For
Plaintiff: Catherine Sansonetti, Esq.
For
Defendant: Lisa F. Bortolotti, Esq.
DECISION
LANPHEAR, J.
Before
this Court is Appellant, Gianna Tucker's, appeal of
Appellee, Rhode Island Department of Human Services'
final decision denying Gianna Tucker's waiver request for
additional tuition support for her post-secondary education.
The Rhode Island Department of Human Services denied Gianna
Tucker's request for additional tuition assistance on the
basis that the Office of Rehabilitation Services (ORS) policy
complied with federal law and the ORS correctly calculated
the amount of tuition assistance. Jurisdiction is pursuant to
G.L. 1956 § 42-35-15. For the reasons set forth herein,
this Court affirms the Rhode Island Department of Human
Services' final decision.
I
Facts
and Travel
The
Rhode Island Department of Human Services (DHS) is an agency
within the executive branch of the state government, which is
the federally designated state agency that is responsible for
the Rehabilitation Services Administration grants. Within
DHS, the ORS oversees the management of the Vocational
Rehabilitation Program. Appellant, Gianna Tucker (Tucker), is
a disabled individual, [1] who permanently resides in
Narragansett, Rhode Island. (Appellee's Answer (Answer)
Ex. 30 at 13.) After graduating from Narragansett High School
in 2012, she was found eligible for the Vocational
Rehabilitation Program. Id. at 3, 9. Tucker listed
Occupational Therapy as her employment goal for her
Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE). This goal required
a master's degree. (Answer Ex. 29 at 10.)
From
2012 until 2016, Tucker attended Saint Mary's University
and attained a Bachelor's Degree in psychology and
biology. (Answer Ex. 30 at 4.) During Tucker's enrollment
at Saint Mary's University, she received a trustee
scholarship in the amount of $72, 000 and a training grant
from ORS in the amount of $46, 798. Id.
Additionally, during this time, Tucker received $3482 for
assistive technology. Id.
In
January of 2016, Tucker met with her ORS Counselor, Teresa
O'Brien (Counselor), to discuss the continuation of her
IPE in order to obtain a master's degree in Occupational
Therapy. Id. During this meeting, Tucker indicated
that she applied to eight post-secondary schools and was
awaiting acceptance decisions. Id. There was no
master's program for Occupational Therapy within Rhode
Island that Tucker was eligible for; thus, Tucker was
required to apply to out-of-state schools. Id. at
14. Her Counselor advised Tucker that the ORS policy for
post-secondary training grants funds up to a baseline amount,
which is set at the amount of the University of Rhode Island
graduate tuition. Id. at 4. Additionally, the
Counselor informed Tucker that in order for the IPE to
develop, Tucker must receive an acceptance into a school, and
ORS must receive the letter of acceptance, information
regarding scholarship grants, plans for working during the
school year and the summer, and a copy of the student aid
report from Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA).
Id. Tucker acknowledged the required steps and
stated that she would provide ORS with the information.
Id. Nonetheless, ORS agreed to develop her IPE with
the goal of a master's degree in Occupational Therapy
based upon Tucker's undergraduate GPA of 3.7 and her
demonstrated ability to handle challenging science classes;
furthermore, this goal was also supported by the labor
market's expected salary and job growth rate.
Id.
In
March of 2016, Tucker informed her Counselor that she
selected Tufts University and was visiting Boston to search
for apartments while she attended school. Id. at
4-5, Ex. 6 at 2. A meeting was held on March 28, 2016, during
which Tucker informed her Counselor that she had
independently enrolled at Tufts University. (Answer Ex. 30 at
4-5, Ex. 6 at 2.) As a result of Tucker's decision, her
Counselor was foreclosed from discussing the comparable
benefits at various institutions, such as scholarships,
grants, work study or part-time work at the various
institutions that would aid with the funding. (Answer Ex. 30
at 5, 7, 36.)
