Supreme Court and FAPE

[bubbalicious]

link

www.wrightslaw.com/law/art/endrew.douglas.benefit.fape.htm


The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments (1/11) that will likely resolve the inconsistencies among Federal courts with the standard for FAPE. The above link is to the Wright's Law page with an explanation.

Also if you are interested in hearing the oral arguments, the Supreme Court's page will post by the end of next week. link

[akafred]

I hope their decision whenever it comes down answers the questions satisfactorily. It would be interesting to know how the boy fared in 5th grade in the private s/n school.

[bubbalicious]

He is now 17. There is probably something out there about his progress. I have read only two of the links.

His parents paid for some significant attorney fees and private school.

[akafred]

It may not even be relevant. Just because he progressed (or didn't) doesn't mean the next student will (or won't). I can definitely see both sides. How much progress is adequate? How do you make that determination on an individual level? Are there some students who simply aren't capable of making progress in any educational setting and if so, what is the district's responsibility to them? Are they obligated to send them to private school to make essentially zero progress vs putting them in their own school to make essentially zero progress? On the other hand, it isn't right for a district to basically educationally neglect a child who is capable of making some amount of progress and kind of wipe their hands clean and say "well he's in a school building so that's good enough." If a parent did that with regards to other needs of the child they would be found neglectful and lose their rights. And then there is the rub of who determines that the child can or cannot make progress? If it's the school district, won't they be incentivized to say that the child cannot make progress so they don't have to foot the bill? Or does the standard become having the parent put the child in private school and IF the child progresses THEN the district pays for the school? That would certainly not be an option available to all families.

[Deleted]

Interesting, thanks for posting. Last year I was a teacher for a student who was basically homebound because the school district did not support her medical needs but she was otherwise a standard level student. They were looking for private schools that the school district would pay for. So far, a placement has not been made.

[bubbalicious]

Jan 6, 2017 14:13:24 GMT -5 akafred said:

It may not even be relevant. Just because he progressed (or didn't) doesn't mean the next student will (or won't). I can definitely see both sides. How much progress is adequate? How do you make that determination on an individual level? Are there some students who simply aren't capable of making progress in any educational setting and if so, what is the district's responsibility to them? Are they obligated to send them to private school to make essentially zero progress vs putting them in their own school to make essentially zero progress? On the other hand, it isn't right for a district to basically educationally neglect a child who is capable of making some amount of progress and kind of wipe their hands clean and say "well he's in a school building so that's good enough." If a parent did that with regards to other needs of the child they would be found neglectful and lose their rights. And then there is the rub of who determines that the child can or cannot make progress? If it's the school district, won't they be incentivized to say that the child cannot make progress so they don't have to foot the bill? Or does the standard become having the parent put the child in private school and IF the child progresses THEN the district pays for the school? That would certainly not be an option available to all families.

The deminimus standard for FAPE is basically the child just shows up and the district has fulfilled the FAPE obligation. So you can show a kid is failing educationally and they can still say a child is making significant progress. Who knows the child's potential if no meaningful education is provided. Only two circuits do not follow the deminimus standard.

Even in public school, you can have no progress while the public school says there is progess. Who determines if the progress occurs or is signficant...quite frankly the law is not on the parents side with a burden of proof on the parent and a deminimus standard for FAPE.

I have been advised in the past that due process is a waste of time, just pay the private school tuition. We have 9% identification rate for sped (our state is 11% and nationally is 13%). With the deminimus standard, special education can openly deny services or just pass the child through.

IDEA is clear on the district is responsible for nonpublic payment if FAPE is denied. But if FAPE is under the deminimus standard than nonpublics are out of reach for so many. And you are right sped nonpublics start at 40k.  Reimbursement is near impossible in our state. 

[bubbalicious]

Jan 6, 2017 17:41:54 GMT -5 @mightymaude said:

Interesting, thanks for posting. Last year I was a teacher for a student who was basically homebound because the school district did not support her medical needs but she was otherwise a standard level student. They were looking for private schools that the school district would pay for. So far, a placement has not been made.

Interesting. When we went through the process, there was no rush on the systems end to schedule meetings.

[akafred]

Jan 6, 2017 19:29:29 GMT -5 bubbalicious said:

Jan 6, 2017 14:13:24 GMT -5 akafred said:

It may not even be relevant. Just because he progressed (or didn't) doesn't mean the next student will (or won't). I can definitely see both sides. How much progress is adequate? How do you make that determination on an individual level? Are there some students who simply aren't capable of making progress in any educational setting and if so, what is the district's responsibility to them? Are they obligated to send them to private school to make essentially zero progress vs putting them in their own school to make essentially zero progress? On the other hand, it isn't right for a district to basically educationally neglect a child who is capable of making some amount of progress and kind of wipe their hands clean and say "well he's in a school building so that's good enough." If a parent did that with regards to other needs of the child they would be found neglectful and lose their rights. And then there is the rub of who determines that the child can or cannot make progress? If it's the school district, won't they be incentivized to say that the child cannot make progress so they don't have to foot the bill? Or does the standard become having the parent put the child in private school and IF the child progresses THEN the district pays for the school? That would certainly not be an option available to all families.

The deminimus standard for FAPE is basically the child just shows up and the district has fulfilled the FAPE obligation. So you can show a kid is failing educationally and they can still say a child is making significant progress. Who knows the child's potential if no meaningful education is provided. Only two circuits do not follow the deminimus standard.

Even in public school, you can have no progress while the public school says there is progess. Who determines if the progress occurs or is signficant...quite frankly the law is not on the parents side with a burden of proof on the parent and a deminimus standard for FAPE.

I have been advised in the past that due process is a waste of time, just pay the private school tuition. We have 9% identification rate for sped (our state is 11% and nationally is 13%). With the deminimus standard, special education can openly deny services or just pass the child through.

IDEA is clear on the district is responsible for nonpublic payment if FAPE is denied. But if FAPE is under the deminimus standard than nonpublics are out of reach for so many. And you are right sped nonpublics start at 40k.  Reimbursement is near impossible in our state. 

Right but is that not exactly what this case is about? The plaintiffs are maintaining that de minimus isn't good enough.

[akafred]

Bye bye de minimus, hello "reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress in light of the child's circumstances."

Will be interesting to see how it shakes out.