Special Education Hearing Officer


Child’s Name: B.L.

Date of Birth: [redacted]

Dates of Hearing:

August 23, 2016 September 7, 2016


ODR Cases #17920-1516AS

Parties to the Hearing: Parent[s]

Owen J. Roberts School District 3650 St. Peters Road
Elverson, PA 19520

Representative: Pro Se

Sharon Montanye, Esquire 331 East Butler Avenue New Britain, PA 18901

Date of Decision: September 30, 2016

Hearing Officer: Michael J. McElligott, Esquire


[Student] (“student”)1 is [a mid-teenaged] student residing in the Owen J. Roberts School District (“District”) who has been identified as a student with a disability under the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Improvement Act of 2004 (“IDEIA”)2. The student has been identified under the terms of IDEIA as a student with an intellectual disability, autism, and speech/language impairment.

On June 6, 2016, the student’s individualized education program (“IEP”) team met to consider the results and recommendations of an independent educational evaluation (“IEE”) issued in May 2016. As a result of that meeting, parents filed a special education due process complaint, alleging that the parents were denied an opportunity for meaningful participation at the June 6, 2016 IEP team meeting and that events thereafter which led to the revision of the student’s IEP did not accurately and/or comprehensively address the results of the IEP team meeting.

For the reasons set forth below, I find that the parents were not denied meaningful participation in the events surrounding the June 6, 2016 IEP team meeting. I will, however, order that the IEP team re- convene under certain conditions for further consideration of the student’s educational programming.


Were the student’s parents denied meaningful participation at the June 6, 2016 IEP meeting?


Leave a Reply