FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION
OF THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT

 

The above-captioned matter was heard as a contested case on August 2, 2007, at which time the respondents appeared and presented testimony, exhibits and argument on the complaint.  The complainant failed to appear.

 

            After consideration of the entire record, the following facts are found and conclusions of law are reached:

 

1.  The respondents are public agencies within the meaning of §1-200(1), G.S.

 

2.  By letter of complaint filed February 13, 2007, the complainant appealed to the Commission, alleging that the respondent failed to comply with procedural regulations regarding parent access right to the educational records of her son.

 

3.  It is found that the complainant asked to review and obtain a copy of certain academic assessments performed by the respondents to evaluate her son.

 

4.  It is found that the respondents promptly agreed to review the requested records with the complainant, although under the condition that a school administrator be present, a condition that the complainant objected to.

 

5.  It is found that the respondents promptly offered a choice of several days to meet with the complainant to review the requested records with his teacher, including going over the test protocol, the questions, and the child’s answers.  However, the complainant would not agree to the respondents’ condition that a school administrator be present.

 

6.  Section 1-200(5), G.S., provides:

 

“Public records or files” means any recorded data or information relating to the conduct of the public's business prepared, owned, used, received or retained by a public agency, or to which a public agency is entitled to receive a copy by law or contract under section 1-218, whether such data or information be handwritten, typed, tape-recorded, printed, photostated, photographed or recorded by any other method.

 

7.  Section 1-210(a), G.S., provides in relevant part:

 

Except as otherwise provided by any federal law or state statute, all records maintained or kept on file by any public agency, whether or not such records are required by any law or by any rule or regulation, shall be public records and every person shall have the right to (1) inspect such records promptly during regular office or business hours, (2) copy such records in accordance with subsection (g) of section 1-212, or (3) receive a copy of such records in accordance with section 1-212….   

 

8.  It is concluded that the requested records are public records within the meaning of §§1-200(5) and 1-210(a), G.S.

 

9.  The complainant contends that the respondents failed to comply with Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies §10-76d-18, that parents shall have the right to inspect and review any educational records of their child, which are collected, maintained or used by the board of education.

 

10. The respondent contends that the requested records are exempt from disclosure pursuant to §1-210(b)(17), G.S., which provides that disclosure is not required of “Educational records which are not subject to disclosure under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act [“FERPA”], 20 USC 1232g ….”

 

11.  Section 1232g(b)(1) of Title 20 provides that, with certain exceptions:

 

No funds shall be made available under any applicable program to any educational agency or institution which has a policy or practice of permitting the release of education records (or personally identifiable information contained therein other than directory information, as defined in paragraph (5) of subsection (a) of this section) of students without the written consent of their parents to any individual, agency, or organization ….

 

12.  It is concluded that the requested records are educational records that are exempt from disclosure pursuant to §1-210(b)(17), G.S.

 

13.  It is found that the complainant did not waive any of her or her son’s confidentiality rights under §1-210(b)(17), G.S.

 

14.  It is concluded that the respondents did not violate the FOI Act.

 

15.  Given the conclusion in paragraph 14, above, it is unnecessary to address the respondent’s additional contention that the requested records are exempt from disclosure under §1-210(b)(6), G.S., as test questions and scoring keys.

 

16.  In essence, the complainant seeks to compel the school to comply with a parent’s right of access to a child’s records pursuant to state and federal authority.  While the Commission lacks jurisdiction to decide whether the respondents complied with such non-FOI Act requirements, it appears from the record that they made every effort to give the complainant a meaningful opportunity to review and understand the requested records.

 

 

The following order by the Commission is hereby recommended on the basis of the record concerning the above-captioned complaint:

 

            1.  The complaint is dismissed.

 

Approved by Order of the Freedom of Information Commission at its regular meeting of January 23, 2008.

 

________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 4-180(c), G.S., THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NAMES OF EACH PARTY AND THE MOST RECENT MAILING ADDRESS, PROVIDED TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION COMMISSION, OF THE PARTIES OR THEIR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

 

THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTESTED CASE ARE:

 

Karen A. Bowyer

20 Timber Ridge Drive

Pawcatuck, CT 06379

           

Special Services Director,

Board of Education,

Stonington Public Schools; and

Director of Special Services, Learn

c/o Anne H. Littlefield, Esq.

Shipman & Goodwin

One Constitution Plaza

Hartford, CT 06103

 

 

 

___________________________________

Petrea A. Jones

Acting Clerk of the Commission

 

 

FIC/2007-100FD/paj/1/30/2008