BC vs. School District Pocono Mountain

This is a redacted version of the original decision. Select details have been removed from the
decision to preserve anonymity of the student. The redactions do not affect the substance of
the document.

Pennsylvania
Special Education Hearing Officer

DECISION

ODR No. 00743-0910AS

Child’s Name: BC

Date of Birth:
xx/xx/xxxx

Date of Hearing: 4/12/10

CLOSED HEARING

Parties to the Hearing:

Parents

School District Pocono Mountain P.O. Box 200 Swiftwater, PA 18370

Representative:

Parent Attorney Pro Se

School District Attorney Rebecca A. Young, Esq.
King, Spry, LLC
1 West Broad Street, Suite 700, Bethlehem PA 18018

Date Record Closed: April 16, 2010

Date of Decision: May 1, 2010

Hearing Officer: Anne L. Carroll, Esq.

INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The hearing in this matter concerned (Student), an IDEA eligible Pocono Mountain School District (hereinafter District) resident who reenrolled in the District for his senior year in August 2009 after several years in other educational placements.

In a due process complaint submitted in February 2010, Parent asserted denial of FAPE claims based upon the lack of a behavior plan from the beginning of the current school year and the adequacy of the transition services provided by the District. Parent’s complaint also raised issues concerning the District’s past conduct toward Student and Parent, and concerning past, present and future expenditures of funds for equipment and services requested as compensatory education pursuant to due process hearing decisions issued in 2003 and 2004. In accordance with the 2004 order requiring the District to initiate a due process hearing if it refuses Parents’ request for payment/reimbursement for equipment and/or services selected by Parents as part of the compensatory education to which Student is entitled, the District submitted a counterclaim seeking an order that it need not provide the computer. In a preliminary ruling outlining the issues for the hearing, this procedure was deemed sufficient to fulfill the provision of the 2004 order requiring the District to seek a due process hearing if it denies a parental request for compensatory services. At the hearing, Parent also requested an order that the District pay for a fitness center membership for Student.

The hearing was conducted in a single session on April 12. For the reasons that follow, Parents’ FAPE claims are denied; the District will be directed to purchase a computer before Student enters college, but need take no further action concerning the fitness center membership. A time limit is also placed on the use of the compensatory education award.

ISSUES

  1. Did the Pocono Mountain School District deny Student a free, appropriate
    public education during the 2009/2010 school year by failing to provide him with

    1. an appropriate behavior support plan and/or
    2. appropriate transition services?
  2. Is the District required to provide Student with
    compensatory education services pursuant to prior due process hearing orders by paying for

    1. a computer system
    2. a one year membership at fitness center identified by Student Mother in April 2009?
BC-Pocono-Mountain-ODRNo-00743-0910AS

Leave a Reply

Pennsylvania

Montgomery Law, LLC
1420 Locust Street, Suite 420
Philadelphia, PA 19102
T/F. 215-650-7563

Rate By
SUPER LAWYERS
Joseph W Montgomery, II

New Jersey

Historic Smithville, Suite 1
1 N. New York Road
Galloway, NJ 08205
(all mail to Phila. office)
T. 856-282-5550

Disclaimer: Montgomery Law, LLC does not give legal advice until after it has entered into an attorney-client relationship. No part of this website creates an attorney-client relationship. All Parts of this website are Attorney Advertising. The photos and videos on this website contain portrayals of clients by non-clients, re-enactment of scenes, pictures and persons which are not actual or authentic and depictions which are a dramatization.