On December 5, 2023, the Department of Public Instruction (department) received a complaint under state and federal special education law from #### (complainant) against the #### (district). This is the department’s decision regarding that complaint. The issues are whether the district, beginning December 5, 2022:
● Properly responded to a request from the parent of a student with a disability for an individualized education program team (IEP) meeting;
● Properly responded to the student’s parent’s request for a special education evaluation;
● Properly developed and implemented the student’s IEP regarding development and progress monitoring of annual goals and provision of specially designed instruction, and
● Properly determined the education placement of the student.
Whether the district properly responded to a request from the parent of a student with a disability for an individualized education program team (IEP) meeting.
A parent may request an IEP team meeting at any time, and the district should grant any reasonable request for an IEP team meeting. If the district denies the parent's request for an IEP team meeting, the district must provide the parent with a notice of refusal in writing and include an explanation of why the district refuses to grant the request. 34 CFR § 300.503. Districts must ensure that the IEP team for each child with a disability includes the parents of the child, at least one regular education teacher of the child, and at least one special education teacher or special education provider of the child. The team must also include a representative of the district, often called the local educational agency (LEA) representative, who is qualified to provide or supervise the provision of specially designed instruction, is knowledgeable about the general education curriculum, and is knowledgeable about the availability of the resources of the public agency. 34 CFR § 300.321. A member of the IEP team may be excused from the IEP meeting, in whole or in part, when the parent and the district agree to the excusal in writing. 34 CFR § 300.321(e).
The complainant stated that they asked district staff for an IEP team meeting and did not receive a response but has not provided the department with information about when they made the request. The district held several IEP team meetings (January 10, 2023, January 26, 2023, May 1, 2023, June 7, 2023, and December 6, 2023) for the student during the time period relevant to this complaint. District staff do not have records of whether any of these meetings were scheduled at the parent’s request, but the frequency of the IEP team meetings demonstrates the district’s appropriate responsiveness and attention to any changes in the student’s circumstances. On one occasion, on the day of the meeting, the district employee assigned to act as the LEA representative was unable to attend the meeting. The IEP team met without the required LEA representative and without following proper excusal provisions. Following the meeting district staff realized that conducting the IEP team without the LEA representative present did not meet Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requirements. To resolve the noncompliance an IEP team meeting was subsequently held with all required members present. In scheduling and conducting the second IEP team meeting the district corrected the situation and consequently properly responded to a request from the parent for an IEP team meeting.
Whether the district properly responded to the student’s parent’s request for a special education evaluation.
A school district must ensure that a reevaluation of a student with a disability is conducted if the student’s parent requests a reevaluation. 34 CFR 300.303(a)(2). An independent educational evaluation (IEE) is an evaluation conducted by a qualified examiner who is not an employee of the student's school district. A parent has the right to an IEE at public expense if the parent disagrees with the district's special education evaluation. Upon receiving a request for an IEE, a school district must inform parents about where to obtain an IEE. The agency must also inform the parents of the district's IEE criteria. The district must respond to the request for an IEE in a reasonable amount of time by either providing the IEE at public expense or requesting a due process hearing to show that its evaluation is appropriate. 34 CFR § 300.502.
In late 2022, the parent requested a special education reevaluation to determine whether the student met the criteria under an additional disability category. Upon receiving the parent’s request for reevaluation, the district began the reevaluation process. This reevaluation was completed in January 2023. The parent requested an IEE late in 2023. Upon receiving the parent’s request for an IEE, the district informed the parent about where to obtain an IEE and has since been assisting the parent in locating an appropriate examiner. The district properly responded to the parent’s requests.
Whether the district properly developed and implemented the student’s IEP regarding development and progress monitoring of annual goals and provision of specially designed instruction.
A student’s IEP team must develop a statement of annual goals for the student designed to meet the student’s needs to enable the student to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum. The IEP must contain a statement on how the student’s progress towards meeting the goals will be measured. 34 CFR § 300.320(a).
The student’s IEP team developed five annual goals for the student in January 2023. Each of the goals contained a baseline and associated level of attainment expressed in measurable terms aligned with the baseline. Each goal specified the methods for measuring the student’s progress. The complaint states that when the IEP team met, school staff falsely reported on the student’s progress towards annual goals. The department’s investigator interviewed district staff responsible for progress monitoring of the student’s annual goals. Staff demonstrated to the department’s investigator how they collected and reported accurate data consistent with the student’s IEP goals to the IEP team. The district properly developed and implemented progress monitoring of the student’s annual goals.
School districts must provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to each student with a disability by developing a program that meets the student’s unique needs, documenting that program in the student’s IEP, and implementing the program as articulated in the IEP. 34 CFR § 300.324. The department’s investigator interviewed district staff responsible for providing the student’s specially designed instruction in reading, math, attention and focus, and oral language. Each staff member explained how they were informed of their responsibilities to provide the specialized instruction through a review of the student’s IEP. Each staff member explained how they worked with other school staff to develop a schedule to ensure they were available to provide specialized instruction, and each staff member was able to demonstrate that they had consistently provided the required specially designed instruction to the student. The district properly implemented the student’s IEP with respect to specially designed instruction.
Whether the district properly determined the education placement of the student.
To the maximum extent appropriate students with disabilities must be educated with other students who are non-disabled. Removal of students from the regular education environment should occur only if the nature or severity of the student’s disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. 34 CFR § 300.114(2). In Wisconsin, the IEP team determines placement for a student with a disability. Wis. Stat. § 115.78(2).
The complainant states that the student should be placed half-time at their home school and half-time at an off-site program for students with disabilities. At the student’s IEP team meeting in January 2023 and again in December 2023, the student’s IEP team considered the student’s present levels of performance, disability related needs and annual goals. The team determined that the student would receive educational services at their home school in the regular education environment with the exception of 45 minutes four times per week for instruction in reading, 30 minutes four times per week for instruction in math, and 40 minutes then 30 minutes weekly for instruction in oral language. The evidence reviewed by the department shows no member of the IEP team asked the IEP team to consider placing the student at an off-site program. The evidence also shows there is no reasonable basis for considering an off-site placement before the IEP team has considered other options for meeting the student’s needs in the regular education environment or the on-site special education environment. The student’s IEP team properly determined placement.
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. For more information, visit the department’s website at http://dpi.wi.gov/sped/dispute-resolution or contact the special education team at (608) 266-1781.
For questions about this information, contact dpispeddata@dpi.wi.gov (608) 266-1781