Class action suit says Calif. special education hearing officers unqualified

[Guest guest]

SPECIAL EDUCATION & DISABILITIES

Class action suit says Calif. special education hearing officers unqualified

A federal class-action lawsuit filed last week on behalf of a California

family alleges that state officials who decide disputes between parents and

school districts over special education services are unqualified,

inadequately trained and side with districts too often. The lawsuit asks the

U.S. District Court to prohibit the California Department of Education from

renewing its $29 million contract with the state's Office of Administrative

Hearings to provide mediation and due process hearings to resolve conflicts

between school districts and parents. The current contract expires in June.

Ruiz, a parent advocate at the San Diego office of Team of

Advocates for Special Kids, which is not involved in the suit, pointed out

that asking for and going through a due process hearing is " always really

hard " emotionally and financially on parents. School districts and parents

may disagree about what is appropriate for the student, and the children may

be failing, becoming depressed or exhibiting behavior such as aggression.

While a due process hearing is pending, the child has to remain in the same

school setting and may continue to fall behind or show other behaviors,

leaving a parent feeling " helpless, " Ruiz said. Ruiz said she and other

parent advocates have heard parents question whether the administrative

judges know enough about the law to render a fair decision, but said the

advocates rarely hear from parents after a decision has been made.

The lawsuit alleges that since the Office of Administrative Hearings

began conducting the due process hearings in 2005, administrative law judges

have ruled completely in favor of students in only 10% of the 279 hearings

that occurred by Sept. 30, 2007. However, the Mc School of Law Special

Education Hearing Office, which conducted the hearings for the state before

2005, ruled in favor of students about 50% of the time, the lawsuit alleges.

The lawsuit alleges administrative judges have issued written decisions

" that are contrary to law, unduly favorable to school districts, and which

deny a free appropriate public education to disabled students. " The lawsuit

alleges a lack of oversight and management from the state education

department has contributed to the alleged problems. State officials did not

want to give the contract for due process hearings to the Office of

Administrative Hearings in 2005 but did so because of a California Supreme

Court decision that year that said the state had to award contracts to civil

servants instead of private contractors, the lawsuit alleges. A different

state Supreme Court decision last year eliminated that requirement, the

lawsuit alleges.

Source:

<http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/02/12/news/top_stories/1_05_222_11_08.

txt> North County Times, 2/11/08, By Marshall

[Editor's Note: The excerpt below is from a lengthy Wall Street Journal

article on complaints that administrative reviews in some places favor

schools. The 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act added requirements as to the qualification and objectivity of

hearing officers. These are set forth in the regulations at the second

link.]

NSBA <http://www.nsba.org/site/doc_cosa.asp?VID=50 & CID=442 & DID=41263>

School Law pages on administrative reviews

IDEA <http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/,root,regs,300,E,300%252E511,>

regulations on impartial due process hearing

Amy A. Sosa

amy.sosa@...

Coppell, Texas

Home/Office -

Fax -

Cell -