Complaint Summary

Date Findings Report Sent:

January 24, 2025

Case Number:

25-0286

Grade Level:

High school

Person filing complaint:

Parent

School District:

Vernon Public Schools (single student)

Allegation(s):

• Failure to ensure that parents of a student with a disability understand the proceedings at a PPT meeting (RCSA § 10-76d-12(a)(5))
• Failure to respond to the parent’s request of an IEE in a timely manner (34 CFR § 300.502)
• Failure to provide periodic reports in accordance with the IEP on the progress the child is making toward meeting the annual goals and objectives (34 CFR § 300.320(a)(3))

Conclusion(s):

• The District is not in violation of RCSA § 10-76d-12(a)(5). The District is not required to include the Advocate in communication regarding the Student. The District has made efforts to ensure that the Parent understands the proceedings of the Student’s PPT meetings including providing notice of the PPT meeting, providing a PPT meeting agenda, sending documentation home before a PPT meeting, using jargon-free language when discussing items at the PPT meeting, and summarizing key points to ensure Parent understanding at the PPT meeting. The District has sent home weekly communication to the Parent and connected with the Parent various times during 2024. The Parent’s meaningful participation is evidenced by her attendance at meetings, and the relevant questions put forth by her to the team during the meetings.
• The District is in violation of 34 CFR § 300.502. The District alleges that they were not aware of the Parent’s request for an IEE for reading until the state complaint was received. It is noted on the Student’s current IEP and in the Parent Statement uploaded in CT-SEDS that the Parent did request an IEE for reading. When the Parent requested the IEE for reading, the District was required to respond, without unnecessary delay, by either filing a request for hearing to defend their evaluation or by granting the IEE at public expense through the reimbursement of the Parents. It has been over two months since the Parent made the request and the District has not responded in the manner required by the regulation. It must be noted that the two-month time period since the Parent requested the IEE is beyond the timeframe that may reasonably be considered responding ‘without unnecessary delay’.
• The District is not in violation of 34 CFR § 300.320(a)(3). The District has provided the Parent with weekly data collection on the Student’s IEP goals and objectives. The District has provided the Parent with work samples on the Student’s IEP goals and objectives. The District indicated a variety of strategies that the case manager utilized to collect data on IEP goals and objectives. The District has hired a the consultant to train special education teachers on progress monitoring and data collection.

Corrective Action(s):

• The District has stated that it will grant the Parent’s request for an IEE at a public expense in the area of reading. Once the IEE has been scheduled, the District must send documentation to this investigator showing that it has funded the evaluation.
• On or before June 30, 2025, the District shall provide training to all appropriate staff as related to the requirements of 34 CFR § 300.502. The materials and method of delivery of such training shall be at the discretion of the District. However, this investigator recommends, but does not require, that the training consist of a thorough review of the Guidelines Regarding Independent Educational Evaluations at Public Expense and In-School Observations (March 29, 2018 memorandum).