On April 25, 2006, the Department of Public Instruction received a complaint under state and federal special education law from XXXXX against the Racine Unified School District. This is the departments decision regarding that complaint. The issue is whether the district had an individualized education program (IEP), including annual goals, in effect between November 2005 and April 2006. The department has determined that the circumstances of the other allegations in the April 25 letter of complaint are the same as those already covered in previous complaints filed by the complainant.
On November 9, 2005, an IEP team meeting was held to develop an annual IEP, determine placement, and develop a functional behavior assessment plan. The students parents attended the meeting. The students parents were provided a notice of school assignment and placement. This IEP contained annual goals and was projected to be in effect between November 9, 2005, and November 8, 2006. A statement included in the IEP indicates that the meeting was not completed on November 9 due to time constraints and that another meeting was scheduled to again review and revise the IEP. The students parents were informed that the November 9 IEP would be implemented until it was revised at a future IEP team meeting. IEP team meetings were scheduled to be held on November 30 and December 19, 2005; January 5 and 9, February 13 and 27, and April 5, 2006. IEP team meetings were held on December 19, 2005; January 9, February 13 and 27, and April 5 and 10, 2006. The students parents attended each meeting. The IEP team meeting held on April 5 included a facilitator provided by the Wisconsin Special Education Mediation System. The students parents asked the facilitator to leave the meeting. The meeting was held between 9:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. and reconvened on April 10. The students parents were provided a notice of school assignment and placement. This IEP was projected to be in effect between April 10, 2006, and April 9, 2007.
A local educational agency (LEA) must provide each child with a disability a free appropriate public education (FAPE). An LEA meets its obligation to provide FAPE to a child in part by providing special education, related services, and supplementary aids and services in conformity with an IEP. Between November 2005 and April 2006, special education services were provided to the child as described in the November 9, 2005, IEP. The district had an individualized education program (IEP), including annual goals, in effect between November 2005 and April 2006.
This concludes our review of this complaint, which we are closing.
//signed CST 6/26/06
Carolyn Stanford Taylor
Assistant State Superintendent
Division for Learning Support: Equity and Advocacy