Unpacking VDOE’s Letter of Findings in State Complaint C26-564
VDOE’s Notice of Complaint misstated the allegation. Its Letter of Findings admitted a mediator’s signature instruction was inconsistent with IDEA. Then . . . VDOE found itself in compliance.
June 30, 2026, Virginia Department of Education issued a Letter of Findings (LOF) for State Complaint C26-564, which a parent filed against VDOE itself.
The parent alleged VDOE failed to properly train, oversee, monitor, and ensure compliance in Virginia’s state-sponsored special education mediation system.
The complaint arose after a VDOE-assigned mediator told the parent and other mediation participants:
“You must sign, date, and return the Agreement to Mediate prior to the day of the mediation.”
The mediator also wrote:
“You will be expected to agree to it and return it to me prior to the mediation”
VDOE later admitted the signature instruction was inconsistent with IDEA and VDOE policy.
Then . . .
VDOE found itself in compliance.
Background
The parent filed the complaint against VDOE “in its capacity as the State Educational Agency” and framed the allegation this way:
“Whether VDOE failed to meet its supervisory responsibilities under 34 C.F.R. § 300.149 and §§ 300.600–300.604 by failing to provide adequate training, guidance, and oversight to mediators, resulting in noncompliant mediation practices that undermine the voluntary and accessible nature of IDEA mediation.”
The complaint asked whether VDOE’s oversight system worked after U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) had already required Virginia to stop treating signatures on confidentiality agreements as a condition of mediation.
OSEP’s March 13, 2024, differentiated monitoring and support (DMS) report found that Virginia’s procedure requiring parties to sign a confidentiality pledge before mediation was inconsistent with IDEA and OSEP guidance. OSEP required Virginia to revise its regulation and related procedures.