Listing of Issues in 1999 IDEA Complaint Decisions

99-001

99-002

1. Did the district fail to identify and evaluate the child as learning disabled after a special education referral was made at the beginning of the 1996-97 school year?
2. Did the district fail to provide written notice to the complainants when it refused to evaluate the child for a learning disability at the beginning of the 1996-97 school year?
3. Did the district fail to send the complainants a copy of the placement offer within 90 days of receiving a referral for the child on May 20, 1998?
4. Did the district fail to provide notice to the complainants when the child’s 1998-99 placement was changed to a more restrictive environment?
5. Did the district fail to implement a provision of the child’s 1998-99 IEP(s) related to aide support?
6. Did the district fail to provide the complainants with the opportunity to question the determinations made regarding the child’s 1998-99 IEP(s)?

99-003

99-004

1. Did the district fail to evaluate the child for a suspected disability in a timely manner when it was requested by the child’s mother?
2. Did the district fail to include required participants on the child’s individualized education program (IEP) team?
3. Did the district fail to implement modifications and adaptations in the child’s IEP permitting the use of a calculator, requiring supplementation of class notes in math and social studies with teacher or peer’s notes, requiring weekly meetings between the parent and the learning disabilities teacher, requiring that tests are to be graded by teachers, and prohibiting lowering the child’s grade based on behavior?
4. Did the district fail to permit the child’s parent to inspect and review the child’s education records in a timely manner?
5. Did the district fail to discuss IEP provisions relating to the child’s behavior at an IEP team meeting?
6. Did the district fail to include a statement of transition services in the child’s IEP?
7. Did the district improperly exclude the child from the regular education math program?
8. Did the district fail to provide an educational placement to implement the child’s IEP?

99-005

99-006

99-007

99-008

99-009

99-010

99-011

99-012

1. Did the district fail to provide special education and related services consistent with the child’s IEP during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district fail to provide the parent with an opportunity to review records after a written request by the parent during the 1998-99 school year?

99-013

1. Did the district fail to have a current IEP for the child in effect during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district fail to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) during the 1998-99 school year by repeatedly suspending the child from school?
3. Did the district fail to follow required procedures when it changed the child’s placement during the 1998-99 school year?

99-014

99-015

1. Did the district refuse to accept a written request by the parent to mail IEP meeting notifications to a third party during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district fail to provide the parent and advocate with a written evaluation report from the IEP team meeting held on March 4, 1999?
3. Did the district fail to safeguard the confidentiality of a child’s information when it allowed a member of the public to attend an IEP team meeting on March 4, 1999?

99-016

1. During the 1998-99 school year, did district administrative staff require individualized education program (IEP) teams to submit special education evaluation reports for approval and improperly overrule IEP team determinations related to evaluation?
2. During the 1998-99 school year, did the district fail to include parents when determining whether the child required additional testing as part of an evaluation?
3. Did the district fail to timely evaluate children for special education during the 1998-99 school year?
4. Did the district fail to have a local educational agency (LEA) representative participate in IEP meetings during the 1998-99 school year?

99-017

1. Did the district fail to provide the complainant’s daughter one-to-one assistance consistent with the child’s individualized education program (IEP) during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district fail to include the participation of a representative of the local education agency at IEP meetings conducted on March 31, 1998; January 12, 1999; and January 21, 1999?
3. Did the district fail to provide the complainant a copy of his daughter’s IEP in a timely manner during the 1997-98 school year?

99-018

1. During the 1998-99 school year, did the district fail to provide school nursing services to the complainant’s daughter consistent with the child’s individualized education program (IEP)?
2. During the 1998-99 school year, did the district violate the child’s privacy rights when the district improperly disclosed personally identifiable information about the child?

99-019

99-020

1. Did the district fail to review and, if necessary, revise the youth’s IEP during the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 school years?
2. Did the district fail to provide the youth a copy of his January 1999 IEP?
3. Did the district provide special education and related services to the youth without a current IEP in effect since January 1999?
4. Did the district fail to provide supplementary aids and services for the youth to be involved and progress in the general curriculum during the current school year?
5. Did the district improperly refuse to include general equivalency diploma (GED) preparation and testing in the child’s 1997-98 and 1998-99 school year IEPs?

