California OAH special education order · November 13, 2023
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2023100794 · ALJ Tiffany Gilmartin
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient. It identified specific assessment areas and unmet needs in academics, social skills, behavior, speech, occupational therapy, and auditory processing, giving Greenfield enough information to respond.
Summary
Greenfield filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. OAH found both claims sufficient. The first claim alleged Greenfield failed to appropriately assess Student over the past two years and named specific areas, including functional vision, behavior, speech, occupational therapy, auditory processing, and psychoeducation. The second claim alleged Greenfield failed to address Student's needs in academics, social interactions, and behavior, and failed to provide appropriate services. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A complaint that names the specific assessment areas and service areas in dispute gives the district fair notice and will survive a sufficiency challenge. OAH reads complaints liberally under the IDEA.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185 (2003)
- 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699 (Aug. 14, 2006)
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
Topics
Full text of the order
Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.
BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE MATTER OF:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
GREENFIELD UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2023100794
ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF SUFFICIENCY OF DUE
PROCESS COMPLAINT
NOVEMBER 13, 2023
On October 24, 2023, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Greenfield Union School District. On November 8, 2023, Greenfield filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to the complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties have the right to challenge the complaint’s sufficiency.
(20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).) The party filing the complaint is not entitled to a hearing unless the complaint meets the requirements of title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).
A complaint is sufficient if it: (1) describes the problem relating to the proposed change regarding the Student’s identification, evaluation, or educational placement, or providing the Student a free appropriate public education; (2) includes facts about the problem; and (3) includes a proposed resolution to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).) These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints and promote fairness by providing the named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. (See H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess.
(2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.)
The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” (Sen. Rep. No. 108- 185, supra, at p. 34.) The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the IDEA and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. (Alexandra R. ex rel. Burke v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept.
10, 2009, CIV. 06-CV-0215-JL) 2009 WL 2957991[nonpub. Opn.]; Escambia County Bd. Of Educ. V. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260; Sammons v. Polk County School Bd. (M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. Opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. Bd. Of Educ. (3d Cir.
2009) 306 Fed.Appx. 772, 775 [nonpub. Opn.].) Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. (Assistance to States for the Educ. Of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46,540-46541, 46699.)
DISCUSSION
The facts alleged in Student’s complaint are sufficient. Student’s complaint identifies the issues and adequate facts about the problem to permit Greenfield to respond and participate in a resolution session and mediation. Student’s complaint provides Greenfield an awareness and understanding of the issues. Student’s complaint claims Greenfield failed to appropriately assess Student within in the last two years.
Student’s complaint identified concerns with cognitive, academic, social, behavior, and pre-vocational skills. Student’s complaint alleged Greenfield failed to assess in functional vision and behavior. Further, Student’s complaint specifically identified speech, occupational therapy, central auditory processing disorder, and psychoeducation as areas where assessments were inappropriate.
Student’s second issue alleges Greenfield failed to address Student’s needs for the past two years. Specifically, Student alleged Student had needs in academics, social interactions, and behavior. Student also required services in specialized academic instruction, speech and language, occupational therapy, and support for his central auditory processing disorder. Student alleged he either required them and did not receive these services or the amounts he receive was not appropriate.
Therefore, Student’s statement of the two claims is sufficient.
ORDER
1. The complaint is sufficient under title 20 United States Code section
1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).
2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are
confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Tiffany Gilmartin Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings