I. S., By and Through His Attorney in Fact, M. S., et al. v. Fulton County School District

When Congress enacted the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), it imposed on public school districts an affirmative duty to ensure that parents participate robustly in developing an independent education plan (IEP) for their disabled children so that they receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The procedural safeguards of 20 U.S.C. §§ 1414 & 1415, give parents the right to full and timely disclosure of recommendations by school personnel before an IEP meeting takes place so that they can bring their own questions, concerns and recommendations to the meeting as part of a meaningful, two-sided discussion of the child’s needs and the services to be provided to meet those needs before the IEP is finalized. The Questions Presented Are:

1. Does a school district predetermine a child’s IEP under the IDEA where before an IEP meeting takes place it secretly alters the child’s psychological report to support its less costly home placement and then refuses to engage meaningfully at the IEP meeting with the parents’ suggested placement in a residential school?

2. In light of the crucial procedural safeguards of the IDEA, what are the legal consequences when a school district secretly alters a child’s psychological report to support its predetermined home placement and then refuses at the IEP meeting to engage with the child’s parents about their suggested placement?