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: 159864
Student’s Name:
Date of Birth:
District:
Hearing Requested By: Parent
Date of Hearing: April 19, 2016
May 13, 2016
Actual Record Closed Date: May 13, 2016
Hearing Officer: Linda Agoston, Esq.
NAMES AND TITLES OF PERSONS WHO APPEARED ON APRIL 19, 2016
Mother
District Representative — DOE
NAMES AND TITLES OF PERSONS WHO APPEARED ON MAY 13, 2016
Mother
District Representative — DOE
On February 11, 2016, I was appointed as Impartial Hearing Officer and conducted an Impartial Hearing. Hearings were held on April 19, 2016 and May 13, 2016 pursuant to the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C.
§1415(b)(2) and Article 89 of the Education Law of the State of New York, regarding the special education program of I rendered a decision on April 21, 2016 and ordered that this case be remanded on the Committee on Special Education ("CSE") to develop a new Individualized Education Program and to consider the new evaluation and all current and to change the classification based on the new evaluation. I further ordered CSE to compile the computer records of the related service sessions to demonstrate the amount of related services that received during the 2015-2016 school year to determine the amount of compensation for missed related services.
On May 13, 2016, the department of education ("DOE") district representative acknowledged that did not receive related services for the mandated sessions of (" ") for sessions of minutes per session or hours of and that did not received related services for the mandated sessions of (" ") for sessions of minutes per session or hours of . The district representative agreed that was entitled to compensatory services for the missed services for the 2015-2016 at the enhanced rate of per hour until June 30, 2018.
On May 13, 2016, the parent stated that she did not want to place in a NYS approved private school as she had searched and did not find an appropriate NYS approved private school placement, but she wanted to search for an appropriate private school that was not approved by the NYS Department of Education. She stated that she wanted to conclude this hearing and commence another due process hearing after she found an appropriate placement. The parent agreed that was entitled to compensatory services for the missed services for the 2015-2016 at the enhanced rate of per hour until June 30, 2018. The parent agreed to find an provider to provide services providers at the enhanced rate of per hours.
FINDING OF FACT, CONCLUSION OF LAW
The central purpose of the IDEA is to ensure that students with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education. 20 U.S.C. §1400(d)(1)(A); Schaffer v. Weast, 126 S.Ct. 528, 531 (2005); Board of Education v. Rowley, 458 U.S.
176, 179-181 (1982). A free appropriate public education includes special education and related services designed to meet the student’s individual needs, provided in conformity with a written IEP. See 20 U.S.C. §1401(9); 20 U.S.C. §1414(d). A school district offers a student a free and appropriate public education when (1) it complies with the procedural requirements of the IDEA and (2) its CSE develops an IEP reasonably calculated to enable the student to receive educational benefits. Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson S.D. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176, 206-207 (1982).
The parent asserted was and required
(Exh. A). This assertion was undisputed. It was further undisputed that missed hours or and hours of services.
I find "related services" under the IDEA are supportive services provided to a student with a disability to assist the child to benefit from his or her special education program pursuant to 34 C.F.R.300.34. I find the denial of OT and PT during the 2015- 2016 school year was a denial of a free and appropriate public education ("FAPE").
Compensatory education refers to education for a person to compensate for educational deficiencies that occurred between the ages 3 to 21. It is a remedy granted to students deprived of FAPE. Compensatory education refers to education for a person to compensate for educational deficiencies that occurred between the ages 3 to 21. It is a remedy granted to students deprived of FAPE and students who have endured educational failures, and who have regressed during their school age years. Garro v. Connecticut, 23 F.3d 734 (2d Cir. 1994); Melvin v. Bolton School District, 100 F.3d 944 (2d Cir. 1996);
Application of a Child Suspected of a Disability, Appeal No. 91-6. I find the SRO in Application of a Child with a Disability, Appeal No. 10-057 held compensatory educational relief in the form of supplemental special education or related services has been awarded to such students if there has been a denial of FAPE. I found that no FAPE was provided to for the 2015-2016 and it was undisputed that was entitled to compensatory service for the missed services for the 20150-2016 school year.
ORDER
Therefore, it is hereby ordered that the DOE shall pay for following: (1) hours of and (2) hours of from a provider at the enhanced rate not to exceed per hour. The hours of and hours of is to be provided to the parent beyond the 2015- 2016 year until the hours are used and this order is in effect until June 30, 2018.
Dated: May 23, 2016
Lind
a Agost
on, Esq.
LINDA AGOSTON, ESQ.
Impartial Hearing Officer LA:
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 ON APRIL 19 2016
1 Decision on Extension, 4/19/16, 1 p. IHO
DOCUMENTATION ENTERED INTO THE RECORD ON MAY 13 2016
A Impartial Hearing Request, 2/11/16, 2 pp. Parent