THE DIVISION OF 2023 Annual
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Report
APPEALS
Division of Administrative Law Appeals: 2023 Annual Report 0
 Table of Contents
Mission and General Overview ............................................................................................................... 3
The General Jurisdiction Unit................................................................................................................... 3
A. 2023 in Review .......................................................................................................................... 4
B. Additional Accomplishments and Highlights ..................................................................... 5
The Bureau of Special Education Appeals ............................................................................................. 7
A. 2023 in Review .......................................................................................................................... 7
B. Additional Accomplishments and Highlights ................................................................... 11
Appendix A: General Jurisdiction Unit: Cases Closed in 2023......................................................... 13
Appendix B: General Jurisdiction Unit: Cases Opened in 2023 ...................................................... 15
Division of Administrative Law Appeals: 2023 Annual Report 1
 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW APPEALS
BUREAU OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPEALS
14 SUMMER STREET, 4TH FLOOR
MALDEN, MA 02148
TEL: 781-397-4700
NATALIE S. MONROE FAX: 781-397-4720
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE MAGISTRATE www.mass.gov/dala
August 8, 2024
Greetings:
I am pleased to submit the Division of Administrative Law Appeals’ (DALA) annual
report for 2023 in accordance with M.G.L. ch. 7, § 4H. The report highlights the
accomplishments of the dedicated and talented individuals at DALA who work every day to
achieve the agency’s mission and to serve the people of Massachusetts.
A special thanks to Jennifer Ngo, Reece Ehrlichman, Myrto Flessas and James Rooney
for their contributions to this report. I also would like to thank the team at A&F IT for their
invaluable assistance with data analysis and visualization.
Sincerely,
Natalie S. Monroe
Chief Administrative Magistrate
Division of Administrative Law Appeals: 2023 Annual Report 2
 MISSION AND GENERAL OVERVIEW
The Division of Administrative Law Appeals (DALA) is a quasi-judicial agency that
hears and resolves challenges to decisions made by Massachusetts state agencies, as well as
disputes among parents, school districts, private schools and state educational agencies.
Fundamental to DALA’s work is upholding the due process rights of everyone who comes
before the agency. In addition to protecting due process rights, DALA’s core objectives are to:
 Provide a neutral forum for the fair, equitable and independent resolution of
disputes.
 Ensure full, equitable and easy access for every person and organization that
appears before DALA.
 Ensure fair and respectful treatment throughout the mediation and hearing
processes.
 Issue well-written, concise and understandable rulings and decisions.
DALA is comprised of two units: the General Jurisdiction Unit and the Bureau of Special
Education Appeals. At the end of 2023, DALA had 32 employees. Throughout 2023, the agency
was led by Acting Chief Magistrate James Rooney.
THE GENERAL JURISDICTION UNIT
DALA’s General Jurisdiction Unit (GJU) hears challenges from decisions made by other
state agencies. Although for historical reasons DALA’s name refers to “appeals,” most of the
GJU’s work is not appellate in nature. Rather, the GJU functions more like a trial court. Those
appearing before the GJU may file motions, obtain discovery and participate in evidentiary
hearings at which, like a trial, they have an opportunity to present witnesses and any other
evidence they consider relevant to their dispute.
Each case is assigned to an administrative magistrate who manages all aspects of that
case, including holding prehearing conferences, overseeing discovery, ruling on motions,
conducting the evidentiary hearing and issuing a decision. The rulings and decisions that the
magistrate issues are binding on the parties. Like a trial court ruling, moreover, magistrates’
decisions can be appealed. Depending on the type of case, the appeal would go before another
state agency or the trial court.
Cases come to the GJU in two ways: (1) by legislation requiring that certain types of
cases be heard at DALA; and (2) upon request of an agency, subject to the approval of DALA’s
Chief Administrative Magistrate and the Secretary of Administration and Finance. Currently,
the GJU hears cases from approximately 20 state agencies, including the Contributory
Retirement Appeal Board, the Board of Registration in Medicine, the Department of Public
Division of Administrative Law Appeals: 2023 Annual Report 3
Health and the Fair Labor Division of the Office of the Attorney General. Thus, to the extent
that Massachusetts has a “central administrative panel,” the GJU fills that role.
At the end of 2023, the GJU had a team of nine magistrates, one law clerk, three
administrative staff and a fiscal manager.
