By Rebecca Kirschner, Esq.
Pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), public schools are required to provide students with disabilities a Free Appropriate Public Education (“FAPE”). A FAPE is defined as educational instruction designed to meet the unique needs of the child, accompanied by the necessary services to ensure the student can benefit from that instruction. An Individualized Education Program (“IEP”) is the primary mechanism through which FAPE is delivered to students with disabilities. Often, disputes arise when parents and the district disagree on whether an IEP is appropriate to sufficiently support the student’s needs to allow for meaningful progress. If parents believe that the school district has failed to provide their child with a FAPE, they may choose to unilaterally place their child in a private school and seek tuition reimbursement from the district.
The Burlington-Carter Test is a three-prong test used to determine whether parents of children with disabilities are entitled to reimbursement from their public school district for the costs of unilateral placement. Under the Burlington-Carter test, a district may be required to reimburse parents for private school tuition if (1) the district denied the student a FAPE; (2) the parents’ unilateral placement is appropriate; and (3) equitable considerations support the parents’ claim for reimbursement.
The first prong of the Burlington-Carter test examines whether the public school denied the student a FAPE. The District must demonstrate that it offered the student an appropriate program and related services. When determining whether the District provided the student with a FAPE, courts will examine whether the District complied with the procedural requirements set forth in IDEA and whether the IEP was reasonably calculated to allow the student to make appropriate progress in light of the child’s circumstances. The student’s unique circumstances and specific needs determine the adequacy of the IEP in question. Districts are only required to provide an appropriate education. They are not required to provide what’s optimal for the student, or to maximize the potential of students with disabilities.
The second prong examines whether the private placement chosen by the parents is appropriate for the student considering the student’s individual needs. When determining whether the parents’ unilateral placement is appropriate, parents must demonstrate that the placement was likely to produce progress, provides educational instruction specially designed to meet the unique special education needs of the student, and is supported by the services necessary to allow the child to benefit from instruction.
The third prong considers equitable considerations. This inquiry focuses on whether the actions of the parents were reasonable and whether the balancing of the equities support reimbursement. Factors considered include whether the parents provided timely notice of the unilateral placement to the District, and whether the parent cooperated with the District by attending IEP meetings, consenting to evaluations, and fairly considering all District proposed programs.
THIS ARTICLE IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED LEGAL ADVICE.