top of page

Special Education Court Settlements

By Alma Chow, Andrew Dawson, and Davina Haggar



A settlement is an agreement between parties that ends the dispute and avoids the need to go to a full trial. It saves time and litigation costs and is a voluntary agreement between parties without ruling from the court. Settlements provide a mutually acceptable resolution by addressing the issues in question, often involving compensation, policy changes, or other agreed-upon conditions.

Special education settlements are legal agreements typically concerning disputes under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the law that ensures free and appropriate public education (FAPE) for special education students. IDEA provides eligible students with disabilities free and appropriate education with specialized programs to meet their needs (U.S. Department of Education). Special education settlements ensure that students with disabilities receive the support and assistance that they’re entitled to according to the law. Settlements typically occur after a due process hearing or through mediation, to avoid a formal court hearing. Through IDEA, there is an option for a “due process,” which is a formal approach to resolving disputes regarding special education in education. However, this process takes a significant amount of time and if the issue isn’t resolved quickly enough, one might need the support of an attorney or advocate. 

If one is interested in filing for a due process, it begins with a written complaint against the institution. Once this complaint is filed, the plaintiff, the person/party filing the complaint, and the defendant, the person/party in which the complaint is filed against, must attend a resolution session. A resolution session is a meeting where both parties communicate to try to reach an agreement to avoid going further into the legal process. Both parties may agree to waive this session or try mediation, where a neutral third-party attempts to facilitate the discussion between both parties in hopes to reach an agreement (U.S. Department of Commerce). If the partiers don’t find an agreement, then there is a due process hearing, which is typically similar to a courtroom trial. In this hearing, evidence is presented and witnesses speak in front of a hearing officer, who makes a decision about the case. If either party disagrees with the hearing officer’s decision, they may challenge it in court (Understood).  

How is funding given in court settlements? The short answer is from school districts’ general budgets. Generally speaking, a given amount in the school districts’ general budget is allocated for each year for students who are sent to alternative educational placements such as private or boarding school. Alternatively, parents can make the decision for alternative educational placement for their child and request to be reimbursed. Some other avenues of funding are from overall state education budgets, and in rare cases, from federal funding under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Another possible source of federal funding is the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Where the funding comes from is usually stipulated in the court documents. Meaning the specific school placement, the duration, and whether the public school district is directly or if the parents are being reimbursed. However, it is important to note that each case and settlement are different, so a “one size fits all rule” does not really fit and when discussing specific cases, this should be noted.

Here are some recent examples of special education-related court settlements.

In Disability Rights New Jersey v. New Jersey Department of Education (2014), the New Jersey Department of Education was found to not be following IDEA’s Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) requirement. The settlement agreement included a needs assessment in over 75 districts with poor inclusion records, increased oversight of districts that segregate students of color in special education, extensive training and technical assistance, designated inclusion facilitators, and parental input on district failures. This was all monitored by a stakeholder committee of disability advocates.

In 2018, the Hawaii Department of Education (DOE) had to make a settlement. Parents, legal guardians and the Hawaii Disability Rights Center filed a lawsuit in reaction to a 2010 state law (Act 163) that cut off public education for special-needs students at age 20, in contrast to federal law stating they receive services until the age of 22. In settlement, the Hawaii DOE paid $10.25 million for the compensatory education or education-related services for the 495 affected former special education students. (reimbursement for private services).

In South Kingstown School Committee v. Joanna (2014), The court was asked to determine whether a prior settlement agreement relieved the school district of an obligation to perform or fund an additional evaluation sought by a parent. In the initial due process complaint, Joanna sought out additional educational services for her child from the School Committee (SC), including private school placement and 8 new evaluations for the child. SC agrees to a settlement. In the agreement, SC will pay for the child to attend the Wolf School, a private school, perform 4 evaluations of the child before he begins at the Wolf School. The 4 evaluations are listed: educational, cognitive, speech and language, and occupational therapy. Joanna relinquishes her request for the other evaluations she had demanded in her complaint. After enrollment in private school and the evaluations are done, Joanna demands 10 additional evaluations. The court determined that the school district's evaluations were appropriate and that the settlement agreement between Joanna and the School Committee released the district from any obligation to fund additional independent evaluations.




Sources 


3DA logo with pink and yellow letters
Contact Details
PO Box 4708
Mesa, AZ 85211-4708 USA
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • X
3DA is a member of the following coalitions
Red and navy blue Arizona Disability Advocacy Coalition logo
Deep blue and white ITEM Coalition logo
3DA is a registered 501c(3) tax exempt organization and was founded in 2022. Tax ID: 88-0737327
bottom of page