Search Our Site

 

Education Advocacy Project

This project is a statewide effort to develop and implement systemic strategies to:  positively impact the provision of educational services to low-income students; provide state support for legal services attorneys in their educational advocacy through co-counseling, training and technical assistance; and enhance parents’ and advocates’ awareness of children’s rights.

One focus of this Project is on special education.  There is a significant need for representation of students with disabilities so that school districts will meet their responsibilities to identify, evaluate and provide an appropriate education.  As part of the effort to secure appropriate education programs for children with disabilities, this Project seeks to stem the flow of children with disabilities from school to jail statewide and to improve the behavioral services provided by school districts.

Another focus of this Project is on the adequacy of education in general.  Unfortunately, on the whole, Florida education’s system is failing.  By numerous performance indicators, Florida’s children are not receiving an adequate education.  The data show huge gaps in reading, writing, mathematics, and graduating on the basis of poverty, race, status as English as Second Language learner, and disability.  Florida’s Constitution provides that the State must provide a uniform, efficient, safe, secure and high quality education.  The State is failing to meet the constitutional standard.

To address these issues, SLC provides direct representation, training, support to legal service organizations in Florida, and state and national policy advocacy.

General Education

Coalition for Advocacy v. Chiles, 680 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 1996).

Lead counsel for interveners of 38 low income and minority school children and four prominent civil rights groups - National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Spanish American League Against Discrimination (SALAD), League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), and the Haitian Refugee Center.  Suit was brought by 43 school boards against the Legislature and state education agencies.  The central claim was that children have the fundamental right to be "adequately provided with a uniform education" under the state constitution's education clause.  Our adequacy claim was framed differently than the school boards' case to focus on the need for the State to meet the needs of low income children, who are primarily children of color.  Interveners sought trained and experienced teachers, facilities and materials, staff student ratios, challenging and vigorous curriculum and access to early childhood programs at their high poverty schools, at least at the level of schools that are not high poverty.  Case decided by Florida Supreme Court in favor of State, but the dissents and a concurrence point the way to framing legal action that would be successful.

Jacksonville Branch, NAACP v. Duval County School Bd., Case No. 85-316-Civ-J-16 (M.D. Fla., J. Moore).

SLC entered its appearance in 1994 as local counsel to assist the Jacksonville chapter of the NAACP in a long-standing school desegregation case by negotiating revisions to a 1990 consent decree.  One of the chapter's key concerns was the deep disparity in achievement levels of students in schools attended by large numbers of children of color.  Once these particular negotiations ended, SLC withdrew.

League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) v. Florida Board of Education, Case No. 90-1913 (S.D. Fla., J. Moreno).

For several years, SLC assumed the role of lead monitor with our co-counsel, who included John Ratliff of Nova's Children First and Peter D. Roos and Stefan Rosenzweig of META, but never entered our appearance.  The consent decree governs the rights of Florida children in the public schools whose comprehension of English is limited.

Special Education

Cook v. School Bd. of Sarasota County, Case No. 81-319 (Fla. 1st DCA).

This was the first known case for the Florida District Courts of Appeal to address the Education of the Handicapped Act (now IDEA).  The federal standards were of first impression for the appellate court and the issues were extensively briefed by the parties.  The DCA affirmed the administrative order which had established precedent on when a school board is obligated to provide a residential placement for seriously emotionally disturbed youth who require such placements in order to learn.

J.R. v. Palm Beach County Sch. Bd. et al, Case No: 06-80861 (S.D. Fla., J. Hurley)

J.R. is a special education student with an emotional handicap.  During an incident in which he was misbehaving, the school called the resource officer to restrain him.  After he was placed in handcuffs in a seclusion room and while he was on the floor, the resource officer pepper sprayed him.  We filed a § 1983 excessive force police misconduct case seeking an injunction to improve the pepper spray policy in this school district, which allows too much discretion in school resource officers.  The case settled during mediation for damages for the student, a change to the pepper spray policy, and training for school staff on the policy and in handling students with emotional and mental health problems.

Martinez v. School Board of Hillsborough County, 861 F.2d 1502, 50 Ed. Law Rep. 359 (11th Cir. 1988).

Counsel for amicus curiae Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities in a challenge to the school board's refusal to permit an HIV positive student with a developmental disability to attend school.  The appellate court required such a placement, and articulated guidelines for district courts when presented with interrelated Rehabilitation Act and Education of the Handicapped Act (now IDEA) claims.

M.L. on behalf of W.R. v. School Bd. of Osceola County, Case No. 97-0874E (Fla. Div. Admin. Hrgs.); Case No. 6:97-cv-1139-Orl-3ABF (M.D. Fla., J. Conway, M.J. Baker).

Represented Spanish-speaking child with multiple disabilities, including Tourette’s Syndrome, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, specific learning disability and language impairment.  Mother sought free appropriate public education under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act.  ALJ found that School Board had not provided appropriate education for two years, and ordered it to pay for thorough neuropsychological evaluation, retain outside behavior consultant with expertise in Tourette’s, and provide compensatory education.  School Board sought review in state circuit court, and M.L. removed to federal district court.  On preliminary injunction motion, court ordered OCSB to pay for neuropsychological evaluation.  After court-ordered settlement discussions failed, court appointed Special Master to facilitate and develop appropriate Individual Education Program.

