On July 1, 2019, the Department of Public Instruction (department) received a complaint under state and federal special education law from XXXXX (complainant) against the XXXXX (district). On July 16, 2019, the department received notification that the parties agreed to participate in mediation relating to the issues in this complaint, and the department extended the time to complete the complaint investigation pursuant to the parties’ request. This is the department’s decision regarding that complaint. The issue is whether the district, during the 2018-2019 school year, properly developed and implemented the individualized education program (IEP) of a student with a disability.
School districts must provide a free appropriate public education to each student with a disability by developing a program based on the student’s unique needs that is reasonably calculated to enable the student to make progress appropriate in light of the student’s circumstances, documenting that program in the IEP, and implementing the program articulated in the IEP. (34 CFR §§ 300.320, 300.323, 300.324; Wis. Stat. §115.787).
The student’s IEP team developed the IEP that is the subject of this complaint at a meeting on April 17, 2019. At that meeting, IEP team members agreed the student should deliver presentations in a small group setting and planned to revise the supplementary aids and services in the student’s IEP to include this as an academic support. The implementation date for the IEP was May 12, 2019. The district acknowledges district staff erroneously omitted the academic support in the revised IEP document.
After the IEP meeting, but prior to the implementation date of the IEP, the parent notified the district that the student was not presenting in a small group setting and, consequently, was not completing the required presentations. The school term ended on June 8, 2019. No required presentations occurred between the implementation date of the IEP and the end of the school term. During the summer break, following additional communications from the parent, the district revised the IEP to include the relevant academic support.
The district did not properly develop the student’s IEP when it erroneously omitted the agreed upon service in the revised IEP document. The district has since corrected the error, and no presentations occurred during the period of omission. Accordingly, no corrective action is required.
This concludes our review of this complaint. This decision is final for the IDEA State Complaint process. These issues may be addressed through other dispute resolutions, including mediation and due process hearings. Visit http://dpi.wi.gov/sped/dispute-resolution for more information.
Sincerely,
//digitally signed by BVH 11/8/19
Barbara Van Haren, PhD
Assistant State Superintendent
Division for Learning Support
BVH:nam