RENARD PARISH PUBLIC *
SCHOOL SYSTEM *
*
IN THE MATTER OF *
*
MARY SMITH *
ON BEHALF OF JANE SMITH *
*
**************************************************************************************************************************
REQUEST FOR DUE PROCESS HEARING1
Ms. Smith, who resides at 1234 Main Street, Renard, Louisiana 70000, submits this request for due process through counsel to the Louisiana Department of Education’s Legal Division pursuant to §§507 and 508 of Louisiana Bulletin 1706 on behalf of her child Jane Smith (D.O.B. 01/01/20XX). John is an 11-year-old fifth grader with an exceptionality of Autism currently enrolled at Central Elementary School within the Renard Parish Public School System (“RPPSS”). Ms. Smith seeks redress on behalf of Jane as her mother for RPPSS’s violations of their rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq. (2005) (“IDEA”), the IDEA regulations contained in 34 C.F.R. 300.300 et seq., and state special education regulations contained in Louisiana Bulletin 1706.
At all times within one year of the filing of this request for due process, RPPSS has failed to provide Jane with a Free and Appropriate Public Education (“FAPE”). Ms. Smith now requests a due process hearing to address the following violations by RPPSS:
- Denial of FAPE through the failure to develop an IEP that is reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit by meeting Jane’s unique needs and allowing her to make the academic and behavioral progress of which she is capable. Specifically, Jane has not made sufficient progress because RPPSS has failed to develop an IEP that includes appropriate goals; sufficient Speech/Language Therapy and Occupational Therapy minutes; and sufficient behavioral supports such as a Functional Behavioral Assessment (“FBA”), Behavior Intervention Plan (“BIP”), or other appropriate services.
- Denial of FAPE through the failure to implement the services listed in Jane’s IEP. Specifically, the school did not provide a special education instructor from January 1, 20XX through the end of the school year; repeatedly failed to provide a one-on-one Special Needs Paraeducator (“SNP”) for Jae for various days during the current and previous school year; and unilaterally placed Jane in a more restrictive environment by failing to provide access to activities with her non-disabled peers in accordance with the educational placement established in her IEP.
- Denial of FAPE through the failure to provide timely and sufficient prior written notice of the school district’s refusal to increase Jane’s speech/language therapy and occupational therapy minutes and of the unilateral decision to make Jane’s de facto placement more restrictive, all of which was done in a manner that negatively impacted Ms. Smith’s right to parental participation and Jane’s educational benefit and progress and her right to FAPE.
- Denial of FAPE through the failure to educate Jane in the Least Restrictive Environment (“LRE”) to the maximum extent appropriate.
- [The above are non-exhaustive examples of common violations of FAPE that could be included as claims in a due process hearing request. Insert any other applicable claims related to a denial of FAPE or violations of special education rights as necessary.]
STATEMENT OF FACTS
[Insert a detailed factual narrative and timeline of all violations of FAPE that have occurred within a year of the filing of the due process request. Describe the particular deficiencies of evaluations or IEPs in effect during the applicable time period, referencing and citing all relevant documents as exhibits attached to the complaint.]
VIOLATIONS OF FAPE
- Failure to Develop an IEP Reasonably Calculated to Produce Educational Benefit
In order to provide FAPE, “a school must offer an IEP reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.” Endrew F. v. Douglas Cnty. Sch. Dist. RE-1, 137 S. Ct. 988, 999 (2017). The U.S. Supreme Court has held that “the essential function of an IEP is to set out a plan for pursuing academic and functional advancement.” Id. An IEP is reasonably calculated to provide meaningful educational benefit if a multi-factor analysis indicates: “(1) the program is individualized on the basis of the student's assessment and performance; (2) the program is administered in the least restrictive environment; (3) the services are provided in a coordinated and collaborative manner by the key "stakeholders"; and (4) positive academic and non-academic benefits are demonstrated.” Cypress-Fairbanks Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Michael F., 118 F.3d 245, 253 (5th Cir. 1997).
[Insert argument as to how relevant facts described in the Statement of Facts constitute a violation of the special education rights and protections raised in this claim.]
