COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW APPEALS
BUREAU OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPEALS
In Re: Student v. Leominster Public Schools BSEA # 2610128
RULING ON PARENT'S REQUEST FOR ACCELERATED STATUS
On March 11, 2026, Parent filed an Expedited Hearing Request alleging, in part, that the Leominster Public Schools (Leominster or the District) denied Student, a four-year-old student with an Individualized Education Program (IEP), a free appropriate public education (FAPE), when the District refused to include certain accommodations and/or services relative to safety concerns in Student's IEP despite private evaluator recommendations; failed to convene a Team meeting; and failed to respond to Parent's request for an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE). In response, the Director of the Bureau of Special Education Appeals (BSEA), Reece Erlichman, notified Parent that her request did not appear to meet the standard for an expedited hearing pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. section 1415, and Rule II C. of the Hearing Rules for Special Education Appeals. Ms. Erlichman further stated that while it was not wholly clear from the request as written, the matter may meet the standard for an accelerated hearing, pursuant to Rule II D of the Hearing Rules for Special Education Appeals, and recommended, should Parent wish to pursue assignment of accelerated status, that Parent notify the assigned Hearing Officer, who may then inquire further.
On the same date, Leominster filed Objection to Expedited or Accelerated Status, stating that the case does not meet the standard as outlined in BSEA Hearing Rules II(C) and (D) as it does not involve a disciplinary proceeding, and the Student's initial IEP and placement within the District's substantially separate preschool classroom was fully accepted by the Parents on or about June 5, 2025. Student is not currently without an available placement, there is no health or safety concern, and the current services are sufficient and adequate. Complaints regarding evaluations are also not appropriate for expedited or accelerated status.
On March 11, 2026, via email, Parent filed Urgent Rebuttal: [Student] - Safety Emergency, stating that the District's assertion that there is "no health or safety concern" is "directly contradicted by their own January 14, 2026 Progress Report [which documented only a 15% success rate for transitions] and the Student's September 2025 elopement History." Parent further alleged "bad faith" on the part of the District, which "ignor[ed] [Parent's] emergency meeting requests for 31 days…. A signature from June 2025 does not grant the District a license to ignore an 85% safety failure rate in 2026." Parent requested "that Expedited/Accelerated status be maintained to prevent irreparable harm."
On March 12, 2026, Leominster responded, stating that Parent's assertion that the District is engaging in bad faith is false and without merit. The District reiterated its objection to the Parent's request for accelerated status and noted that a behavioral observation was completed as part of the initial evaluation process and Leominster is in the process of completing an AAC evaluation.
Because neither testimony nor oral argument would advance the Hearing Officer's understanding of the issues involved, this Ruling is issued without a hearing, pursuant to Bureau of Special Education Appeals Hearing Rule VI(D).
LEGAL STANDARDS
Pursuant to BSEA Hearing Rule II(C)(1), hearings involving discipline are scheduled on an expedited timeline consistent with federal IDEA regulations. Expedited status will be granted:
"a. when a parent disagrees with a school district's determination that the behavior leading to discipline was not a manifestation of the student's disability; or
b. when a parent disagrees with a school district's decision regarding a student's placement in the discipline context; or
c. when a school district asserts that maintaining the current placement of the student during the pendency of due process proceedings is substantially likely to result in injury to the student or others."
Pursuant to BSEA Hearing Rule II(D)(1), hearings may be assigned accelerated status in the following situations:
"a. when the health or safety of the student or others would be endangered by the delay; or
b. when the special education services the student is currently receiving are sufficiently inadequate such that harm to the student is likely; or
c. when the student is currently without an available educational program or the student's program will be terminated or interrupted immediately."
APPLICATION OF LEGAL STANDARDS
Parent's Amended Hearing Request does not meet the standard for an expedited hearing pursuant to Hearing Rule II (C) as it does not involve discipline. Nor does it meet the standard for an accelerated hearing pursuant to Hearing Rule II (D)(1)(a) of the Hearing Rules for Special Education Appeals. Accelerated status under Rule II(D) is reserved for cases presenting an immediate and concrete threat to a student's health or safety that cannot be adequately addressed through the ordinary hearing process. The allegations here, even if accepted as true for purposes of Parent's request, do not meet that standard. Although Parent's concerns are taken seriously, claims regarding skill deficits, such as difficulties transitioning safely, do not, standing alone, establish a health or safety emergency. Moreover, the harm Parent asserts is, at this time, speculative. Accordingly, the issues raised by Parent, including the need for accommodations, services, and additional evaluation, are more appropriately addressed through the standard due process timeline.
ORDER
Parent's Hearing Request shall proceed on the standard track.
By the Hearing Officer:
/s/ Alina Kantor Nir
Alina Kantor Nir
Dated: March 13, 2026