CD vs. Bethel Park 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.

IN THE PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Final Decision and Order
ODR File No. 2330-1112AS

OPEN HEARING

Child’s Name: C.D.1
Date of Birth: [redacted]

Hearing Dates: 11/21/2011, 01/30/2012

Parties to the Hearing

Parents

Bethel Park School District 301 Church Road
Bethel Park, PA 15102

Representative

Pamela E. Burger, Esquire 434 Grace Street Pittsburgh, PA 15211

Michael L. Brungo, Esquire Maiello, Brungo & Maiello, LLP 3301 McCrady Road Pittsburgh, PA 15217

Record Closed: March 2, 2012
Date of Decision: March 2, 2012
Hearing Officer: Brian Jason Ford

Introduction

The Parents requested the instant due process hearing pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, as amended 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (IDEA). They allege that the Bethel Park School District (District) has violated the Student’s right to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). Specifically, the Parents allege that the Student’s individualized education programs (IEPs) have not provided the type of social skills training and behavioral interventions that the Student requires. The Parents also claim that the Student’s IEPs were not reasonably calculated to ensure that the Student could make meaningful educational progress in academic areas – and that meaningful progress was, in fact, not made.

For reasons detailed below, this Hearing Officer determines that the District has not provided the social skills training and behavioral supports that the Student needs, and that the District has not provided appropriate Math instruction leading to a denial of FAPE in that particular area. Remedies are awarded to correct these particular denials.

Issues

1. Was the Student denied FAPE from September 14, 2009 through the present?

2. Has the District offered an appropriate IEP to the Student?

The Parents argue that both questions should be answered in the negative, and demand compensatory education and an independent FBA. The District argues that both questions should be answered in the affirmative and that no remedy is owed.

 

C-D-Bethel-Park-ODRNo-2330-1112AS

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.