Failure to Implement IEP Services
A central component to the definition of a Free and Appropriate Public Education is that students with disabilities must receive special education and related services that “[a]re provided in conformity with an individualized education program (IEP)” developed according to the requirements established in special education regulations. 34 C.F.R. 300.17; Louisiana Bulletin 1706 §905. However, RPPSS has continually failed to properly implement the IEPs in effect for Jane at all times throughout the past year such that the services she actually received do not conform with those contained in the IEP in effect for her at the time.
[Insert argument as to how relevant facts described in the Statement of Facts constitute a violation of the special education rights and protections raised in this claim.]
- Failure to Provide Prior Written Notice
Due Process is a dispute resolution mechanism appropriate for determining whether a student is receiving FAPE on substantive grounds related to the child’s identification, evaluation, or placement, or on the grounds of procedural violations that impede the student’s right to FAPE, impede the parent’s opportunity to participate in the decision-making process regarding the provision of FAPE, or cause a deprivation of educational benefit. La. Bulletin 1706 §513(A). A key procedural protection of state and federal special education law is that a school district must provide Prior Written Notice to parents a reasonable time before the agency initiates or refuses to initiate or change a student’s educational placement or the provision of FAPE to the student. 20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(3); 34 C.F.R. §300.503(a); La. Bulletin 1706 §504(A). In order for the notice to be sufficient, it must be in understandable language and include the following content:
(1) a description of the action proposed or refused by the agency; (2) an explanation of why the agency proposes or refuses to take the action; (3) a description of each evaluation procedure, assessment, record, or report the agency used as a basis for the proposed or refused action; (4) statement that the parents of the student with a disability have protection under the procedural safeguards of this chapter, and if this notice is not an initial referral for an evaluation, the means by which a copy of a description of the procedural safeguards can be obtained; (5) sources for parents to contact to obtain assistance in understanding the provisions of this chapter; (6) a description of other options that IEP team considered and the reasons why those options were rejected; and (7) a description of other factors that are relevant to the agency’s proposal or refusal.
34 C.F.R. §300.503(b); La. Bulletin 1706 §504(B).
[Insert argument as to how relevant facts described in the Statement of Facts constitute a violation of the special education rights and protections raised in this claim.]
- Failure to Educate in the Least Restrictive Environment
State and Federal special education law require that “[t]o the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities . . . are educated with children who are not disabled, and special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily.” 20 U.S.C. §1412(a)(5)(A); see also 34 C.F.R. §300.114 (a)(2)(i); Louisiana Bulletin 1706 §114(A). As detailed in the Statement of Facts, RPPSS has failed to educate Jane in the LRE both by designing IEPs that have curtailed access to her non-disabled peers by confining her to a self-contained classroom for the vast majority of the day and by unilaterally deciding to curtail even that limited access to non-disabled peers during the past year without notification and without amending her IEP.
[Insert argument as to how relevant facts described in the Statement of Facts constitute a violation of the special education rights and protections raised in this claim.]
REQUESTS FOR RELIEF
As the result of RPPSS’s numerous violations of federal and state special education laws and regulations, Ms. Smith respectfully requests the appointment of an Administrative Law Judge who will assume jurisdiction and set this matter for an impartial due process hearing. Upon completion of the hearing, Ms. Smith requests on behalf of her daughter that the due process decision include the following remedies:
- A finding that RPPSS denied FAPE by failing to design an IEP reasonably calculated to allow the student to make appropriate progress; An order that RPPSS provide additional compensatory education for this deprivation of FAPE in the following amounts:
- 180 hours of individual/direct special education instruction by a certified special education teacher
- 36 hours of individual/direct Speech/Language Therapy services
- 18 hours of individual/direct Occupational Therapy services
- An order that RPPSS pay for an Independent Education Evaluation (“IEE”) conducted by a qualified expert of Ms. Smith’s choosing to assess Jane in all areas of need, including for Assistive Technology/AAC systems;
- An order that RPPSS contract at its expense an expert of Ms. Smith’s choosing to review Jane’s IEP and draft new appropriate goals in all areas of educational need that are specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and time bound for the consideration of the IEP team.
