Bridgeport 26-0406

Complaint Summary

Date Findings Report Sent:

April 2, 2026

Case Number:

26-0406

Grade Level:

Elementary school

Person filing complaint:

Parent

School District:

Bridgeport Public Schools

Allegation(s):

  1. The Parent alleges that IEP dated November 19, 2025 contains 6.5 hours of time with non-disabled peers and that during the 2025-26 school year, the District has only provided 2 hours. (34 CFR §§ 300.323(c)(2) and 300.17, RCSA § 10-76d-1(a)(1) )
  2. The Parent alleges that the Student would be able to spend more time with her peers if she had a paraeducator assigned to her.(34 CFR § 300.114 )
  3. The Parent alleges that at the PPT meeting on February 3, 2026, the PPT’s recommendation to reduce the Student’s time with non-disabled peers was not based on the Student’s individual needs. The Parent alleged that the District did not present any data or evaluations to support their decision.(34 CFR § 300.324(1) )
  4. The Parent alleged she did not receive prior written notice.(34 CFR § 300.503 and RCSA §10-76d-8)

Conclusion(s):

  1. 34 CFR §§ 300.323(c)(2) and 300.17, RCSA § 10-76d-1(a)(1) require each board of education to provide in a timely way special education and related services in accordance with the student’s individualized education program. The Student’s IEP in place at the 2025-26 school year through February 5, 2026 provided for 6.5 hours a week with non-disabled peers. Despite the District stating that this was a clerical error and that the IEP should instead have listed 2 hours, the District was required to implement what was written in the IEP. During the relevant time1, the District only provided the Student with 2 hours a week with her non-disabled peers, and therefore violated 34 CFR §§ 300.323(c)(2) and 300.17, RCSA § 10-76d-1(a)(1) for failing to provide the additional 4.5 hours in the Student’s IEP.Corrective action is required, see below.
  2. 34 CFR § 300.114 requires that each LEA must ensure that, to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are nondisabled; and special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only if the nature and severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. The reason why the District refused the Parent’s request remains unclear, because the reasons stated in the PWN are about assistance in the self-contained classroom and not a general education classroom. On the other hand, the District completed the LRE checklist which supports that the PPT considered supplementary aids and supports to enable the Student to be educated with nondisabled peers to the maximum appropriate. Although the PPT did not review or did not have access to data related to the Student’s performance in the general education setting with a one-to-one paraeducator, the Student’s delays combined with her required level of prompting support a conclusion that she would be able to access the general education setting more with a one-to-one paraeducator. However, the lack of data, it is not possible to determine whether increasing time with non-disabled peers would provide the Student with FAPE. Thus, no violation is found.
  3. 34 CFR § 300.324(1) requires the planning and placement team (PPT) to consider the strengths of the child, the concerns of the parents for enhancing the education of their child, the results of the most recent evaluation of the child, and the academic, developmental, and functional needs of the child, when developing the IEP. The PPT’s recommendation to reduce the Student’s time with non-disabled peers was not based on the Student’s individual needs.Neither the District’s response to the complaint inquiry letter nor the PWN provided detailed information about the Student’s individual needs and the relationship to refusing the Parent’s request. Therefore, a violation of 34 CFR § 300.324(1) is found and corrective action is required.
  4. 34 CFR § 300.503 and RCSA §10-76d-8 obligates a local board of education to provide parents of a child with a disability with prior written notice (PWN) before the board refused to initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child or the provision of a free appropriate public education (“FAPE”) to the child. This notice must include a description of the action proposed or refused by the PPT, and explanation of why such PPT proposes or refuses to take the action , a description of each evaluation procedure, assessment, record, or report such board used as a basis for the proposed or refused action, a statement that the parent of a child with a disability have protections under the procedural safeguards of IDEA and, if the written notice required is for the initial referral for evaluation. Additionally, the notice must include sources for parents to contact to obtain assistance in understanding the procedural safeguards of IDEA, a description of other options the PPT considered and the reasons why those options were rejected and a description of other factors that are relevant to the proposal or refusal.  PWN shall be provided not later than 10 days before the PPT proposes to, or refuses to take such action. The PWN for this issue was dated February 9, 2026. However, the date for the refusal to take action is February 3, 2026. Thus, the district violated 34 CFR § 300.503 and RCSA §10-76d-8 when it did not provide notice to the Parent of its refusal before February 3, 2026. Corrective action is required, see below.

Corrective Action(s):

  1. On or before May 15, 2026, the District must correct the PWNs in issues number 2 and 5. The notices must comply with the 10-day timeline, and contain sufficient relevant and detailed information as to the reason why the District refused the Parent’s requests.
  2. On or before September 1, 2026, the District must provide the Student with 15 hours of compensatory services. The PPT shall convene to determine the type of services and a plan for how the services will be delivered.
  1. Approximately 20 weeks of school. ↩