CADRE Resources
Background/Introduction
California currently serves approximately 638,000 students through special education, up from 553,000 in 1995.
During that same period of time, the number of formal dispute resolution activities, including mediation, due process
hearings, and compliance complaints has doubled. The resulting expense to districts and the state has been considerable,
dollars that could otherwise be applied to instruction. Further, the existing infrastructure for resolving disputes
is overwhelmed, such that the timely resolution of disputes, consistent with legal mandate, is increasingly difficult
to achieve. With the reauthorization of IDEA in 1997, and the state's response to the reauthorization, the potential
for increased dispute activity is considerable as parents and special educators make meaning of the new laws. Clearly,
alternative methods of dispute resolution will be necessary to help ensure that disputes are resolved at the local
level whenever possible, and in a timely manner consistent with legal timelines.
For the past five years, the California Legislature has authorized CDE Special Education Division, to allocate
$100,000 per year to promote ADR statewide. To date, the division has awarded approximately 100 grants to SELPAs
across the state. The average grant was $5,000. Based on a recent survey of ADR grant recipients, CDE has identified
eight effective ADR programs in the state. Relative to the state's total investment over the past five years, the
average cost per functioning programs is $62,500. Given the legal expense associated with due process hearings
and complaint investigations, the money is well spent. (SELPA directors report that it can cost between $35-50,000
to successfully defend a due process hearing and can be considerably more if they loose. This is in addition to
the state's expense of administering the process, reflected in the current contract with McGeorge.) Still, the
relatively small number of functional programs relative to the number of ADR grants made to date, points out the
need for a more effective dissemination model. An understanding of program factors that increase the probability
of effective implementation and the nature of CDE support for ADR program development must be reevaluated in light
of the new ADR survey data.
ADR Survey Results - Common Threads
The ADR survey data was self-reported by SELPA directors, either in writing or by interview. Based on responses
from SELPAs who have received an ADR grant, the following SELPAs have been identified with effective programs.
Contra Costa, Solano, El Dorado, Riverside, Butte, Placer/Nevada, Sonoma and San Luis Obispo. By far, the most
effective program reported was in Contra Costa. Last year, the ADR coordinator facilitator resolved 189 disputes.
Due process hearings dropped from 18 in 1996-97 to 11 during 1997-98. While the number of resolved disputes varies
significantly across the effective 8, it is clear that all 8 see the value of dedicating staff to this specific
purpose. Given the observation that the cost of litigating a single due process hearing is $35 - 50,000, resolving
only one such case through ADR financially justifies the state's investment. More importantly, local solutions
lead to more expedient service for individuals with disabilities and help to maintain relationships between parents
and school district personnel, a positive influence in reducing the number of repeat filings.
Another common thread involves the use of ADR teams to assist in the resolution of disputes. Ty
