Representing people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in administrative hearings
BY JENNIFER OLIVERI AND STACIE SIEBRECHT
Intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) encompass a group of conditions that affect how a person thinks, learns, communicates, and manages everyday activities in life. IDD includes conditions like Down Syndrome, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, autism, and other neurological or related conditions.11 See RCW 48.01.035. “Developmental disability” is defined by state law as “a disability attributable to intellectual disability, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, autism, or another neurological condition closely related to an intellectual disability or to require treatment similar to that required for persons with intellectual disabilities, which disability originates before such individual attains age eighteen, which has continued or can be expected to continue indefinitely, and which constitutes a substantial limitation to such individual.” The community of people with IDD is diverse and includes students, artists, workers, friends, and family members, all with unique strengths, dreams, and ways of experiencing life. But too often they confront systems that are not built for them and barriers that make basic rights feel out of reach, including access to the legal system.
People with IDD face significant and persistent obstacles to accessing legal services. They also tend to encounter the legal system more often than others by way of guardianship cases, denials of special education and benefits, and discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations.22 Washington State Supreme Court Interpreter Commission February 10, 2023, meeting packet, 43-55. “Disability Justice Task Force Study and Program Development Staffing,” agenda item, Robert W. Lichtenberg and Judge David Whedbee.
Two years ago, The Arc of Spokane released a report entitled “Nowhere to Turn,”33 Stacie Siebrecht, “Nowhere To Turn: A Study of the Unmet Civil Legal Service Needs of People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in Spokane County,” prepared for The Arc of Spokane, June 2023 (available at www.arc-spokane.org/legal-feasibility-study). which exposed Washington state’s failure to track and respond to the civil legal needs of people with IDD. In response to this report, the authors of this article helped launch a new project called the Developmental Disability Administration Appeal Project (DDAAP), which aims to address one of the most pressing recommendations from the report—to “provide education about and assistance with requests for counsel or Suitable Representatives as an accommodation in legal proceedings.”
Specifically, people with IDD need services provided by the state to live their daily lives—support with housing, health care, and community living. However, far too often, people with IDD are denied these critical services. They are then left to appeal the denial of these services through the administrative hearing process, often without representation. DDAAP establishes a network of trained attorneys and law students who work together to advocate for people with IDD through the administrative appeals process.
The Need
People with IDD often rely on state-funded services to meet their basic needs. Every individual’s needs are unique, but typical areas of need often include assistance with getting out of bed, using the bathroom, preparing meals, going to work, moving around their community, and accessing health care.44 Developmental Disabilities Administration website overview of services and programs, available at www.dshs.wa.gov/dda/developmental-disabilities-administration-services-programs. Last visited March 25, 2025. In Washington, the Department of Social and Health Service’s Developmental Disabilities Community Services (previously the Developmental Disabilities Administration (DDA), now DDCS) provides these services, but they are hard to access and, as with any government program, there is a lot of red tape and many bureaucratic gatekeepers. As of July 2024, DDA had 58,068 enrolled clients, 71 percent of which receive services paid for by DDA. The remaining 29 percent do not receive any services paid for by DDA.55 Amanda Eadrick, Joshua Karas, Suzanna Pratt, Stephanie Seto, and Melanie Stidham, Ryan McCord, and Eric Thomas, “Developmental Disabilities Administration Processes and Staffing,” 25-04 Final Report, May 2025, conducted by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) (available at https://leg.wa.gov/jlarc/reports/2025/DDA/f_c/default.html). These people may not receive paid services because they do not want them, because no one told them what is available, because they are waiting for services to become available, or because they were denied services they truly need.
People with IDD are often low income as they have high rates of unemployment, and until recently, it was legal in Washington to pay them less than minimum wage when they did secure a job. We know that those who are low income in Washington state experience an average of more than nine legal problems a year.66 “2015 Washington State Civil Legal Needs Study Update,” October 2015, at 3 (available at www.courts.wa.gov/disability-justice-task-force/public/OCLA-2015-Civil-Legal-Needs-Study-Update.pdf). We also know that accessing legal help is challenging for most people due to barriers like complicated intake processes, long holding times, an inability to take action on trainings offered, a lack of understanding about when a problem has a legal remedy, and an inability to secure legal representation due to scarce resources. These barriers are magnified and often insurmountable for many people with IDD. Moreover, many people with IDD, particularly Black, Indigenous, and people of color, and those with co-occurring disabilities like mental health or addiction, face systemic bias, and often lack access to a diagnosis that can open the door to additional services and protections of rights.
We can no longer ignore the civil legal needs of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities across Washington state.