A. 2023 in Review
In 2023, the GJU received 606 new cases. As in past years, the majority (71.76%) related
to public employees’ pensions, such as challenges to the calculation of an individual’s pension
or the denial of an application for an accidental disability retirement. The second largest
category of appeals (6.24%) came from challenges to Medicare reimbursement rates that the
Executive Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS) sets for nursing homes in
Massachusetts.
Abbreviations
CR: Cont. Retirement App. Bd.
CS: Civil Service Comm’n
DET: Dept. of
Unemployment Assistance
DPPC: Disabled Persons
Protection Comm’n
LB: AGO, Fair Labor Division
MS: Miscellaneous1
OC: Dept. of Early
Education and Care
PH: Dept. of Public Health
PHET: Dept. of Public
Health (EMTs)
PHNA: Dept. of Public
Health (Nurse's Aides)
RM: Bd. of Registration in
Medicine
RS: EOHHS (Rate Setting)
VS: Exec. Office of
Veterans’ Services
Figure 1. GJU Cases Opened in 2023
1“Miscellaneous” includes cases involving the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education,
Department of Agricultural Resources, Department of Developmental Services, Division of Fisheries and
Wildlife, and Boston Police Department.
Division of Administrative Law Appeals: 2023 Annual Report 4
 The individual, agency or company that files a case with the GJU is typically called the
petitioner (akin to the plaintiff in a civil lawsuit). The individual, agency or company against
whom the legal action is taken is generally referred to as the respondent (similar to a defendant
in a civil lawsuit).
Once a case is filed, the parties may conduct discovery, such as obtaining relevant
documents from each other and third parties. The parties are entitled to file motions to resolve
the case without the need for an evidentiary hearing. For example, a respondent could file a
motion to dismiss on the grounds that the petitioner filed the case after the time allowed by law.
Parties also are encouraged to talk and explore resolving their disputes amicably. And of
course, parties also have the right to a full evidentiary hearing, after which a magistrate issues a
decision based on the evidence presented and the applicable law. As a result, cases may resolve
in many ways, including settlement, withdrawal, a ruling on a motion, or a written decision
after an evidentiary hearing.
In 2023, the GJU continued its efforts to resolve cases more expeditiously, with a focus
on its oldest cases, as well as on cases involving applications for an accidental disability
retirement. Consequently, the GJU closed 1,897 cases last year. These cases were open an
average of 1,727 days. Many considerations impacted the time to resolve these cases.
Magistrates’ caseloads and agency staffing continued to be significant factors. Further, the
complexity of a case, the need for discovery, and filing pre-hearing motions affect the time it
takes for a case to proceed to hearing. In addition, parties may ask to stay a case, such as to
explore settlement or to allow a related criminal investigation or prosecution to conclude.
Appendix A contains a breakdown of the number of cases closed by type of appeal, as well as
the average length of cases by the type of appeal.2
The GJU ended 2023 with 812 open cases.
B. Additional Accomplishments and Highlights
1. Rate Setting Cases
The GJU has been engaged in a multi-year initiative to resolve a backlog of nursing
home rate-setting cases; these cases concern the rate of reimbursement for services provided by
nursing homes to Medicare patients. Many were filed years ago but not pursued. In 2022, the
GJU closed over 1,000 nursing home rate-setting cases. In 2023, the GJU continued this progress
2
DALA’s enabling statute requires the agency to report on the number of “simplified hearings”
that it holds each year. M.G.L. ch. 7, § 4H. The Standard Rules of Adjudicatory Practice and
Procedure, 801 CMR 1.00, et seq., do not use that term. Interpreting “simplified hearing” to
mean an informal hearing pursuant to 801 CMR 1.02, the GJU held six simplified hearings in
2023.
Division of Administrative Law Appeals: 2023 Annual Report 5
by closing 590 more rate-setting cases. As it stood at the end of 2023, the GJU had reduced the
number of open rate-setting cases to 213, a number that the agency expects to decrease as it
wraps up the last of the older cases, and schedules hearings in the new cases.
2. Retirement Cases
The GJU also has continued its efforts to resolve its inventory of retirement cases and to
process them in a timelier manner. At the end of 2022, the GJU had 1,075 open retirement cases.
By the end of 2023, that number had been reduced to 439 open retirement cases.
