BS vs. Bethlehem Area School District

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
Student’s Name: B.S.
Date of Birth: [redacted]
ODR No. 15237-14-15-AS
CLOSED HEARING

Parties to the Hearing:

Parent[s]

Bethlehem Area School District 1516 Sycamore Street Bethlehem, PA 18017

Representative:

Elizabeth J. Kapo, Esquire 2123 Pinehurst Road Bethlehem, PA 18018

Kristine Roddick, Esquire Timothy E. Gilsbach, Esquire King Spry Herman Freund & Faul, LLC
One West Broad Street, Suite 700 Bethlehem, PA 18018

Dates of Hearing: September 16, 2014, September 29, 2014, October 3, 2014,
October 9, 2014, October 17, 2014, October 30, 2014
Record Closed: November 24, 2014
Date of Decision: December 9, 2014
Hearing Officer: William F. Culleton, Jr., Esq., CHO

 

INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The Student named in the title page of this decision (Student) is an eligible resident of the school district named in the title page of this decision (District). (NT 14-15.) The District has identified Student with Autism, Intellectual Disability and Speech or Language Impairment. (NT 33; J 23.) Parents assert that the District has failed to offer or provide to the Student a free appropriate public education (FAPE), as required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §1401 et seq. (IDEA), and the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U. S. C. §794 et seq. Parents request compensatory education from the first day of school for kindergarten students in August 2012 through October 30, 2014.

The District asserts that it offered a FAPE during all relevant times and requests that the hearing officer so find.

The hearing was concluded in six sessions. The parties submitted written summations, and the record closed upon receipt of those summations. I conclude that the District has offered and provided a FAPE to Student.

ISSUES

1. During the period from the first day of school for kindergarten students in August 2012 through October 30, 2014, did the District fail to offer to, or provide Student with, a FAPE, in violation of the IDEA and section 504?

2. Should the hearing officer order the District to provide compensatory education to Student for all or any part of the period from the first day of school for kindergarten students in August 2012 through October 30, 2014?

3. Did the District offer to Parents an appropriate IEP for the 2014-2015 school year?

4. Should the hearing officer order the District to conduct a Functional Behavioral Assessment and an Assistive Technology Assessment, as well as to offer a new IEP, including a Positive Behavior Support Plan, for Student consistent with the findings and conclusions set forth in this decision?

 

B-S-Bethlehem-Area-ODRNo-15237-14-15-AS

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.