When people with an IDD cannot access the services that they need to live their lives fully, they suffer, and our community suffers. A person denied DDCS services may end up stuck in the hospital with large hospital bills for an unnecessary and inappropriate level of care, they may be denied opportunities to live in their community where they might obtain employment, or they may languish, isolated from the world, lying in bed every day. People with IDD too often have nowhere to turn when they need to fight for basic civil rights, like the right to get out of bed, the right to not sit in their own waste, and the right to be a part of the world.
“Access to justice for all persons is a fundamental right. It is the policy of the courts of this state to assure that persons with disabilities have equal and meaningful access to the judicial system.” —General Rule 3377 Washington General Rule 33, “Requests for Accommodation by Persons with Disabilities,” Comment 1 (available at www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/pdf/GR/GA_GR_33_00_00.pdf).
As the “Nowhere to Turn” report explains, we can no longer ignore the civil legal needs of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, in Spokane or across Washington.
DDAAP: A Starting Point
DDAAP hopes to create a sustainable solution to the lack of representation for people with IDD who are trying to access essential services. It responds directly to the “Nowhere to Turn” report’s second recommendation to “Provide education about and assistance with requests for counsel or Suitable Representatives (SR) as an accommodation.” The project is funded by a Flom Incubator Grant from the Skadden Foundation and is a partnership between the authors of this article (acting as consultants) and The Arc of Spokane. Starting in September 2026, DDAAP will work in partnership with the Northwest Justice Project.
The Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) is the state office that handles the appeals cases for people denied services from DDCS. OAH is independent of other state administrative agencies, and is charged with the impartial administration of administrative hearings. 88 WAC 10-24-010 (providing a process to appoint a person to serve as a “suitable representative.” The accommodation is for self-represented parties when other accommodation measures are not sufficient to provide meaningful participation in OAH hearings). OAH has a rule allowing an administrative law judge (ALJ) to appoint a Suitable Representative (SR) as an accommodation.99 Id. A person can request an SR as an accommodation directly from OAH. Additionally, the rule requires an ALJ who “has a reasonable belief that an unrepresented party may be unable to meaningfully participate in the adjudicative proceeding because of a disability, with that party’s consent” to refer the case to the ADA Coordinator and stay it until the referral is addressed.1010 RCW 34.12.010; WAC 10-24-010;WAC 10-24-1010(3) and (7) (Specifies that, at any stage of an adjudicative proceeding, if the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) or any party reasonably believes an unrepresented party may be unable to meaningfully participate due to a disability, the ALJ must, with the party’s consent, refer them to the agency ADA Coordinator. The proceeding is delayed until the ADA Coordinator evaluates the accommodation request. The presence of a guardian, near relative, or friend does not affect the determination of the party’s ability to meaningfully participate.) If the ADA Coordinator approves the SR and the party and SR agree to the appointment, the Chief ALJ will officially make the appointment. However, OAH has struggled to maintain a pool of SRs.1111 Sabiha Ahmad and Johnette Sullivan. “Executive Summary of Suitable Representation at OAH—January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021,”at 2, Washington Office of Administrative Hearings, August 15, 2022. On file with the authors. Accessed June 19, 2023 (stating “We have struggled to build a consistent pool of advocates across the state to serve in this innovative role, which has also been difficult to fund and insure with liability coverage. Partly due to these factors, we were unable to provide an SR to 11 of 26 SR-eligible parties, i.e., roughly 42 percent. If we are evaluating our implementation of the SR process by this metric, we have failed so far.”)
That’s where DDAAP comes in. The project recruits, trains, and refers cases to pro bono attorneys and students who will partner together to represent people with IDD in appeals before OAH, establishing a sustainable pipeline of SRs for people with IDD. This fall, DDAAP will train its first cohort of pro bono attorneys and law students statewide. Trainers include Erika Lim and Brendan Haigh from the Northwest Justice Project; Taylor Crisp, an advocate with lived experience; Carla Sullivan, the ADA Coordinator at OAH; and the authors of this article and DDAAP project founders.
After attending the above free CLE, attendees commit to taking at least two administrative appeals over the next year. These cases are discrete, focusing on a single issue, such as the denial of a specific service. Attendees receive training on administrative appeals, learn about specific issues raised in DDCS denials of service, gain tips to effectively represent people with IDD, and obtain ongoing case consultation, if needed. Attorneys will have the opportunity to make a significant difference in the lives of people with IDD through discrete legal cases with support from a law student. Law students will gain practical advocacy, interviewing and counseling skills, and access to legal mentors. And finally, people with IDD who otherwise lack the opportunity to meaningfully participate in their hearings will have the opportunity to access justice, and hopefully greater access to the services they need to live day to day.
