Thursday, February 21, 2008

Procedural Safeguards - Part I

We have previously run a series on Dispute Resolution options under IDEA. Dispute resolution is included within the broader topic of Procedural Safeguards under the Act. Today we begin a series in the other IDEA procedural safeguards. Although we won't repeat the items on dispute resolution, we will examine how the IDEA'04 changes and the latest federal regulations impact the other procedural safeguards. We'll hold off on the caselaw until after we take a look at the changes in the law and regs. Today we address the nature of procedural safeguards in general.

Procedural safeguards are extremely important under our system of special education. In the seminal United States Supreme Court decision interpreting the predecessor of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. Section 1400, et seq, the Court stressed the importance of procedural safeguards in the statutory system adopted by the Congress, noting that the procedural safeguards gave parents a “large measure of participation at every stage of the … process.” Board of Educ., Hendrick Hudson Central Sch. Dist. v. Rowley, 455 U.S. 175, 102 S.Ct. 3034, 3038 and 3049, 553 IDELR 656 (1982). The court went on to emphasize that compliance with the Act’s procedural safeguards is a critical component of a free appropriate public education. Rowley, supra 102 S.Ct. at 3051.

More recently, the Supreme Court rejected an argument that school districts should have the burden of persuasion due to an alleged advantage in information. The Court reasoned that Congress had leveled the playing field by requiring school districts to share information and protect the rights of parents by adopting the extensive system of procedural safeguards contained in the IDEA. Schaffer v. Weast 546 U.S. 49, 126 S.Ct. 528, 44 IDELR 150 (2005).

Section 615 of the IDEA is entitled “Procedural Safeguards,” and most procedural safeguards for parents are contained in that section. However, some procedural safeguards are found in other sections of the Act or in the federal regulations. In addition to the required Notice of Procedural Safeguards, Section 615(d), there are a number of specific procedural safeguards. The specific procedural safeguards include the following: independent educational evaluation , Section 615 (b)(1) and 34 C.F.R. Section 300.502; prior written notice, sections 615(b)(3)-(4) and (c)(1); informed parental consent, Section 614 (a)(1)(D); access to educational records, Section 615(b)(1); state complaints, 34 CFR Section 300.151, et seq; mediation, Section 615(e); child’s placement during a challenge or “stay put,” Section 615 (j); procedures for an interim alternative education, Section 615 (k); unilateral placement in private school when FAPE in issue, Section 612 (a)(10)(C); due process hearings, Section 615 (f); if a two tiered system, state appeals, Section 615 (q); civil actions appealing a due process decision, Section 615 (q); and attorneys’ fees, Section 615 (i)(C)(3).

2 comments:

  1. "More recently, the Supreme Court rejected an argument that school districts should have the burden of persuasion due to an alleged advantage in information. The Court reasoned that Congress had leveled the playing field by requiring school districts to share information and protect the rights of parents by adopting the extensive system of procedural safeguards contained in the IDEA. Shaffer v. Weast 546 U.S. 49, 126 S.Ct. 528, 44 IDELR 150 (2005)."

    The irony here is that in Shaffer, the Supremes placed emphasis on the procedures that schools must comply with as being safeguards for parents, and thus an implicit advantage of sorts. Yet clearly, the role of procedural compliance has been eroding not only in court decisions post IDEA '97, but now in the statutory language of the IDEIA '04 itself.

    Once the courts start allowing procedural violations to fly, unless they "seriously infringe" on a parent's right to participate -- the procedures of the Act become more and more meaningless, not to mention it encourages non-compliance with the procedures.

    The biggest downfall for parents came once courts (and now IDEA itself) starting saying strict compliance with the procedures wasn't necessary.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for the comment Spedvet.

    Jim Gerl

    ReplyDelete