## Facts

- D.A. is a child with autism eligible for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
- For the 2007–08 school year, the New York City Department of Education (DOE) developed an individualized education program (IEP) and proposed a public placement.
- D.A.’s parents concluded the proposed program denied D.A. a free appropriate public education (FAPE) and unilaterally enrolled him at the Rebecca School, a private school serving students with autism.
- The parents could not pay tuition upfront, but executed an enrollment contract that made them personally liable for tuition; the school deferred collection while they sought public funding.
- In IDEA due process proceedings, an Impartial Hearing Officer (IHO) found DOE denied FAPE, the Rebecca School was appropriate, and equitable considerations favored relief, and ordered DOE to pay the tuition balance upon documentation.
- On administrative appeal, a State Review Officer (SRO) agreed on FAPE denial, appropriateness, and equities, but reversed the remedy because the parents had not paid tuition out of pocket.
- The parents filed an IDEA civil action in federal district court; both parties moved for summary judgment.

## Issues

1. Whether IDEA authorizes a federal court to order retroactive direct payment of private-school tuition when the district denied FAPE, the private placement was appropriate, equities favor relief, and parents are legally obligated for tuition but have not prepaid it.

## Decision

- The court granted the parents’ motion for summary judgment and denied DOE’s cross-motion.
- The court held that IDEA’s remedial provision permits retroactive direct payment of tuition to the private school when parents are legally obligated for the tuition even if they have not paid it upfront.
- The court reinstated the IHO’s tuition-funding remedy, requiring DOE to pay the tuition balance upon appropriate documentation.

## Legal Principles

- Under IDEA, a reviewing court may “grant such relief as the court determines is appropriate,” which confers broad equitable remedial authority.
- Under Burlington and Carter, tuition relief for a unilateral private placement is available when: (1) the public program denied FAPE; (2) the private placement is appropriate; and (3) equities favor relief.
- IDEA relief is not limited to reimbursement for amounts already paid; where Burlington/Carter criteria are satisfied, courts may structure relief as direct payment to the private school.
- A parent’s enforceable contractual obligation to pay private-school tuition can constitute an incurred educational expense sufficient to support tuition relief.
- Conditioning tuition relief on a family’s ability to front tuition is inconsistent with IDEA’s purpose of ensuring access to FAPE regardless of parental financial resources.

## Conclusion

The court ruled that IDEA permits retroactive direct tuition payment to a private school when a district has denied FAPE and the parents selected an appropriate private placement under equitable circumstances, even if the parents could not prepay tuition but remain legally obligated to pay it.


Mr. & Mrs. A ex rel. D.A. v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ., 769 F. Supp. 2d 403 (S.D.N.Y. 2011)