Due Process Hearings

Hearing Officer Decisions 2020-2021

July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021

Were the Individual Education Programs (IEPs) provided and proposed by LEA for Student for the fall 2017-2018, 2018-2019 and 2019 to 2020 school years appropriate and designed to permit Student to make meaningful educational progress in the least restrictive environment, given his unique needs, and in accordance with the meaning of the Individual with Disabilities Act, 20 U.S.C., §§ 1400 (IDEA)?
Are the Parents entitled to reimbursement and/or public funding under IDEA arising from their unilateral removal of Student from LEA and placement of Student in private school where they unilaterally placed Student for the fall 2017-2020 school years?

Whether there were procedural or substantive violations of the eligibility and/or child study requirements. If so, what relief, if any, should be granted?
Whether the student was denied a free appropriate public education (FAPE)?
Whether the student has a disability?
Whether the student is in need of special education and related services?
Whether the LEA failed to provide the student with a FAPE during the 2019 - 2020 school year by failing to identify the student's disability?
Whether the LEA violated Child Find regulations by failing to evaluate the student or by failing to properly interpret and consider the student's independent evaluation(s)?
Whether the student's alleged disability resulted in an adverse impact upon her educational performance or access to her curriculum?
Whether the student's behavioral record was properly reflected by LEA, and if not, did this alleged failure result in the denial of a FAPE?

Whether the school division has provided the student with a free appropriate public education (FAPE).
Whether the student's current Individualized Education Program (IEP) sufficiently addresses the student's special education needs so as to provide a FAPE.
Whether the parent is entitled to reimbursement from LEA for educational expenses unilaterally secured for the student.

Whether the Parties entered into a settlement agreement which releases and/or bars some or all of the claims raised by the Amended Due Process request?
Whether the Child’s current restriction from attending school is in violation of the IDEA?
Whether the LEA followed the applicable regulations regarding the expulsion of Student in March 2019 and, if not, what is the remedy?
Whether the child was denied a free appropriate public education (FAPE) on the basis that the school division failed to identify the student’s disability for the 2018-2019, 2019-2020, and 2020-2021 school years?
Whether the school division denied the student a free appropriate public education (FAPE) by allegedly failing to implement the student’s IEP for the 2018-2019, 2019-2020, and 2020-2021 school years?

Whether the IEPs proposed during 2018-20 were not reasonably calculated to offer the Student a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and whether private day school placement at the Private School selected by Parents was/is the appropriate IEP placement for the Student during the 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 school years.
Whether the October, 2020 IEP did not contain adequate and/or appropriate IEP Transition Services, Goals, Accommodations, Services, and Placement to address the Student's needs according to Student’s disabilities and whether a new IEP should be developed that incorporates the recommendations made by Speech Language Pathology and Audiology Expert and Clinical Psychologst, to include placement at the Private School selected by Parents.
Whether the Parents should be reimbursed the full fees and expenses incurred by them to effectuate the Student's enrollment and SPED services during the 2018-19 and 2019-20 school years at the Private School selected by Parents, to include 1:1 services, speech, OT, education, etc.
Whether the Parents should be reimbursed for any fees and expenses incurred for Speech Pathology and Audiology Expert’s Auditory Processing Independent Educational Evaluation and Speech Language Independent Educational Evaluation and for Clinical Psychologist’s Psychoeducational Independent Educational Evaluation.