Division of Administrative Law Appeals
Bureau of Special Education Appeals
In Re: Belmont Public Schools v. Student
BSEA #24-14684
Ruling on Parent’s Motion to Compel Responses To Parent’s Request For Production Of Documents From Belmont Public Schools
On June 12, 2024, Belmont Public Schools (Belmont) filed a Hearing Request in the above-referenced matter, seeking to move Student from an inclusion setting to a more restrictive placement. Parent’s Response to Belmont’s Hearing Request on July 2, 2024, included counter claims for the 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 school years.
Parent filed a Request for Production of Documents and Interrogatories from Belmont on September 9, 2024, seeking a response by October 9, 2024. Belmont responded to some of Parent’s discovery requests but not others. On September 18, 2024, Belmont filed Objections to Parent’s discovery requests, including Requests #18 and #19. While the Parties were able to informally resolve part of their dispute, they were not able to resolve requests for production of documents #18 and #19, which sought,
#18. For the 2023-2024 school year, copies of IEPs cleansed of identifying names and information for every special education student [Student]was placed with at the Butler elementary School in the general and special education settings.
#19. For the 2024-2025 school year, copies of IEPs cleansed of identifying names and information for every special education student [Student]was placed with at the Butler elementary School in the general and special education settings.
According to Belmont, the requests were irrelevant, overbroad, burdensome and not likely to lead to admissible evidence. Moreover, Belmont argued that they called “for non-party student information in violation of the privacy rights of other Belmont students.”
Parent noted that the issues for Hearing included the “appropriateness of Student’ s current setting, which presumably includes other special education students”; Student’s alleged need on for a more restrictive setting without considering amendments to the current IEP that may allow Student to remain in a less-restrictive placement; and, whether Student is entitled to an award of compensatory education services or other relief. As such, Parent argued that Student’s peer cohort in his second and third grade classrooms, as well as in the pull-out settings, are likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Parent disputed that the requests were overly broad or burdensome as the elementary school cohort is relatively small. Lastly, Parent argued that the request relative to document requests #18 and #19 proactively requested removal of personally identifiable information on the IEPs of the relevant cohort, consistent with previous BSEA Rulings addressing the same issue. See In Re: Student v. Manchester-Essex Regional School District, BSEA # 2403782 (Kantor-Nir, 1/12/2024); In Re: Newton Public schools v. Student, Ruling on Newton Public schools Motion To Limit The Scope Of Discovery, BSEA # 2010632 (9/2/2020); In Re: Jerrol v. Haverhill Public Schools, BSEA #1900557 (Byrne, 11/19/2018).
On September 26, 2024, Parent filed a Motion to Compel Responses To Parent’s Request For Production Of Documents From Belmont Public Schools (Motion).[1]
Upon consideration of the Parties’ positions, applicable law and previous BSEA rulings addressing the issue of redacted, cohort IEPs, Parent’s Motion is ALLOWED. In reaching this determination I specifically rely on the legal analysis in In Re: Student v. Manchester-Essex Regional School District, BSEA # 2403782 (Kantor-Nir, 1/12/2024), and incorporate it by reference, to avoid having to restate the well-reasoned legal standards and analysis in said Ruling. I further rely on the analysis in my previous Ruling, In Re: Newton Public schools v. Student, Ruling on Newton Public schools Motion To Limit The Scope Of Discovery, BSEA # 2010632 (9/2/2020).
As such, Belmont is Ordered to:
- Produce the IEPs requested by Parent for the period the 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 school years cleansed of all identifying information, including, at minimum, the name of the child, name(s) of parent(s) or other family members, address, date and place of birth, gender, race/ethnicity, any language(s) other than English that are spoken by student and/or parents, and any student number(s) assigned to such students including Social Security numbers, involvement with a court or state agency. The IEPs shall also be cleansed of any information regarding family members including, but not limited to medical, social, educational, employment, financial or demographic information, whether or not such information actually or potentially identifies the person at issue.
- The redacted IEPs shall not be redacted of the cognitive levels, benchmarks and service delivery grids of students grouped with or proposed to be grouped with [Student] for the 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 school years.
- The redacted IEPs shall be provided solely to counsel for Parent, and not to the Parent, Student, or any other person or entity. Parent’s counsel may disclose the redacted documents to experts who are assisting Parent regarding appropriate peer groupings and related issues and who will testify at Hearing. Parent’s counsel shall also warn the experts not to discuss the information contained in those IEPs with Parent or anyone other than counsel at any time. Experts may not retain any copies of the cohort IEPs that may be shared with them and shall destroy or return those copies to counsel immediately following testimony at Hearing, or after a settlement agreement has been reached, or the case is withdrawn or dismissed. Parent’s counsel is responsible to ensure that the aforementioned protections are implemented.
- Counsel for Belmont and/or Parent may submit copies of some or all of the redacted IEPs as exhibits at Hearing. The Parties shall discuss whether additional protections may be necessary in preparation for or during the Hearing.
- Except as described in (2) and (3) above, Parent’s counsel shall not disclose the IEPs, or information therein, to any other person or entity.
- Upon the close of the record in this matter by decision or by settlement, Parent’s counsel shall ensure that any copies of the IEPs at issue that may have been shared with experts per Paragraph 2 are returned to the school district, or are destroyed. The matter will be deemed concluded after a decision has been issued and the period for appeal has expired, or after final disposition of the case via settlement, withdrawal and/ or dismissal.
- The Parties may craft additional protections to which they agree.
- The District’s response time is extended through the close of business on October 11, 2024.
So Ordered by the Hearing Officer,
Rosa I. Figueroa
Rosa I. Figueroa Dated: 10/8/2024
[1] The Motion had been discussed during a telephone conference call held on September 24, 2024.