Complaint Summary
Date Findings Report Sent:
February 13, 2026
Case Number:
26-0330
Person Filing Complaint:
Parent
School District:
Orange Public Schools (single student)
Grade Level:
Elementary School
Allegations:
Issue 1: The Parent alleged that the District did not meaningfully incorporate the recommendations from the IEE into the Student’s IEP on March 20, 2025. (34 CFR § 300.502(c))
Issue 2: The Parent alleged that following the eligibility determination on December 17, 2024, the District failed to develop an IEP that was reasonably calculated to enable the Student to make appropriate progress in the absence of reading instruction in the IEP. The Parent further alleges that the District informed her that the Student’s IEP did not include reading instruction due to the Student’s primary disability of OHI-ADHD. (34 CFR 300.324(a) and 34 CFR § 300.320(a)(2))
Issue 3: The Parent alleged that the District failed to provide adequate Prior Written Notice (PWN) that explained the basis for excluding reading goals. (34 CFR § 300.503)
Issue 4: The Parent alleged that the District failed to implement the IEP with regard to the monthly parent meetings and monthly progress monitoring data sent to parents in accordance with the IEP dated March 20, 2025. (34 CFR §§ 300.323(c)(2) and 300.17, RCSA § 10-76d-1(a)(1))
Issue 5: The Parent alleged that the District did not provide a full copy of the IEP for the PPT meeting held on December 17, 2024, until January 10, 2025. (RCSA § 10-76d-13(a)(6))
Conclusions:
Issue 1: A review of the Student’s IEP dated March 20, 2025, confirmed that the District not only considered the results of the IEE, but also incorporated information and recommendations from the IEE into the Student’s present levels of performance, goals and objectives, special education and related services, supplementary aids and services, and the additional data/assessment information section of the IEP. The District provided the contracted evaluator with draft goals and objectives prior to the PPT meeting and asked for feedback. The contracted evaluator attended the PPT meeting on March 20, 2025, to review her evaluation report and provide recommendations to the team. Therefore, the District is not in violation of 34 CFR § 300.502(c) as the District considered the results of the evaluation when making decisions with respect to the provision of FAPE to the Student. No corrective action is required.
Issue 2: The District maintained that the Student was making progress with tier III reading intervention and did not require specialized instruction in the area of reading at the time he was found eligible for special education and related services on December 17, 2024. Progress monitoring data confirmed that the Student was showing growth on his reading intervention objectives at the time of the PPT meeting. The Student’s executive functioning goal and objectives in the IEP dated December 17, 2024, focused on self-regulation and self-monitoring prior to engaging in reading and writing fluency tasks and were measured by the Student’s improvement in his oral reading fluency rate and writing fluency score. According to the District, they identified the special education service as executive functioning instruction because, “Reading instruction in the IEP focused on his perseverance and attention – Habits of Mind. Reading is addressed in goal #5 based on attention, focus, and motivation concerns discussed during the meeting.”
The Student’s progress monitoring data for tier III reading intervention, first marking period grades, and present levels of performance under the goal area of executive functioning supported the District’s decision to embed the reading and writing objectives within executive functioning instruction. Therefore, the District is not in violation of 34 CFR 300.324(a) and 34 CFR § 300.320(a)(2). No corrective action is required.
It is concerning that two District administrators informed the Parent via email that, “Given that he qualified for special education based on ADHD and anxiety, goals and objectives in this IEP are aligned with this concern.” While a Student who qualified for special education and related services due to ADHD and anxiety should have goals and objectives aligned to these concerns, a Student’s special education and related services are not solely driven by the primary disability category. A Student’s disability category does not limit the scope of special education services available to a Student. Present levels of performance and the need for specially designed instruction to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum; and meet each of the child's other educational needs that result from the child's disability drive the services within an IEP in accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). While a violation has not been found, see the recommendation below.
