Last spring, leaders in Washington, DC gave New Jersey just three months to change the state’s judicial system for resolving special education disputes. The US Department of Education has found that NJ’s current process involving the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) takes too long.
In response, the Murphy administration has announced a pilot program outside the court system, in which a team of non-judicial hearing officers will hear and decide disputes. In addition, the state is requiring that any requests for extensions and adjournments—chief culprits in delayed cases—be fully explained.
New Jersey has one of the country’s highest incidences of special-education disputes that go to due process. The reasons for due process vary, but they typically address critical issues such as placement, extended school year, related services, and scope of services.
According to NJDOE data, the number of due process cases has increased 22 percent, from 1,477 in 2014 to 1,811 in 2018. Federal and state laws require that special education disputes be resolved within 45 days. The USDOE found that New Jersey failed to monitor the system, and poorly written rules about how to count those days have allowed disputes to linger.
In an eight-page letter from the USDOE’s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) issued last spring, federal leaders required NJ to put in place a mechanism to bring it in compliance with the 45-day rule by August 2019. In addition, OSEP requested the state to tighten its processes for resolving disputes earlier and determining what happens to students during the disputes. CLICK HERE to read the letter.
According to the report, New Jersey lacks procedures for ensuring the decisions in due process hearings are issued within the 45-day timeline or within allowable extensions.
Already, advocates have questioned the impartiality and training of the non-judicial officers. To start, the new system would allow voluntary participation by school districts, and parties in the disputes would retain their legal rights, including the right to appeal the hearing officers’ decisions.
.