NYSED redacts decisions, and its source files vary in quality. Gaps and text errors are original to the NYSED documents.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
Case Number:
Student’s Name:
Date of Birth:
District: Hearing Requested By: Parent
Date of Hearing: May 27, 2014
Actual Record Closed Date: May 29, 2014
Hearing Officer: James P. Walsh, Esq.
NAMES AND TITLES OF PERSONS WHO APPEARED ON MAY 27, 2014
Mother of — Student
Committee on Special Education, — DOE
New York City — DOE
District Representative — DOE
The Matter of Rachel S., (hereinafter referred to as “Student”) came before me for determination in accordance with the provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. §1415(f)(1) and Article 89 of the Education Law of the State of New York on May 27, 2014. The undersigned was appointed by the Impartial Hearing Office of the Department of Education of the City of New York on November 11, 2013. A previous scheduled hearing date of February 12, 2014, was adjourned due to the unavailability of District witnesses. The Actual Record Close Date was the date of hearing, May 29, 2014
The formal impartial hearing process was initiated by correspondence sent by Parent, which correspondence, although dated, was received by the Impartial Hearing Office of the New York City Department of Education on November 12, 2013. Parent’s original Due Process Complaint Notice alleged that, although Parent had requested that Student be evaluated in November of 2012, no evaluation had been performed, although one full year had passed. In Parent’s Amended Due Process Complaint (I.H.O. Exhibit I), Parent requested that Parent be reimbursed for the cost of a private evaluation of Student, performed on De4cember 23, 2013, for which Parent had paid, as well as seeking a Speech/Language Evaluation, a reconvention of District’s Committee on Special Education (C.S.E.) after the completion of such evaluation and appropriate services for Student.
At the hearing conducted on May 27, 2014, District’s Representative advised that, after the filing of Parent’s original Due Process Complaint, District had obtained a Evaluation (Exhibit 4), Evaluation (Exhibit 3 and a Evaluation (Exhibit 2) and, with such in hand, reconvened District’s C.S.E. on April 3, 2014 and prepared an Individualized Education Service Plan (IESP) (Exhibit 1) for Student.
Having reviewed such documentation, it is clear that Parent’s request that I order the performance of a Evaluation or a reconvention of the C.S.E. to develop appropriate services for Student have become moot. Thus, the sole issue remaining for determination is Parent’s request that Parent be reimbursed the sum of Six Hundred ($600.00) Dollars, the cost to Parent of the Evaluation performed by Dr. on December 23,2013
It borders on the unconscionable that Parent had to wait one full year for an evaluation of Student that Parent had requested in November of 2012 and, with no appropriate action having been taken by District, had to arrange herself for such evaluation and pay the cost for such. It has been established that Boards of Education may be required to pay for educational services obtained for a child by the child’s parent, if (1) the services offered by the Board of Education were inadequate or inappropriate; (2) the services selected by the Parents were appropriate and (3) equitable considerations support the Parents’ claim (School Committee of the Town of Burlington v. Department of Education, Massachusetts, 471 U.S. 359 (1985); Application of a Child with a Disability, Appeal No. 01-052). It is my finding that District failed in its obligation to promptly and properly evaluation Student as requested; that the evaluation obtained by Parent was appropriate; and that equities favor Parent.
. ORDER
Based upon the above, it is
HEREBY ORDERED that District #20 and the New York City Department of Education immediately reimburse Parent the sum of Six Hundred ($600.00) Dollars, the amount paid by Parent for the Evaluation performed by Dr. on December 23, 2013.
Dated: May 29, 2014
James P. Walsh, Esq./gkw
JAMES P. WALSH
Impartial Hearing Officer JPW: gkw
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE
Within 35 days of the date of this decision, the parent and/or the New York City Department of Education has a right to appeal the decision to the State Review Officer of the New York State Education Department under Section 4404 of the Education Law and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
“The notice of intention to seek review shall be served upon the school district not less than 10 days before service of a copy of the petition for review upon such school district, and within 25 days from the date of the decision sought to be reviewed. The petition for review shall be served upon the school district within 35 days from the date of the decision sought to be reviewed. If the decision has been served by mail upon petitioner, the date of mailing and the four days subsequent thereto shall be excluded in computing the 25- or 35-day period.”
(8NYCRR279.2[b]) Failure to file the notice of intention to seek review is a waiver of the right to appeal this decision.
Directions and sample forms for filing an appeal are included with this decision. Directions and forms can also be found in the Office of State Review website: www.sro.nysed.gov/appeals.htm.
DOCUMENTATION ENTERED INTO THE RECORD
A. Itemized Bill from., undated Parent (1 page; Parents)
B. Copy of Check from Parent to, dated Parent 12-23-13 (1 page; Parents)
C. Psycho-Educational Report Parent dated 1-9-14 (7 pages; Parents)
1. IESP, dated 3-24-14 (8 pages; DOE)
2. Psycho-Educational Evaluation Report by dated 1-5-14 (4 pages; DOE)
3. Physical Therapy Evaluation by, PT, dated 3-12-14 (5 pages; DOE)
4. Speech/Language Evaluation DATED 3-25-14 by,T.S.H.H. (5 pages; DOE)
5. School Progress Report, undated (1 page; DOE)
I. Parent’s Amended Due Process Complaint IHO Notice, undated (3 pages; Parents)