In
accordance with DHS, ORS Policy Manual Section 115.28,
Post-Secondary Education and Vocational Training
Services (ORS Policy Sec. 115.28), Tucker and Tufts
University provided ORS with the required documentation for
the purpose of completing the Training Grant Worksheet
(ORS-29 form). (Answer Ex. 30 at 5, Ex. 6 at 2.) Based on the
foregoing financial information received[2] and ORS Policy
Sec. 115.28, ORS provided Tucker with a grant of $13, 362 for
the 2016- 2017 school year and $1000 for books and supplies.
Id. Additionally, ORS funded Tucker $1193 for a
refurbished MacBook in November of 2016. Id.
After
Tucker received the ORS-29 form, she objected to the
calculations and requested ORS to reevaluate and recalculate
the grant. (Answer Ex. 30 at 5, Ex. 14.) ORS reevaluated the
financial information from the ORS-28 form, the student aid
report from FAFSA, the baseline amount, and the current ORS
Policy Sec. 115.28. Id. After reviewing the
pertinent materials, ORS contacted Tucker to notify her that
the amount originally granted was correct. Id. The
authorization for the fall 2016 semester was paid on August
22, 2016 in the amount of $6681, which amounted to half of
the annual training grant. Id.
On
January 10, 2017, ORS received a letter from Tucker's
legal counsel, Rhode Island Disability Law Center, requesting
that ORS reevaluate Tucker's tuition as well as her room
and board expenses. (Answer Ex. 30 at 5, Ex. 17.) ORS
reviewed the amount that was granted on August 1, 2016 and
found that it was consistent with ORS policy and baseline
fee. However, ORS indicated in a letter dated January 19,
2017 that they would explore reimbursement options for
Tucker's room rental once some documentation was received
regarding the lease or rental agreement. (Answer Ex. 18.)
After receiving the relevant information, ORS offered to fund
Tucker for rental expenses of $636 per month until the
completion of her master's degree in Occupational
Therapy. (Answer Ex. 20.) On February 24, 2017, Tucker
accepted ORS's offer for rental assistance and requested
that ORS fund rent retroactively as well. (Answer Ex. 21.)
Additionally, Tucker requested ORS to grant a waiver based on
individualized extenuating circumstances within Section IV(B)
of ORS Policy Sec. 115.28. (Answer Ex. 21.) ORS approved the
administrative waiver that would reimburse Tucker for room
and board from January 2017 until the completion of her
campus classes. (Answer Ex. 30 at 6.) However, on March 3,
2017, ORS sent a denial letter indicating that ORS cannot
grant Tucker's request for additional tuition because it
exceeds the ORS baseline amount of unmet need. (Answer Ex.
22.)
On
March 31, 2017, ORS received Tucker's appeal letter
regarding ORS's denial of waiver for tuition and
expenses. (Answer Ex. 6 at 4.) On May 8, 2017, the Appeals
Officer of DHS (Appeals Officer) conducted a hearing, where
the Appeals Officer heard testimony from various witnesses
involved with Tucker's tuition assistance. (Answer Ex.
30.)[3]
On July
11, 2017, the Appeals Officer issued the decision formally
denying Tucker's request to grant a waiver for additional
tuition and expenses. (Answer Ex. 29.) The Appeals Officer
found that ORS Policy Sec. 115.28 complied with the federal
law and that ORS correctly calculated the amount of
Tucker's tuition assistance because student loans
qualified as other available resources that this state agency
has authorized to substitute for Vocational Rehabilitation
assistance. (Answer Ex. 29 at 11-15.) On August 24, 2017,
Tucker filed an appeal of the Administrative Hearing Decision
with this Court.
II
Standard
of Review
This
Court's review of an appeal from an administrative action
is governed by § 42-35-15, which provides:
"The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of
the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of
fact. The court may affirm the decision of the agency or
remand the case for further proceedings, or it may reverse or
modify the decision if substantial rights of the appellant
have been prejudiced because the administrative findings,
inferences, conclusions, or decisions are:
"(1) In violation of constitutional or statutory
provisions;
"(2) In excess of the statutory authority of the agency;
"(3) Made upon unlawful procedure;
"(4) Affected by other error of law;
"(5) Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable,
probative, and substantial evidence on the ...