This case is the most recent interpretation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA Act”) and revolves around the education of a student referred to as “T.A.” In December of 2000, T.A. was evaluated by a school psychologist for the Forest Grove School District to determine if he qualified for special-education services. Although the school district declined to offer T.A. an individualized education program (“IEP”), a subsequent private specialist diagnosed T.A. with learning disabilities. The parents of T.A. then removed him from public school without notifying the school district, enrolled him in a private academy for students with academic disabilities, and requested that the school district reimburse his private-school tuition.

The Supreme Court had previously ruled that the IDEA Act authorizes courts to require public schools to reimburse the cost of private-school tuition when two conditions are met: 1) the school district fails to provide a free appropriate public education for the student; and 2) the private-school placement is appropriate for students that require special education. In these previous cases, however, the students had inadequate IEPs and had already received special-education services. In Forest Grove School District v. T.A. the court applied this existing interpretation of the IDEA Act to a slightly different situation and ruled that the IDEA Act authorizes reimbursement for private special-education services when a public school fails to provide a free appropriate public education and the private-school placement is appropriate, regardless of whether the child previously received special-education services through the public school.

This case merely clarifies confusion amongst the lower courts by extending the same right to reimbursement for students regardless of whether the student already received special-education services. Parents may now move their children that require special-education services to private facilities and seek reimbursement from public schools after-the-fact. This remains a risky option for parents since reimbursement may be diminished or eliminated if the hearing board subsequently determines that the public school’s special-education services were adequate, or the private institution was not an appropriate selection for children that require such special-education services. In order to avoid reimbursement for costly private-school tuition, schools should remain diligent in identifying, evaluating, and educating students that require special-education services.