In an important 6-3 decision written by Justice Stevens, the Supreme Court affirmed a Ninth Circuit ruling for parents of a child with disabilities enrolled in a private school, holding that the 2004 amendments Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) permitted parents to seek private school tuition reimbursement even when the child had not previously partook of public school special educational services. The court held that the relevant portion of the IDEA did not create a categorical bar to tuition reimbursement for students who have not previously received special education services through the public school system.
Forest Grove School Dist., v. T.A. (T.A.) is significant because it harmonizes conflicting rulings in the circuits that add to the sense that schooling for children with special educational needs and their parents/caretakers is fraught with insecurity and delay. In two Second Circuit examples, NYC Department of Education v. Tom F., and Frank G. v. Board of Ed. of Hyde Park, the Courts held that the IDEA authorizes reimbursement for private special tuition when a public school district fails to provide an appropriate public education, regardless of whether the child previously received special education services through the public school system. A recent Eleventh Circuit case followed the same reasoning, but a First Circuit case went the other way.
T.A., relying on the reasoning and language of Frank G., does not say that any child in private school is entitled to private school tuition. Instead, the case creates clear guidelines for local educational authorities and parent/caretakers when it comes to one aspect of children’s educational rights under the IDEA. The case will be remanded to the district court with guidance to "... consider all relevant factors, including the notice provided by the parents and the school district's opportunities for evaluating the child ... " Other courts will be required to do the same.
Curtis L. Decker, the executive director of the Washington-based National Disability Rights Network which filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the family, reported to Education Week, “Our experience across the country is it does take parents being aggressive to get some school districts to follow the process…. I hope the positive impact will be a clear message to schools that they can’t sort of get out from under their responsibility by just ignoring the child and putting the parents off.” On the other hand, opponents argue that the decision will result in an increase of private school reimbursement cases, which could cost the educational systems millions of dollars.
I think the case sends a clear message to local educational agencies that their obligation to process swiftly and thoroughly parents’ requests for assistance for children who seem to be struggling in school. Even in New York, where there is an unusually high incidence of private school placement, better school response to initial parental requests for service and the proffer of adequate public school options will have the effect of preventing litigation and, ultimately, private school placements. I like to think that every win for parents is a step toward meaningful public special education reform.
—Lisa Isaacs, Director, Education for New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
Comments