Issue 3: There is some confusion in how the executive functioning instruction was documented in the IEP dated December 17, 2024. The PPT recommendation stated, “reading and writing instruction in a small group setting 20 min. day.” However, the special education and related services grid identified the service as executive functioning instruction for 20 minutes a day in site 2a/resource setting. While the Student’s executive functioning goal and objectives focused on self-regulation and self-monitoring prior to engaging in reading and writing fluency tasks and were measured by the Student’s improvement in his oral reading fluency rate and writing fluency score, based on the Parent’s email on January 7, 2025, the Parent was expecting to see reading and spelling services and goals and objectives in the IEP dated December 17, 2024. The District’s email response to the Parent indicated that the Student would continue with tier III reading intervention and that the reading intervention goal and objectives as well as direct reading service would not be included in the IEP at that time. It appears that the discussion at the PPT did not clearly define the services and focus areas for goals and objectives based on the Parent’s email questioning the reading instruction in the IEP. However, a direct connection cannot be made between lack of clarity in the PPT recommendations and the District refusing the Parent’s request for reading instruction at the PPT meeting held on December 17, 2024. The District’s denial of the Parent’s request for reading services via email after the PPT meeting does not require the District to issue PWN. Therefore, the District is not in violation of 34 CFR § 300.503. No corrective action is required. However, see recommendation below.
Issue 4: The Student’s IEP dated March 20, 2025, implemented on April 10, 2025, recommended monthly parent meetings and monthly progress monitoring data to be sent to Parents. The District did not hold a monthly parent meeting in the months of April, May or June 2025. The District did not provide monthly progress monitoring data in the months of April and September 2025. In June, July, November, and December 2025, the data provided was in the form of the progress report on IEP goals and objectives which was already a requirement of the IEP. The District and Parent have since clarified that the Parents will be sent raw data in order to fulfill the requirement of the PPT recommendation of monthly progress monitoring data to be sent to the Parents. It is determined that the District is in violation of 34 CFR §§ 300.323(c)(2) and 300.17, RCSA § 10-76d-1(a)(1) as they did not hold monthly meetings with the Parents and did not consistently share monthly progress monitoring data with the Parents in accordance with the IEP dated March 20, 2025. Corrective action is required.
Issue 5: The District generated the draft IEP for the PPT meeting held on December 17, 2024, on January 10, 2025. Taking into consideration the District’s holiday recess, the IEP was generated 10 school days following the PPT meeting on December 17, 2024. Although the District experienced an issue finalizing the IEP in CT-SEDS and the Parent signed consent for the initial provision of special education on January 12, 2025, neither obstacle negates the fact that the District did not draft the IEP until January 10, 2025. Therefore, the District is in violation of RCSA § 10-76d-13(a)(6). Corrective action is required.
Required Correction Action:
- The District must provide this investigator with monthly updates confirming that a Parent meeting was held and that progress monitoring data (raw data per agreement between District and Parent) was provided to the Parents.If a parent meeting is canceled, it must be rescheduled within a reasonable timeframe, even if it results in two Parent meetings being held in one month.Monthly updates must begin on March 2, 2026, and include information for February 2026.First of the month updates must be provided to this investigator through December 2026, assuming the recommendation remains in the Student’s IEP.
- The District must review the required timelines of RCSA § 10-76d-13(a)(6) with the PPT members present at the PPT meeting held on December 14, 2024.The content of the review and staff signatures and date of completion must be sent to this investigator on or before March 31, 2026.
- The District must provide this investigator with the SASIDs of five students whose PPTs convene after the training and no later than May 29, 2026, so that this office may review the generation and finalization dates of IEPs through CT-SEDS to ensure compliance with RCSA § 10-76d-13(a)(6).
Recommendations:
- It is strongly recommended that the administrators of PPT meetings in the District review the requirements of 34 CFR § 300.320(a) which provides that the child’s individualized education program (IEP) must include a statement of the child's present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, including how the child's disability affects the child's involvement and progress in the general education curriculum; and a statement of measurable annual goals, including academic and functional goals designed to meet the child's needs that result from the child's disability to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum; and meet each of the child's other educational needs that result from the child's disability.
- It is strongly recommended that the District review with the school-based members of the PPT meeting held on December 17, 2024, the need to clearly articulate PPT recommendations and focus areas and skills for goals and objectives at the PPT meeting to ensure that Parents fully understand the recommendations of the PPT and the IEP that the District is proposing.