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35%Parent prevailed (104)18%Split decision (52)46%District prevailed (136)0%Dismissed / withdrawn (1)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 district sought a 45-day move of a young blind student with multiple disabilities to a special therapeutic setting for safety, and the officer found the district met its burden and granted the temporary placement.
Behavior/discipline/manifestationPlacement/LRE
The district asked to move a first-grader to a therapeutic day school for safety reasons over the parents' objection, and the officer found the change of placement justified and granted it.
Behavior/discipline/manifestationPlacement/LRE
The district sought to keep a student in a therapeutic day school for an extra 45 days as a safety measure, and the officer agreed she was substantially likely to injure herself or others if returned to her regular school.
Behavior/discipline/manifestationPlacement/LRE
Parents asked the hearing officer to keep their son in a regular classroom full-time as his least-restrictive setting, but the officer found his behavioral needs required a separate therapeutic day school and denied the parents' request.
Placement/LREFAPE denialBehavior/discipline/manifestation
A district failed to evaluate and serve a teenager with autism and severe reading, writing, and math disabilities, and the hearing officer found a denial of a free appropriate education and ordered a revised IEP and placement, reimbursement for private evaluations, and thousands of hours of make-up tutoring in reading, math, and writing.
Eligibility/evaluation/child findFAPE denialIEP adequacy/implementation
The parties agreed a student with an emotional disability needed a residential program and no state-approved option was available, so the hearing officer found the out-of-state facility the parents chose appropriate and ordered the district to fund it and reimburse the parents $139,525 they had already paid.
Private/residential placement & reimbursementPlacement/LREFAPE denial
A third-grader with dyslexia who read at a kindergarten level got no qualified reading instruction, and the hearing officer found a denial of a free appropriate education and ordered the district to place him in a therapeutic day school for dyslexia and provide 50 hours of specialized reading instruction, though it denied the request for social-work services.
Eligibility/evaluation/child findFAPE denialIEP adequacy/implementation
Parents of a third-grader with autism claimed the district was too slow with a behavior plan, gave inadequate math instruction, and ignored their outside evaluator, but the hearing officer found the district provided a free appropriate education and denied compensatory education, while ordering a prospective move to a therapeutic day school.
FAPE denialBehavior/discipline/manifestationIEP adequacy/implementation
Both sides agreed an 18-year-old with autism and serious mental-health struggles needed a residential program and that the out-of-state facility his parents chose was the only appropriate option, so the hearing officer ordered the district to fund that placement going forward and reimburse the parents $169,045 they had already paid.
Private/residential placement & reimbursementPlacement/LREFAPE denial
A district failed for years to identify, evaluate, or serve a young child with autism after he left early-intervention services, and the hearing officer found this denied him a free appropriate education and ordered the district to reimburse the parent for private therapies and mileage and to fund extensive make-up services and independent evaluations.
Eligibility/evaluation/child findFAPE denialCompensatory education