The Arizona Department of Education has ruled that the Arizona State School for the Deaf and the Blind violated federal special education law during its plan to close its Tucson campus and shift operations to a new campus in Oro Valley.
The decision stems from a complaint filed by the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law's Education Advocacy Clinic, which argued that ASDB made placement decisions for certain students before the legally required individualized review process had taken place.
The controversy began earlier this year when ASDB announced it would relocate from Tucson to Oro Valley. Families were later told the new campus would primarily serve students who are deaf or hard of hearing, while many students who are blind, visually impaired, or enrolled in the school's residential program would instead return to their home school districts.
Advocates representing affected families said many of those students had originally been sent to ASDB because their local districts could not adequately meet their educational needs.
Under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), decisions about where a student receives special education services must be made by an Individualized Education Program (IEP) team that includes the student's parents. The law requires the team to evaluate each student's unique needs before determining the most appropriate educational setting.
According to ADE's investigation, that process did not occur for some ASDB students. Instead, the department found the school had effectively decided in advance that certain programs would no longer be available, preventing IEP teams from considering the full range of placement options.
"The outcome was determined before families ever had the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process," said Diana Newmark, director of the University of Arizona's Education Advocacy Clinic.
The clinic began assisting ASDB families in January and spent several months attending meetings, gathering information, and researching the issue before filing a systemic complaint with ADE in May.
In its ruling, ADE concluded that educational placement decisions cannot be based on factors such as available programs, funding, administrative convenience, or agency-wide policies. Instead, each student's placement must be based on that student's individual educational needs.
As part of the corrective action, the department has appointed a special monitor to oversee ASDB's compliance with federal law. The school has also been directed to reconvene placement teams and consider all appropriate educational options for affected students by Aug. 28.
The ruling does not require ASDB to reopen programs at its new campus, and school officials have not publicly indicated whether students who are blind, visually impaired, or part of the residential program will ultimately be served there.
However, advocates say the decision ensures families will have meaningful participation in determining what services their children receive rather than being presented with a predetermined outcome.
Newmark called the ruling a significant victory for families and said she hopes it results in long-term improvements for students who rely on specialized educational services.
"Our hope is that those specialized programs are available to all the kids that need them," she said.