- An order that RPPSS increase the amount of related services in Jane’s IEP as follows:
- 90 minutes of Speech/Language Therapy services per week in at least three weekly sessions with at least 75 of the minutes delivered in the form of direct individual services
- 60 minutes of direct individual Occupational Therapy services per week delivered in at least two weekly sessions
- An order that RPPSS conduct an FBA and develop a new BIP as follows:
- Contract with an independent child or school psychologist of Ms. Smith’s choosing to conduct the FBA and develop the BIP at the school district’s expense.
- Contract with the same expert at school district expense to train all of Jane’s service providers in the implementation of the BIP.
- A finding that RPPSS denied FAPE by failing to implement the student’s IEP when it removed the special education teacher from her classroom on January 12, 20XX and failed to replace her with special education certified substitutes for the remainder of the school year; An order that RPPSS provide Jane with a substitute special education-certified teacher in the event of future absences and that the district provide compensatory education for any future short-term or prolonged periods without a special education teacher; An order that RPPSS provide compensatory education outside of the instructional day and in the following amounts:
- 42 hours of individual/direct special education instruction by a private tutor of Ms. Smith’s choosing.
- A finding that RPPSS denied FAPE by failing to implement the student’s IEP by failing to provide the services of a one-on-one Special Needs Paraprofessional at various times throughout the prior and current school year and by failing to follow the student’s IEP placement during the current school year; An order that RPPSS (a) provide a full-time, qualified one-to-one paraprofessional for Jane trained to work with students with autism starting immediately; (b) provide a substitute one to one paraprofessional for the student at all times when her permanent paraprofessional is absent; and (c) immediately provide access to non-disabled peers in accordance with the IEP
- A finding that RPPSS failed to provide sufficient Prior Written Notice of its refusal to increase Speech and Occupational Therapy services and before Jane’s LRE placement was changed in a manner that negatively impacted parental participation and Jane’s educational benefit;
- A finding that RPPSS denied FAPE by failing to educate Jane in the Least Restrictive Environment to the maximum extent appropriate; an order that RPPSS develop a plan to increase IEP minutes spent outside of a self-contained classroom and to incorporate time with non-disabled peers into therapeutic services and goals related to independence, behavior, and social interaction.
- An order finding that Ms. Smith is the prevailing party in this due process hearing and awarding her reasonable attorney’s fees and costs;
- An order granting any other relief deemed necessary to remedy the violations described herein and ensure the provision of a Free and Appropriate Public Education.
- [The above are a non-exhaustive list of remedies that could be included in a request for a due process hearing. Insert any additional remedies for compensatory education, expert assistance, or changes to IEP that would serve as a remedy for violations of FAPE.]
Respectfully Submitted,
_________________________________
[Name and Signature Block of Attorney]
Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Request for Due Process Hearing was sent via electronic mail on [INSERT DATE] to:
|
[INSERT NAME] Superintendent Renard Parish Public School System Renard, LA 7043 [INSERT EMAIL ADDRESS]
|
|
______________________________
[Name of Attorney], Esq.
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
|
EXHIBIT |
DESCRIPTION |
|
P-1 |
Reevaluation of October 1, 20XX |
|
P-2 |
Reevaluation Waiver of April 15, 20XX |
|
P-3 |
Private Speech Evaluation of December 1, 20XX |
|
P-4 |
Private Occupational Therapy Evaluation of September 14, 20XX |
|
P-5 |
IEP of April 15, 20XX |
|
P-6 |
IEP of April 12, 20XX |
|
P-7 |
IEP Amendment of August 27, 20XX |
|
P-8 |
Progress Reports – April 20XX IEP |
|
P-9 |
Progress Report – April 20XX IEP |
|
P-10 |
IEP Meeting Request Letter – September 30, 20XX |
|
P-11 |
IEP Meeting Follow-Up Letter – November 3, 20XX |
|
P-12 |
RPPSS Email and Prior Written Notice Form – November 20, 20XX |
|
P-13 |
Occupational Therapy Service Summary |
|
P-14 |
Speech/Language Therapy Service Summary |
- 1The names of all parties and dates used in this sample request for due process hearing are fictional.