The reduction is primarily attributable to adding resources and improving the agency’s
intake system. Most importantly, the GJU received approval to hire a law clerk and a third
administrative assistant to help process retirement appeals. This has allowed the GJU to
improve its intake system and the resolution of cases in general. Now, for example, when
retirement appeals are filed, they are screened and placed into three categories. First, if it
appears from the filing that the appeal is legally flawed or procedurally barred, the agency
issues an order to show cause directing the petitioner to provide facts that support the appeal.
For example, the agency may issue an order to show cause if it appears that the petitioner filed
the appeal long after the statutory deadline for doing so.
Second, if it appears that the parties’ disagreement can be resolved without live
testimony, the GJU requires the parties to submit briefs and evidence setting forth their
positions and the matter is then decided on the papers.3 Third, if there are factual disputes, the
GJU requires the parties to submit prehearing memoranda explaining the facts they intend to
prove, along with proposed exhibits; after such memoranda and exhibits are filed, the matter is
scheduled for an evidentiary hearing.
It formerly took many months to send out the appropriate orders to the parties, but with
the addition of a third administrative assistant, the GJU has reduced processing times
significantly. Since the end of 2023, the GJU has been able to screen cases in a week after they
are filed and issue preliminary orders within two weeks.
3. Language Access
Consistent with Executive Order No. 615, the GJU implemented a Language Access Plan
to ensure that all individuals who participate in matters before the GJU, including individuals
who are limited in their English language proficiency, have meaningful access to DALA’s
services. Language access serves not only the individual needs of parties and participants, but
also the GJU’s goal of ensuring the fair and efficient resolution of the matters before it. To
further improve language access, DALA also has contracted with a local vendor for interpreter
and translation services.
3 However, if the magistrate identifies the need for live testimony, the appeal proceeds to a full
evidentiary hearing.
Division of Administrative Law Appeals: 2023 Annual Report 6
 THE BUREAU OF SPECIAL EDUCATION APPEALS
The BSEA conducts mediations, hearings and facilitated meetings to resolve disputes
among parents, school districts, private schools and state agencies. The BSEA derives its
authority from both federal law (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, “IDEA”) and
Massachusetts law (Chapter 71B of the Massachusetts General Laws, “Chapter 71B”).
A parent4 or a school district may request a mediation or hearing on any matter
concerning the eligibility, evaluation, placement, individualized education program, provision
of special education or procedural protections for students with disabilities, in accordance with
state and federal law. In addition, a parent may request a hearing on any issue involving the
denial of a free appropriate public education guaranteed by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973.
Mediations, hearings and facilitated meetings are conducted by impartial and specially
trained mediators and hearing officers. The BSEA is comprised of six hearing officers (all of
whom are attorneys), six mediators, a coordinator of mediation, a scheduling coordinator, four
administrative staff, a fiscal manager and a director.
The BSEA is federally funded through a grant managed by the Department of
Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). In 2010, the Legislature transferred the BSEA to
DALA from DESE to ensure independence from any educational agency that could be a party
to, or interested in, the matters that come before the BSEA. See Chapter 131 of the Acts of 2010.
A. 2023 in Review
In Massachusetts, a public school district is responsible for developing an Individual
Education Program (IEP) for a student with a disability who is found eligible pursuant to the
IDEA or Chapter 71B. An IEP is a “road map” and “contract,” which is prepared by an
interdisciplinary team, and which sets forth the goals, objectives, services, placement and
accommodations necessary to provide an eligible student with a free appropriate public
education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment.
If the parent of a student rejects or does not respond to a proposed IEP, the school must
notify the BSEA. The BSEA then sends a packet of information to the parents and school district
notifying them of their dispute resolution options, including mediation and an evidentiary due
process hearing. Parents and school districts are not required to request a BSEA mediation or
hearing. After receiving this packet, therefore, the parents and school district may or may not
contact the BSEA to request mediation or file a written request for a hearing.
4 As used in this report, “parent” refers to the father, mother, foster parent or legal guardian of a child; a
person acting as a parent of a child; or an educational surrogate parent appointed in accordance with
federal law.
Division of Administrative Law Appeals: 2023 Annual Report 7
 In most instances involving a rejected IEP,5 the families and school districts work
collaboratively to resolve the rejections. As a result, only a small percentage of the rejected IEPs
that the BSEA receives ultimately lead to a mediation, settlement conference or full evidentiary