In the “Nowhere to Turn” report, several people with IDD were asked to speak to their experiences with the legal system. One woman with IDD, when asked about the qualities she would want in a legal services provider, said, “a welcoming environment, reassurance, patience, understanding that I might get emotional speaking quickly or shutting down, and someone who will work alongside me throughout the process because it is really hard to do it alone.” She explained that she understood she may not get the results she wants, but she needs someone who is not intimidating and who gives her some hope.1212 Supra note 2, at 39.
As a legal community, we have continually failed to provide targeted access to justice and civil rights to people with IDD—people who are seeking access to housing, education, health care, employment, and the ability to live their lives fully.
We can change this story. We can show up. We can take action by advocating for those who have been ignored for far too long. Legal services are not the finish line, but they can be the gateway to justice, to opportunity, and to a world in which people are not left unseen and unsupported.
LEARN MORE > To get involved with the DDAAP project and register for a training taking place this fall, visit https://tinyurl.com/DDAAPtraining.
About the authorS
Stacie Siebrecht has more than 25 years of experience as a disability rights attorney. She recently authored a report for The Arc of Spokane, exposing barriers to accessing legal services for people with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. Previously at Disability Rights Washington, she advocated for systemic change through impact litigation, directed the Treatment Facilities Program, and expanded organizational capacity through fundraising and partnership building in the Strategic Partnership Program.
Jennifer Oliveri is the founder of Oliveri All Abilities Consulting and a passionate advocate for disability inclusion. With years of experience improving accessibility in programs and systems, Oliveri partners with professionals to create welcoming, barrier-free environments for people with disabilities. A former director at The Arc of Spokane and the Next Generation Zone, she believes real change happens through practical, thoughtful solutions that ensure everyone can participate fully and thrive.
NOTES
1. See RCW 48.01.035. “Developmental disability” is defined by state law as “a disability attributable to intellectual disability, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, autism, or another neurological condition closely related to an intellectual disability or to require treatment similar to that required for persons with intellectual disabilities, which disability originates before such individual attains age eighteen, which has continued or can be expected to continue indefinitely, and which constitutes a substantial limitation to such individual.”
2. Washington State Supreme Court Interpreter Commission February 10, 2023, meeting packet, 43-55. “Disability Justice Task Force Study and Program Development Staffing,” agenda item, Robert W. Lichtenberg and Judge David Whedbee.
3. Stacie Siebrecht, “Nowhere To Turn: A Study of the Unmet Civil Legal Service Needs of People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in Spokane County,” prepared for The Arc of Spokane, June 2023 (available at www.arc-spokane.org/legal-feasibility-study).
4. Developmental Disabilities Administration website overview of services and programs, available at www.dshs.wa.gov/dda/developmental-disabilities-administration-services-programs. Last visited March 25, 2025.
5. Amanda Eadrick, Joshua Karas, Suzanna Pratt, Stephanie Seto, and Melanie Stidham, Ryan McCord, and Eric Thomas, “Developmental Disabilities Administration Processes and Staffing,” 25-04 Final Report, May 2025, conducted by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) (available at https://leg.wa.gov/jlarc/reports/2025/DDA/f_c/default.html).
6. “2015 Washington State Civil Legal Needs Study Update,” October 2015, at 3 (available at www.courts.wa.gov/disability-justice-task-force/public/OCLA-2015-Civil-Legal-Needs-Study-Update.pdf).
7. Washington General Rule 33, “Requests for Accommodation by Persons with Disabilities,” Comment 1 (available at www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/pdf/GR/GA_GR_33_00_00.pdf).
8. WAC 10-24-010 (providing a process to appoint a person to serve as a “suitable representative.” The accommodation is for self-represented parties when other accommodation measures are not sufficient to provide meaningful participation in OAH hearings).
9. Id.
10. RCW 34.12.010; WAC 10-24-010;WAC 10-24-1010(3) and (7) (Specifies that, at any stage of an adjudicative proceeding, if the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) or any party reasonably believes an unrepresented party may be unable to meaningfully participate due to a disability, the ALJ must, with the party’s consent, refer them to the agency ADA Coordinator. The proceeding is delayed until the ADA Coordinator evaluates the accommodation request. The presence of a guardian, near relative, or friend does not affect the determination of the party’s ability to meaningfully participate.)
11. Sabiha Ahmad and Johnette Sullivan. “Executive Summary of Suitable Representation at OAH—January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021,”at 2, Washington Office of Administrative Hearings, August 15, 2022. On file with the authors. Accessed June 19, 2023 (stating “We have struggled to build a consistent pool of advocates across the state to serve in this innovative role, which has also been difficult to fund and insure with liability coverage. Partly due to these factors, we were unable to provide an SR to 11 of 26 SR-eligible parties, i.e., roughly 42 percent. If we are evaluating our implementation of the SR process by this metric, we have failed so far.”)
12. Supra note 2, at 39.