The next three paragraphs address misapplications of the ‘Stay Put’ Rule. Stay put is an IDEA law that provides: “during the pendency of any [special education due process] proceedings . . ., unless the State or local educational agency and the parents otherwise agree, the child shall remain in the then-current educational placement of the child, or, if applying for initial admission to a public school, shall, with the consent of the parents, be placed in the public school program until all such proceedings have been completed.” 20 U.S.C. 1415(j). This arises when the parent and school district disagree about the program placement of a child with a disability and the parent files a due process complaint. Stay Put requires the child remain in the last agreed upon program placement until the case is over.
Relief #9 – Paragraph 12
“ALJs shall strictly maintain “the then-current educational placement” (“Stay Put”) of the child under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j) and as an “automatic preliminary injunction” under M.R. v. Ridley School Dist., 744 F. 3rd 112, 117 (3rd Cir. 2014) cert. denied, No. 13-1547, 2015 WL 2340858 (S. Ct. May 18, 2015), and shall cease applying the standard for emergency relief under Crowe v. De Gioia, 90 N.J. 126 (1982).”
What does that mean?
Some ALJs require parents to prove four elements before they will enforce Stay Put. They used the Crowe case as the basis for these elements. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit said that was wrong. In the M.R. case cited above, that federal appeals court said that Stay Put is “automatic” once a due process complaint is filed. This provision in the settlement mandates how ALJs shall treat Stay Put and to stop requiring proof of the Crowe elements.
Relief #10 – Paragraph 13
“The student shall remain in Stay Put and the automatic preliminary injunction shall remain in place until a final decision on the merits of the case.”
What does that mean?
Simply put, the injunction imposed by Stay Put (not changing the student’s placement) stays until the case is over.
Relief #11 – Paragraph 14
“An ALJ shall address any motion or defense asserted or raised by an LEA based on the so-called “15 Day Rule” in accordance with N.J.A.C. § 6A:14-2.3(h)(3). [NOTE: : the Parents Rights in Special Education publication (“PRISE”) and August 6, 2019 Broadcast Memo also provide guidance on this issue.]”
What does that mean?
School districts were telling parents that if they disagreed with a new proposed IEP, the parents had only 15 days to file the due process case or the school would proceed with implementing the new IEP. The U.S. Department of Education and this settlement make clear that the parents do not have to file the complaint within 15 days. NJDOE was instructed to change the language in the Parents Rights in Special Education booklet and that school districts should stop telling parents this to be compliant. In addition, NJDOE issued a Broadcast Memo on August 6, 2019 (PDF file) to explain the change in how this “15 Day Rule” is to be applied.