CB vs. Downingtown 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
ODR No. 3242-1112 KE

Child’s Name: C.B.
Date of Birth: [redacted]

Dates of Hearing: 6/21/12

CLOSED HEARING

Parties to the Hearing:

Parent Parent

School District
Downingtown Area
540 Trestle Place Downingtown, PA 19335-2643

Representative:

Parent Parent

School District Attorney
Sharon Montanye, Esquire
Sweet, Stevens, Katz & Williams LLP 331 Butler Avenue
P.O. Box 5069
New Britain, PA 18901

Date Record Closed: June 26, 2012

Date of Decision: July 7, 2012

Hearing Officer: Anne L. Carroll, Esq.

INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The parties to this case agree that Student, who is enrolled in a District middle school, is eligible for both special education and ESY services.

On June 7, 2012 Parents filed a due process complaint to challenge the District’s offer of an ESY program for this summer, contending that Student’s participation in the same type of ESY program in 2011 was academically unsuccessful and socially/emotionally inappropriate because Student was bullied in that program. Based upon their interpretation of a recently completed private evaluation report, Parents are seeking an order requiring the District to fund Student’s participation in a private school summer program that provides one to one reading instruction with Orton-Gillingham methods.

The due process hearing was conducted in one brief session on June 21. In accordance with the findings of fact and discussion below, Parents’ request that the District fund a private ESY program is denied for several reasons: 1) The evidence in the record does not establish that the District’s proposed ESY program is inappropriate for Student; 2) there is considerable evidence that the District’s proposal will support language and social skills needs identified in all current evaluations of Student, including Parents’ recently procured independent neuropsychological evaluation, and will meet Student’s needs in reading; 3) the private program sought by Parents provides only reading instruction and does not directly address Student’s language, social skills an behavior needs.

ISSUES

1. Is the ESY program the School District proposed for the summer of 2012 appropriate for Student? 1

2. If not, should the School District be required to fund the private school summer program selected by Parents?

 

C-B-Downingtown-Area-ODRNo-3242-1112-KE

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.