Complaint Summary

Date Findings Report Sent:

September 13, 2024

Case Number:

25-0313

Grade Level:

Middle

Person filing complaint:

Attorney

School District:

Stamford Public Schools (systemic)

Allegation(s):

• In the complaint, the Complainant alleged that a document utilized by the District is noncompliant with the rights afforded under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 2004 (IDEA) as itemized in the issue that follows. 20 USC 1412(a)(10)(c) and its corresponding regulations articulate the rules regarding payment for education of children enrolled in private schools without consent of or referral by the public agency.

Conclusion(s):

• The Complainant alleged in his complaint, that the District’s use of a document (see attachment 1) violated the rules articulated in 20 USC 1412(a)(10)(c) and its corresponding regulations. More specifically, the Complainant stated that when a parent unilaterally places a child in a private school and seeks reimbursement from the district, “the parent is not removing the child from the jurisdiction of the Local Education Authority and the LEA need to continue to consider the child within its responsibility. This includes holding annual reviews and continuing to offer an IEP. To the extent this document is saying that as such to unilaterally placed students ‘SPS dos not hold any further PPTs, evaluations or re-evaluations unless family enrolls in Stamford,’ the document is in violation of federal law.
• The Complainant is correct that the IDEA provides rules regarding the unilateral placement of children by their parents when FAPE is at issue. (20 USC 1412(a)(10)(c) and 34 CFR § 300.148). The parents are putting their child in a private school, because the parents are rejecting the IEP proposed by the district. In these cases, the Student does remain enrolled in the district and the district is required to conduct annual reviews and three-year reevaluations. The document created by the District, however, does not address these cases. Instead, the document is for cases where the parents have enrolled their child with a disability in a private school. (20 USC 1412(a)(10)(a) and 34 CFR § 300.129). The rules for these types of cases are separate and distinct from the rules in 20 USC 1412(a)(10)(c) and its corresponding regulations. In these cases, the District is not required to conduct annual review and only required to conduct three-year reevaluations when students with disabilities attending private schools located in Stamford. Cases involving students with disabilities and private school placements are complex. It is clear from the language in the document, that it was not meant to be formal District policy regarding the legal requirements of every type of private placement provided for in the IDEA. Instead, this document corresponds with the OSEP Q and A, and with the PPPSS user types in CT-SEDS, and is therefore limited to these types of scenarios. Therefore, this investigator concludes that the use of the document by the District does not violate 20 USC 1412(a)(10)(c) and its corresponding regulations. No corrective action is required.

Corrective Action(s):

• No corrective actions were ordered.