Defending Parental Rights in the IEP Process

National Council for Severe Autism Legislative Team Member Parul Khemka testifying before the NJ Senate Education Committee

Statement in Support of S3982

Honorable Members of the Senate Education Committee,

My name is Parul Khemka and I am a parent of a child with disabilities and a legislative team member with National Council for Severe Autism, NJ and a parent advocate helping families like mine traversing this journey.

While my first preference was the original bill requiring a draft of the IEP 48 hours before a meeting (which is also required as per IDEA), I do support S3982, which enhances the Individualized Education Program (IEP) process by ensuring transparency, increasing parental involvement, and establishing a working group to improve IEP development and implementation. I hope this is just the first of many steps we need to take.

The absence of this information disproportionately harms non-English speakers and families from marginalized backgrounds who may struggle to navigate the complexities of the IEP process. Many families cannot afford costly legal representation or lengthy due process procedures to challenge unfair decisions. Providing this information in advance ensures all parents—regardless of language or socioeconomic status—can participate meaningfully in shaping their child’s education.

Non-collaborative situations often escalate to due process hearings, leading to significant delays. New Jersey has faced substantial challenges in this area. In 2019, over 5,000 parents filed a class-action lawsuit against the New Jersey Department of Education due to excessive delays in special education dispute resolutions, with some cases averaging over 300 days—far exceeding the federally mandated 45-day timeline. This systemic failure led to a federal court-approved settlement in 2022, requiring theNJDOE to appoint a compliance monitor to oversee timely resolutions and address the backlog of cases.

These delays do not serve students, educators, or administrators—they only add unnecessary strain on an already complex system.

It is also important to note that IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) mentions parents over 400 times, underscoring how critical parental involvement is in this process. By making the IEP process more collaborative rather than adversarial, we not only serve students better but also save valuable educator and administrator time that should be spent supporting students, not navigating disputes and prolonged meetings.

S3982 also takes a critical step forward by establishing an IEP Improvement Working Group. This diverse group—including educators, administrators, child study team members, and parents of students with disabilities—will evaluate New Jersey’s IEP process, study best practices from other states, and recommend necessary reforms to make the system more effective and equitable. I would highly encourage you to consider including more advocates and parents especially from underrepresented groups and who have experience working with other states. With ongoing delays and inconsistencies in IEP implementation across districts, this working group is essential to improving outcomes for students.

Ultimately, this bill promotes collaboration, reduces unnecessary disputes, saves time for educators and administrators, and ensures parents have a meaningful voice in their child’s education. It is a much-needed step toward a more effective, fair, and student-centered IEP process in New Jersey.

I urge you to support S3982 and help strengthen special education in our state.

Thank you.