99-021

99-022

99-023

1. Did the district fail to provide complainant’s son with transition services in accordance with the student’s IEP during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district fail to provide complainant’s son with a free appropriate public education (FAPE) by not providing counseling services in accordance with the student’s IEP and at no cost to the parent during the 1998-99 school year?
3. Did the district fail to provide the complainant’s son with supplementary aids and services and supports as described in the student’s IEP during the 1998-99 school year? Specifically, the complainant’s son’s IEP states that he will participate in general education classes and activities with the following modifications: ongoing special education support in terms of planning and consult time between general educators and special educators, and direct support to provide assistance to reinforce directions, provide outlines for organization of work; assist in starting and completing quality work; assist in evaluating work and making corrections; assist in using assistive technology to complete notes, assignments, and projects; assist in accepting and following directions; assist in accepting criticism; assist in realistic evaluation of work; assist in writing journals and portfolios; and assist in task analyzing job skills needed for apprenticeship/job training transition program?

99-024

1. Did the district fail to follow proper procedures when the child’s individualized education program (IEP) was revised on January 6, 1999, to provide that the child could only attend school for half days?
2. Did the district fail to provide the child with a free appropriate public education (FAPE) by only allowing him to attend school for half days as of January 6, 1999, which constituted an improper change in placement?
3. Did the district fail to provide, upon request, a copy of the child’s IEP developed on March 10, 1999, to the parent’s advocate, who was a member of the IEP team?

99-025

1. Did the district deny the child a free appropriate public education (FAPE) during the current school year through a series of exclusions from school?
2. Did the district deny the child FAPE during the current school year when he was excluded from participation in extracurricular and nonacademic activities?
3. Did the district improperly place the child in a three-day per week program at an alternative site during the current school year?

99-026

99-027

99-028

99-029

1. Did the district fail to provide the parents proper notice of their child’s individualized education program (IEP) team evaluation during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district fail to evaluate a child in a timely manner, when the child’s parents requested additional assessment to determine if the child was a child with a disability due to other health impairments (OHI) during the 1998-99 school year?

99-030

1. Did the district fail to identify the child as a child with a disability during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district improperly discipline the child during the 1998-99 school year?
3. Did the district administer the Depression Screening Test to the child without the parent’s consent during the 1998-99 school year?
4. Did the district fail to follow proper procedures when the parent informed the district that she believed information in the child’s records was inaccurate during the 1998-99 school year?

99-031

99-032

99-033

99-034

1. Did the district fail to provide the complainant parent with proper notice before the evaluation of the child during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district fail to provide the complainant parent with prior written notice of IEP team meetings during the 1998-99 school year?
3. Did the district fail to inform the complainant parent of special education rights during the 1998-99 school year as required by law?
4. Did the district make changes in the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE) without conducting an IEP team meeting?
5. Did the district fail to provide a FAPE in the least restrictive environment (LRE), including denying the child lunch and recess with her nondisabled peers, during the 1998-99 school year?

99-035

99-036

1. Did the district not permit the child’s individualized education program (IEP) team to consider including speech and language services in the child’s IEP at a May 26, 1999, IEP team meeting?
2. Did the district improperly refuse to conduct an IEP team meeting to consider speech and language services for a child with a disability during the 1998-99 school year?

99-037

1. Did the district fail to specify the amount and frequency of special education services in the child’s March 19, 1999 IEP?
2. Did the district fail to provide the child with required special education by limiting services to three hours daily, three days per week since March 22, 1999?
3. At an IEP team meeting on May 19, 1999, did district administrative staff improperly refuse to provide extended school year (ESY) services to the child without consideration by the IEP team?

99-038

99-039

1. Did the district improperly exclude the complainant’s child from school?
2. Did the district fail to ensure that an individualized education program (IEP) team considered positive behavioral interventions, strategies, and supports to address the child’s behavior that impedes his learning or the learning of others?

99-040

99-041

99-042

99-043

1. Did the district fail to inform the parent of the purpose of the IEP meeting prior to the June 16, 1999, IEP team meeting?
2. Did the IEP team determine the child’s need for ESY services?

99-044

1. Did the district hold a meeting on February 12, 1997, to review the complainant’s child’s individualized education program (IEP) without the required participants?
2. Did the district fail to provide the complainant parent with multidisciplinary team (M-team) members’ individual reports at a January 29, 1998, M-team meeting?

99-045

99-046

99-047

1. Did the district fail to evaluate a child in a timely manner, when the child’s parents requested a special education evaluation during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district conduct individualized education program (IEP) team meetings on March 31, 1999, and May 11, 1999, without the required participants?

99-048

1. Did the district fail during 1999 to allow the complainant as an individual brought to the meeting by the parent to participate in the individualized education program (IEP) team meeting?
2. Did the district fail during 1999 to determine the child’s special education placement at an IEP team meeting?
3. Did the district fail during 1999 to consider whether the child’s IEP could be implemented in the school he would attend if not disabled?
4. Did the district improperly change the child’s placement in August 1999 without an IEP team meeting?

