Teacher of the Year Ceremony
Due to inclement weather, the Teacher of the Year Ceremony has been postponed to December 16, 2025 from 5-7pm. Doors will open at 4pm. The Ceremony will take place at the Bushnell Theater in Hartford, and the order of events will remain the same.

Wethersfield 25-0581

Complaint Summary

Date Findings Report Sent:

June 30, 2025

Case Number:

25-0581

Grade Level:

Elementary

Person Filing Complaint:

Parent

School District:

Wethersfield Schools

Allegation(s)

  • Failure to evaluate a student with a disability in accordance with sections 300.304 through 300.311 before determining that the student is no longer a student with a disability unless the student’s eligibility is terminated due to graduation from secondary school with a regular diploma, or due to exceeding the age of eligibility for FAPE under the State law (34 CFR § 300.305 (e) (1-2))
  • Failure to ensure that a PPT reviews the student’s IEP periodically, but not less than annually, to determine whether the annual goals for the student are being achieved, and revise the IEP, as appropriate (34 CFR § 300.324)
  • Failure to conduct an evaluation that is sufficiently comprehensive to identify all of the child’s special education and related services needs, whether or not commonly linked to the disability category in which the student has been classified (34 CFR § 300.304(c)(7))
  • Failure to conduct an evaluation that the school district must use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, development, and academic information about the child, including information provided by the parent (34 CFR § 300.304(b)(1))
  • Failure to provide special education and related services in conformity with an individualized education program (IEP) (34 CFR § 300.17(d))
  • Failure to provide an IEP that includes measurable annual goals and short-term instructional objectives derived from those goals that include objective criteria, evaluation procedures and schedules for determining, on a regular basis, whether the short-term instructional objectives are being achieved (RCSA § 10-76d-11)

Conclusion(s)

  • The District is not in violation of 34 CFR § 300.305 (e) (1-2). The District conducted an evaluation that assessed all communication areas on the worksheet for determining eligibility for a Speech or Language Impairment. The District also provided the Parent with an IEE at public expense in the area of speech and language that was reviewed at the PPT meeting on December 19, 2024.
  • The District is in violation of 34 CFR § 300.324. The PPT met to conduct the Student’s annual review on April 4, 2024. The progress report for April 2024 indicates that the Student mastered one out of three goals and 7 out of 9 objectives in the area of communication. The Student did not master two goals and two objectives in the area of communication. The Student’s progress report on IEP goals and objectives for June 2024 indicates that the Student mastered all goals and objectives in the area of communication. The IEP goals and objectives in the area of communication that were proposed on April 21, 2023, were not revised at the Student's annual review on April 4, 2024, or at the PPT meeting held on May 30, 2024. These goals were not revised until December 19, 2024. Although the District indicated that the PPT team agreed to continue the IEP goals and objectives in the area of communication and revise the goals and objectives when the IEE was reviewed, the Student mastered the IEP goals and objectives as noted in the June 2024 progress report. The District should have updated and revised the IEP goals and objectives in the area of communication based upon present levels of performance.
  • The District is not in violation of 34 CFR § 300.304(c)(7) or 34 CFR § 300.304(b)(1). The procedures recommended by the Connecticut ADHD Task Force to determine if a student qualifies for special education or related services under the eligibility category of ADHD include conducting a comprehensive evaluation, using multiple sources of information, getting information about the Student’s functioning in different settings, assessing all dimensions of ADHD, and obtaining and reviewing multiple types of data. A comprehensive evaluation was conducted on May 30, 2024. The PPT used multiple sources of information including rating scales, teacher report, progress report on IEP goals and objectives, and an observational report. The rating scales conducted provided insight on the Student’s behaviors in different settings, at home and at school. The District conducted multiple assessments for the Student’s three-year reevaluation, considered the IEE in the area of speech and language, reviewed the results of the rating scales, and reviewed the observation report that provided Student data on different areas of ADHD. The District reviewed and obtained multiple types of data.
  • The District is not in violation of 34 CFR § 300.17(d). The IEP dated December 19, 2024, states in the indirect services, “Consult with School Speech Language Pathologist, Special Education Teacher, Classroom Teacher, Parent, Outside SLP” for 1x per month for 30 minutes. At the PPT meeting on February 27, 2025, the confusion of the wording in the IEP was recognized and the District agreed to assume financial responsibility for the Student’s private SLP’s time for consultation with the District from December 19, 2024, to February 27, 2025. At the PPT meeting on February 27, 2025, the District recommended to revise the wording from “consultation” to “collaboration”. The IEP dated February 27, 2025, does not include the Student’s private SLP in collaboration with the District. The District did continue to collaborate with the Student’s private SLP as evidenced by emails and as evidenced by the Google Spreadsheet that documents the District’s SLPs services with the Student. Although the Student’s IEP does not specifically state collaboration between the Student’s private SLP and the District, the District continued to collaborate with the Student’s private SLP for the timeframe of February 27, 2025, to the present day.
  • The District is in violation of RCSA § 10-76d-11. The Student’s IEP short-term objectives in the area of executive functioning do not specify the short-term objective criteria or evaluation procedures. The Student’s IEP objectives use the term “current baseline” or “baseline” which does not specifically state the short-term objective criteria. The Student’s IEP specifies the schedule for monitoring the short-term objectives as monthly or biweekly.

Corrective Action(s)

  • On or before September 30, 2025, the District must develop a compensatory service plan to provide the Student with 12 hours of language/communication services. Should all parties feel that the total number of owed compensatory services hours will be overly burdensome to the Student, the parties may determine a mutually agreed upon alternate number of hours and inform the State of that agreement. The full measure of missed service hours must be delivered to the Student no later than December 31, 2025. On or before September 30, 2025, the District must send a copy of the compensatory service plan to the CSDE.
  • Immediately upon delivery of the Student’s full measure of compensatory services, the District shall inform the CSDE.
  • On or before September 30, 2025, the District must convene a PPT meeting to review and revise the Student’s IEP as follows:
    • The PPT must revise the Student’s IEP objectives in the area of executive functioning to include objective criteria that specifies the Student’s current baseline and evaluation procedures in accordance with RCSA § 10-76d-11. For more information on short-term objectives, see Section 4 of the CSDE’s IEP Manual.
  • The District must send documentation to the CSDE when the PPT meeting has been conducted, and the Student’s IEP has been revised.