05/06/2022
A great article - worth a read!
EVERYONE ON CAMPUS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ACCESS
Written by Jamie Axelrod with Northern Arizona University
This month we are reviewing OCR’s Letter to Wake Technical Community College from November 2021, OCR Complaint No. 11-17-2201. This Findings letter provides a number of good reminders about the scope of Section 504 and why it is important for colleagues around campus to have some training on how disability access laws can impact their individual areas. It also serves as a reminder about who can provide notification of the need for accommodation as well as file a complaint.
This case involves a disabled student in a career preparation program offered by the college. The student enrolled in the program after information was presented at her high school during a meeting for parents. The student was working towards a certificate from the program when she was involved in a number of incidents which violated the college’s student code of conduct. Due to the number of incidents she was involved in and the escalating sanction regime employed under the code of conduct, the student was ultimately suspended from her program.
The student and her legal guardian attempted to grieve the conduct determination on the basis that the student’s violations of the code of conduct were a manifestation of her disability. However, navigating that process presented a number of barriers and when the grievance process ultimately did not change the applied conduct sanction, the student’s guardian filed a discrimination complaint with OCR.
The guardian claimed that the school discriminated against the student by:
Refusing to engage in the interactive process with the student, or the complainant regarding the student’s disability-related needs;
Failing to provide effective or adequate notice of the disciplinary process; and
Excluding the student from their program based on a manifestation of her disability during the academic year.
After conducting an investigation of the facts and circumstances OCR concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support the allegations that the college did not provide effective and adequate notice of the disciplinary process. They also concluded that there was not enough evidence to support that the college excluded the student from her program based on a manifestation of her disability. To this point OCR noted,
“Section 504 and Title II do not prohibit colleges and universities from applying the same conduct standards to all students, regardless of disability status. In addition, Section 504 and Title II do not prohibit colleges and universities from disciplining students for misconduct that is a manifestation of a disability, so long as the college or university disciplines students without a disability in the same manner.”
However, OCR did express concerns that the college did not engage in an interactive process with the student or complainant around the student’s disability-related needs to participate in the conduct process. The investigation revealed that on numerous occasions during the separate conduct processes, both the student and, ultimately, her guardian, indicated that the student had a disability. They even provided information on how the disability impacted the student and her functioning. However, this information, and a request from the complainant to participate in the student’s grievance hearing as a form of support, were never recognized as a request for disability related accommodations.
In the end, the college entered a settlement agreement with OCR to resolve this concern and remedy the situation.
Takeaway
It’s important for faculty and staff around campus to understand that requests to modify campus policies or process based on an individual’s disability status is a request for accommodation. Recognizing that and getting the disability office involved, even if the student doesn’t use those exact words, is critical for a fair and equitable process.