99-049

99-050

99-051

99-052

99-053

1. Did the district fail to convene an individualized education program (IEP) team meeting to determine the special education placement for the child during the 1999-2000 school year?
2. Did the district fail to provide the child with a free appropriate public education (FAPE) by excluding him from school during the 1999-2000 school year?
3. Did the district fail to give a copy of the child’s IEP to the child’s parent with the notice of placement?

99-054

99-055

1. During the 1998-99 school year, did the district fail to provide proper parental notice before evaluating the child?
2. During the May 27, 1999, IEP team meeting, did the district fail to make available to all team participants the written summaries of findings prepared by participants who administered tests, assessments, or other evaluation materials as part of the evaluation of the child?
3. During the 1998-99 school year, did the district improperly determine whether the complainant’s son is a child with a disability by reason of other health impairment (OHI)?
4. Did the district fail to safeguard the confidentiality of information relating to the complainant’s child during a telephone conversation with the complainant’s advocate on May 28, 1999?
5. During the 1998-99 school year, did the district fail to report to the parent as specified in the child’s IEP?

99-056

1. Did the district fail to implement a provision of the child’s current IEP related to biweekly communication with the parent?
2. Did the district fail to include proper statements in the child’s current IEP regarding the amount, frequency and location of special education services?

99-057

1. During the 1998-99 school year, did the district fail to conduct a timely three-year reevaluation of the child?
2. In September 1999, did the district improperly change the location where the child received special education services?

99-058

1. Did the district improperly change the child’s placement in September and October 1999 without an IEP team meeting?
2. Did the district change the child’s placement in September and October 1999 without providing the child’s parent prior writen notice?
3. Did the district fail to provide the youth an educational placement consistent with his IEP in September and October 1999?

99-059

1. Did the district fail to provide the parent with proper notice of an individualized education program (IEP) team meeting?
2. Did the district fail to implement provisions of the child’s IEP relating to student behavior?
3. Did the district fail to ensure that staff responsible for implementing the child’s IEP were informed of his or her specific responsibilities in the IEP?

99-060

1. Did the district fail to provide the parents with a copy of their child’s IEP in a timely manner during the 1998-99 school year?
2. Did the district, from the beginning of the 1999-2000 school year until October 7, 1999, fail to implement provisions of the child’s IEP with respect to speech therapy?
3. Did the district include in the child’s IEP provisions not considered at the September 15, 1999, meeting?
4. Did the district fail to ensure that an IEP team developed and revised the child’s IEP during the 1999-2000 school year?

99-061

1. Did the district revise the program modifications and short-term objectives contained in complainants’ son’s individualized education program (IEP) dated August 2, 1999, without conducting an IEP team meeting?
2. Did the district improperly identify complainants’ son’s speech and language impairment as a related service without conducting an IEP team meeting?
3. Did the district fail to implement complainants’ son’s August 2, 1999, IEP, as relates to program modifications and behavior support plan?

99-062

99-063

1. Did the district fail to have in effect a current individualized education program (IEP) for three children with disabilities?
2. Did the district fail to have the IEPs of three children with disabilities accessible to district staff responsible for implementation of each child’s IEP?
3. Did the district fail to provide FAPE to a child with a disability by improperly excluding the child from school?
4. Did the district, in the development of IEPs for three children with disabilities whose behavior impedes their learning or that of others, fail to consider strategies to address their behavior?

99-064

1. Did the district fail to provide services consistent with the child’s IEP during the 1999-2000 school year that required weekly communication with the parents, "access to science activities beyond the regular classroom", and that the child would "read at least 4 books, selected together with his teacher, per semester"?
2. Did the district fail to provide services consistent with the child’s IEP during the 1997-98, 1998-99, and 1999-2000 schools years related to counseling?
3. Did the district fail to consider the parents’ concerns regarding a behavior modification program during IEP team meetings convened in the fall of 1999?
4. Did the district, after September 1, 1999, fail to provide a free and appropriate public education when it required the parents to transport the child at the parents’ expense?
5. Did the district fail to provide a free and appropriate public education when it shortened the child’s school day during the 1999-2000 school year?

99-065

1. Did the district fail to investigate the child’s status and take appropriate action to provide the child a free appropriate public education following repeated absences from school beginning in May 1999?
2. Did the district fail to conduct an individualized education program (IEP) team meeting from May to December 1999 to consider positive behavioral interventions, strategies, and supports to address the child’s behavior that impedes student learning?
3. Did the district, since May 1999, provide psychological services to the child without a determination by an IEP team that the child requires psychological services as a related service in her IEP to benefit from special education?
4. Did the district fail to ensure that an IEP team determined the child’s special education placement in December 1999?

For questions about this information, contact Patricia M. Williams (608) 267-3720

Last updated on 3/24/2008 11:54:39 AM