Snow v. Volusia County School Board, Case No. 83-804-Orl-Civ-17 (M.D. Fla., J. Sharp), reported in 9 ABA Mental & Physical Disab. L. Rptr. 205 (1985).

Lead counsel in class action to challenge a pattern and practice of discrimination against students in a school for students with disabilities.  Preliminary injunction closed school that the State had condemned as unsafe several years earlier.  In addition, special educational programming requirements were ordered by the court at the new site.  This case prompted a statewide examination of the cost effectiveness of segregated facilities for students with disabilities.

Special Education Prison Project (settled prior to filing) (1992).

Co-counsel with Florida Institutional Legal Services to represent youthful prisoners in Florida with special education needs.  No special education was being provided to eligible students in Florida’s adult prisons in violation of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act.  Prior to filing lawsuit, we requested and met with top officials from Governor’s office, Department of Corrections and Department of Education.  Governor Chiles agreed to establish special education in the adult prisons, and Legislature provided funding.  Our national expert, Dr. Peter Leone, worked with the state agencies to establish systems to identify eligible youth, develop special education services, and improve the appropriateness of services once provided.

W.R. ex rel. Doe v. School Bd. of Osceola County, 726 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), reported in 133 Ed. Law Rep. 276; Case No. CI96-1427 (Fla. 9th Jud. Cir.).

Represented Spanish-speaking child with multiple disabilities, including Tourette’s Syndrome, initially in successfully defending against School Board’s attempt to exclude him from school on alleged basis he was dangerous.  Circuit Court denied injunction on basis that child was not dangerous, but denied attorneys’ fees after concluding that state courts do not have concurrent jurisdiction under Individuals With Disabilities Education Act to award fees.  SLC appealed to Fifth DCA and successfully argued in case of first impression in Florida courts that state and federal courts have concurrent jurisdiction on fees.

Juvenile Justice Reform

SLC has long aimed to improve the juvenile justice system.  Currently, SLC is working with other legal services advocates to stem the flow of children with disabilities from school to jail statewide and to improve the behavioral services provided by school districts.

Bobby M. v. Martinez, Case No. TCA 83-7003 (N.D. Fla., J. Paul), 907 F. Supp. 368 (N.D. Fla. 1995); settlement reported in 11 ABA Mental & Physical Disab. L. Rptr. 101 (1987); analysis of case and legislative implementation and funding reported in 9 ABA Juvenile & Child Welfare L. Rptr. 150 (1990).  Co-counsel: National Prison Project, Youth Law Center and Michael C. Dale.

This statewide class action suit was brought on behalf of approximately 1000 youth confined to Florida's juvenile training schools.  Suit challenged the conditions and practices of those schools, and alleged uncon­stitutional condi­tions of confinement and inappropriate placements.  Preliminary injunctions banned hogtying, restricted lock up, barred admission of males under age 13, prohibited admissions of any females, prohibited admissions of runaways, truants and status offenders regardless of age, and closed the facility located in Ocala (McPherson Training School).  On eve of trial, the State settled.  Three consent decrees were entered that phased down the two remaining schools to 130 youths each, permanently closed the lock-up units, mandated treatment and educational services, provided access to counsel, and required development of a new juvenile justice system.  The new system included individualized, multi-disciplinary assessments and a broad array of community based programs providing substance abuse programs, sex dysfunction programs, prevention and diversion projects, and gang prevention projects.  SLC led the monitoring and enforcement phase (except for educational issues).  The Florida Legislature enacted the Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 1990 to implement Bobby M. and appropriated $52.7 million for the new programs for the first year of implementation.  The new programs provided over 1,700 new community based residential beds and services and treatment for over 120,000 youth per year.  In connection with this legislative implementation, SLC was retained by the Florida House of Representatives as Special Counsel.

In re Juvenile Rules of Procedure, 393 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 1980).

Counsel for Florida Center for Children and Youth petitioning for rule change of first impression to the Juvenile Rules of Procedure concerning the placement of delinquents charged as minors in adult jails when juvenile detention facilities were overcrowded or were otherwise believed to be inadequate.  Petition was granted by Juvenile Court Rules Committee of The Florida Bar and its Board of Governors, but the Florida Supreme Court denied the proposed rule amendment.  The Florida Legislature then amended the statute to restrict minors not charged as adults from commingling with adult jail inmates.

RMP v. Jones, 419 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1982).

Counsel for amicus Florida Center for Children and Youth.  SLC briefed and argued first impression issue concerning the lock-up and commingling of runaways, truants and ungovernable youth (status offenders) with delinquents charged with or adjudicated on criminal law violations.  The Florida Supreme Court declined to reform system of mixing law violators with status offenders.  The Florida Legislature followed by amending the law to prohibit this practice and established new comprehensive programs for these non-criminal youth.