19-049P
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES
v.
PORTSMOUTH SCHOOL DEPARTMENT
(In Re: Student J. Doe)
Interim Order
Held: Per DCYF’s best interest determination under ESSA’s educational stability provisions, School Department is ordered to immediately enroll 17-year-old in foster care who is in the 9th grade.
Date: May 21, 2019
Introduction
This matter concerns a request by the Department of Children, Youth and Families (“DCYF”) for an interim order requiring the Portsmouth school district to enroll a child in foster care for whom it has been determined that it is in his best interest to attend school there.[1]
Background
Student Doe is 17 years old and in the care of DCYF.[2] As a 9th-grade high school student residing in Providence, he was hospitalized following an out-of-school stabbing by gang-affiliated individuals. After the stabbing, intruders entered his high school and searched for Doe.
DCYF changed Doe’s foster placement to Boys Town New England in Portsmouth. On April 8, 2019, DCYF conducted a best interest determination for Doe in accordance with the educational stability provisions of the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (“ESSA”). DCYF concluded that “in order to eliminate the lengthy commute, and for reasons of safety and welfare, it is the determination that [Doe] shall be enrolled immediately into the most appropriate school in the new LEA, Portsmouth School District, where his group home is located.” [DCYF Exhibit 2].
Because of a mistakenly-typed email address, the Portsmouth School Department did not receive notice of the best interest determination until April 22, 2019. Boys Town sought to enroll Doe in Portsmouth but the district refused to enroll him. Boys Town informed DCYF of the enrollment denial and DCYF filed the interim order request herein.
The best interest determination reports that Doe “is a regular education student . . . in the [English as a Second Language] program . . . currently .5 credits short of sophomore status [who] may need to complete credit recovery.” [DCYF Exhibit 2].
Doe, who has an educational advocate, currently is not receiving any educational services.
Positions of the Parties
Citing the Commissioner’s consolidated ESSA decision in DCYF v. North Smithfield School Department (In Re: Student V. Doe), RIDE No. 17-21 and DCYF v. Pawtucket School Department (In Re: Student J. Doe), RIDE No. 17-22,[3] DCYF contends that Portsmouth has a clear obligation to enroll Doe immediately. As stated in the consolidated decision, “DCYF should never have to seek an interim order from the Commissioner in order for a child to be enrolled in school.”[4] A district’s responsibility to educate a child is totally separate from the question of a particular educational placement for a child. This case is not the first time DCYF has had to seek an interim order to require Portsmouth to enroll a child in foster care. Portsmouth needs to adhere to the Commissioner’s consolidated decision and the Commissioner needs to address Portsmouth’s flagrant violation of her authority.
The Portsmouth School Department asserts that it has not enrolled Doe because it does not have an “appropriate school” for him in the district in light of his age and grade level. Doe will be 18 years old at the beginning of the 2019-2020 school year and it is not in his best interest, nor that of the other students, for him to be an underclassman at Portsmouth High School. The district’s only option is to refer Doe to an adult education program so that he may pursue a General Equivalency Diploma. In addition, the district points out that there is an existing Commissioner’s decision which addressed a district’s obligation to enroll a child in foster care following DCYF’s best interest determination.
Discussion
The interim order request we believe Portsmouth referred to in its argument is a perfect place to begin our analysis of this case. In DCYF v. Newport Public Schools (In re Student P. Doe), the Commissioner stated that
It should be emphasized at the outset that [Newport Public School]’s claim that its refusal to enroll P. Doe was justified by its unilateral conclusion that DCYF’s process with respect to its [best interest determination] was faulty is in direct conflict with the Commissioner’s clear and repeated instruction that students must be enrolled despite claims such as those made by [Newport]. As noted in the Commissioner’s Consolidated ESSA Decision:
[i]n the event that an LEA claims that is it is not responsible for a child – whether because it disagrees with DCYF's best interest determination or for some other reason - the LEA nonetheless must comply with DCYF's best interest determination and enroll the child (and/or facilitate the out-of-district placement) forthwith, and only after doing so should it be able to pursue the relief to which it believes it is entitled before the Commissioner. . .
See id. at 12-13. The only reason that the case is being heard on an expedited basis, rather than simply remanded with instructions to [Newport] that it enroll P. Doe, is that the parties agreed that an interim ruling on a discrete issue – i.e., whether the Training School was the proper school of origin – would effectively ensure that P. Doe would be enrolled in school in either [Newport] or the [East Providence School Department] prior to the end of the holiday recess. (emphasis added).[5]
Thus, in explaining the deviation from the rule that was allowed in the Student P. Doe case, the Commissioner affirmed the rule: school districts must enroll children in foster care in compliance with DCYF’s best interest determinations. Portsmouth has not followed the rule, claiming that it does not have an “appropriate school” for Doe per DCYF’s best interest determination. This claim is specious. The Portsmouth school district is charged with the administration of the public elementary and secondary schools in Portsmouth. Doe is 17 years old and therefore covered by Rhode Island’s compulsory attendance law. It is undisputed that he is now a resident of Portsmouth. The Portsmouth school district does not have the option of refusing to enroll Doe because it believes that he is age-inappropriate for placement at its high school. If Doe chooses to attend public school, Portsmouth must accept his enrollment request and provide him with an education that meets his needs and goals. Doe’s educational advocate must be involved in the education decision-making for Doe.
We do not take Portsmouth’s failure to enroll Doe lightly. Numerous Commissioner’s decisions have made the district’s obligation to enroll clear. As for Doe, he has suffered a serious stab wound, been threatened with additional harm, moved across the state to a new foster placement and, now, deprived of educational services for a significant period of time. The evidence shows that he is very close to completing the 9th grade and could benefit from a credit recovery program. We shall order Portsmouth to assist Doe in this regard.
Conclusion
Pursuant to the Commissioner’s authority to issue interim orders under R.I.G.L. 16-39-3.2, the Portsmouth School Department is hereby ordered to immediately enroll Student Doe per DCYF’s best interest determination. Portsmouth is further ordered to consult with Doe’s advocate in determining Doe’s educational path and provide Doe with access to any credit recovery programs it may offer, including summer school.
Footnotes
[1] The request was received on May 7, 2019. A hearing was held on May 14th.
[2] Doe will turn 18 in early September 2019.
[3] Decided on November 21, 2017.
[4] Decision at page 14.
[5] RIDE No. 18-099A, December 31, 2018, p.5.
Paul E. Pontarelli
Hearing Officer
Approved:
Date: May 21, 2019
Angélica Infante-Green
Commissioner