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35%Parent prevailed (104)18%Split decision (52)46%District prevailed (136)0%Dismissed / withdrawn (1)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
Parents argued their child was wrongly placed in a life-skills program and asked that she be held back a grade as compensation, but the hearing officer found the placement appropriate and denied the request.
FAPE denialPlacement/LRECompensatory education
Parents of a child with autism and ADHD sought reimbursement for a private therapeutic school, but the hearing officer found the district met its obligations and dismissed the complaint with prejudice.
FAPE denialEligibility/evaluation/child findIEP adequacy/implementation
A parent argued her child with intellectual disability and autism needed a formal behavior assessment and ABA services, but the hearing officer found the existing program met his needs and dismissed the complaint.
FAPE denialBehavior/discipline/manifestationCompensatory education
A parent claimed the district failed to evaluate her child's wandering and created a behavior plan without consent, but the hearing officer found the district provided an appropriate education and denied all relief.
FAPE denialEligibility/evaluation/child findBehavior/discipline/manifestation
Parents of a dyslexic non-reading child showed the district's IEPs were inadequate and won reimbursement and ongoing funding for the private therapeutic day school where they had placed him.
FAPE denialIEP adequacy/implementationPrivate/residential placement & reimbursement
Parents argued the district failed to properly evaluate and teach an autistic child and won, with the hearing officer ordering placement in a private autism school plus extra evaluations and ABA therapy through the next summer.
FAPE denialIEP adequacy/implementationEligibility/evaluation/child find
The officer found the charter school repeatedly denied an appropriate education to a student with intellectual, speech and emotional disabilities and ordered it, as compensatory education, to fund her placement at a therapeutic day school until age 22 along with a detailed corrected IEP.
FAPE denialIEP adequacy/implementationTransition/secondary services
A mother sought to have the district pay for an out-of-state residential facility and alleged improper restraint and seclusion, but the officer found the district had provided an appropriate education in the least-restrictive setting and denied all of her requests.
FAPE denialEligibility/evaluation/child findPlacement/LRE
A parent claimed her son was bullied and objected to the district's proposed program change, but the officer found a single playground incident was not actionable bullying and allowed the district to move forward with its proposed placement.
Bullying/harassmentPlacement/LREFAPE denial
A parent challenged the district's proposed change of program and claimed her son had been bullied, but the officer found no actionable bullying and allowed the district to proceed with its proposed special-education placement.
Placement/LREBullying/harassmentFAPE denial
The officer found the district failed to identify and properly serve a child with dyslexia, and ordered it to fund her private school placement, reimburse the parents for tuition, tutoring and evaluations, and provide an extra year of schooling as compensatory education.
FAPE denialEligibility/evaluation/child findIEP adequacy/implementation