Illinois · special-education accountability
Due-process decisions, decoded
What is a due-process hearing — and why would a parent need one?
When a parent and a school district can't resolve a disagreement about a child's special education — whether the IEP is appropriate, where the child is placed, or what services or evaluations are owed — either side can file for a due-process hearing: a formal, court-like proceeding before a neutral state hearing officer. It is the strongest enforcement tool a parent has under federal law (the IDEA), and usually a last resort after other steps fail. Below is every Illinois decision on record (316, FY 2008–2026) — read and classified so you can see what families actually fight over and how often they win.
Why this is statewide, not per-district. ISBE anonymizes both the district and the student in every decision ("Student … v. District"), so these can't be tied to a specific district — but as a body they show the system clearly. ISBE source
What these 293 decisions were about — and how they came out
We read every decision on file and classified each by the issue in dispute and who prevailed. (Some early decisions could not be machine-read.)
Who prevailed
35%Parent prevailed (104)18%Split decision (52)46%District prevailed (136)0%Dismissed / withdrawn (1)
Parents prevailed outright in about 35% of decided cases — a reminder that these hearings are hard-fought and far from a sure thing, which is why most disputes are resolved long before this stage.
Most common issues in dispute
FAPE denial245
IEP adequacy/implementation156
Placement/LRE156
Eligibility/evaluation/child find135
Compensatory education109
Private/residential placement & reimbursement103
Related services92
Independent educational evaluation (IEE)88
Procedural/parent-participation81
Behavior/discipline/manifestation66
Disabilities most often involved
Specific Learning Disability 57Autism 50Emotional Disability 39Other Health Impairment 33Intellectual Disability 20Speech/Language 8Hearing Impairment 4Developmental Delay 3
The parents placed their teenage son in a residential school and asked the district to pay them back; the hearing officer agreed the district should have provided a residential placement and ordered it to reimburse the parents about $19,000.
FAPE denialPrivate/residential placement & reimbursementPlacement/LRE
Parents who had moved their teen through a wilderness program into an unapproved private residential facility sought district funding, arguing a residential placement was needed; the hearing officer disagreed, found a therapeutic day school was the least restrictive appropriate environment, and dismissed the parents' complaint with prejudice.
Private/residential placement & reimbursementPlacement/LREFAPE denial
Parents argued the district predetermined their child's IEP and failed to provide needed services; the hearing officer found the district denied a free appropriate education for two school years and ordered a new multi-sensory IEP with a behavior plan, a one-to-one aide, and sensory supports, plus reimbursement for private tutoring and occupational therapy.
FAPE denialIEP adequacy/implementationProcedural/parent-participation
Parents disputed the district's classification and program for their child, whom the district had found to have an intellectual disability, and sought a private placement; the hearing officer found a denial of a free appropriate education and ordered the district to fund the private school, a summer reading program, and reimburse private testing, tutoring, transportation, and advocate costs.
FAPE denialEligibility/evaluation/child findPrivate/residential placement & reimbursement
Parents of an autistic child said the district ignored their requests for help and failed to evaluate or properly serve him; the hearing officer found a denial of a free appropriate education and ordered reimbursement of two independent evaluations plus added behavior, speech, and social-work services, while rejecting the parents' separate interpreter/translation claim.
FAPE denialIEP adequacy/implementationEligibility/evaluation/child find
A parent challenged the district's finding that their child with autism and ADHD was ineligible for special education; the hearing officer found the child eligible, ordered an IEP with reading, math, social-work, and language services, and required the district to pay for the independent neuropsychological evaluation (though the request for compensatory education was dismissed for lack of evidence).
Eligibility/evaluation/child findFAPE denialIndependent educational evaluation (IEE)
Parents of an autistic child argued the district's program denied an appropriate education in the least restrictive environment and unilaterally placed him privately; the hearing officer found the district's plan denied a free appropriate education, found the private placement appropriate, and ordered the district to pay tuition, related services, and transportation.
FAPE denialPlacement/LREPrivate/residential placement & reimbursement
Parents of a medically fragile child with a chronic vomiting illness disputed the amount of homebound instruction the district provided; the hearing officer found a denial of education and ordered 330 hours of compensatory tutoring plus an increase to two hours per day of homebound services.
FAPE denialRelated servicesCompensatory education
A parent claimed the district failed to evaluate and properly serve a child with speech/language needs and asthma; the hearing officer ruled for the parent, ordering 50 compensatory speech-therapy sessions, an independent neuropsychological evaluation, reimbursement of private evaluators, and transportation costs.
FAPE denialEligibility/evaluation/child findRelated services
Spanish-speaking parents of an autistic child said the district denied a free appropriate education, removed his behavior plan, refused transportation, and failed to give them interpreters or translated documents; the hearing officer granted the parents' requested relief in full, ordering interpretation services, behavior supports, transportation, and reimbursement of two independent evaluations.
FAPE denialProcedural/parent-participationRelated services
Parents of a teen with severe depression and anxiety sought full funding of an out-of-state private residential school they chose; the hearing officer found shared responsibility and ordered the district to pay only half the residential and travel costs, denying reimbursement for a wilderness program and one private evaluation.
FAPE denialPrivate/residential placement & reimbursementPlacement/LRE
Parents argued the district's evaluations were inadequate and missed their child's autism and auditory-processing disorder; the hearing officer agreed, ordered public funding of the private placement, added autism and CAPD as disabilities, and required a behavior plan and compensatory education.
FAPE denialEligibility/evaluation/child findIEP adequacy/implementation
Parents who had unilaterally placed their child in a private therapeutic day school sought reimbursement because the district failed to do a timely triennial evaluation or offer an education plan for years; despite the parents' own delays, the hearing officer found the district's failures outweighed them and ordered $97,126 in tuition and transportation reimbursement.
FAPE denialEligibility/evaluation/child findPrivate/residential placement & reimbursement
Parents challenged whether the district properly evaluated their child with learning disabilities and provided an adequate transition program; the hearing officer ruled for the parents and ordered compensatory multi-sensory tutoring, travel training, continued vocational placement, and transition services until the student's 22nd birthday.
FAPE denialIEP adequacy/implementationEligibility/evaluation/child find
Parents of a child with cerebral palsy raised many claims that the district mishandled his IEPs, placement, and their participation; the hearing officer rejected most claims and found the program overall provided a free appropriate education, but found a denial for the first four months of one year when no qualified special-education teacher was in place, awarding limited compensatory education and a detailed new IEP.
FAPE denialIEP adequacy/implementationProcedural/parent-participation