HEARING OFFICER DECISION/ORDER
CHILD’S NAME: J.N.
PITTSBURGH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT (ODR FILE NO. 6765/06-07 KE)
Date of Birth: [REDACTED]
Type of Hearing: Closed
Dates of Hearing: 8/ 31/2006; 8/14/2006; 9/15/2006
I. PARTIES TO THE HEARING
PARENTS:
[REDACTED]
PARENTS’ REPRESENTATIVE:
Pamela Berger, Esquire
312 Blvd. of the Allies, Suite 600 Pittsburgh, PA 15222
DISTRICT CONTACT:
Pittsburgh City School District 341 S. Bellefield Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3516
DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE:
Jocelyn M. Perry, Esquire
503 Ft. Pitt Commons Building 445 Ft. Pitt Blvd.
Pittsburgh PA 15219
DATE TRANSCRIPT RECEIVED:
September 19, 2006
HEARING OFFICER:
Dorothy J. O’Shea, Ph.D.
___________________
Signature: Hearing Officer
September 28, 2006
Date of Decision/Order
HEARING OFFICER DECISION/ORDER
CHILD’S NAME: J.N.
PITTSBURGH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT (ODR FILE NO. 6765/06-07 KE)
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Student was an [REDACTED] year old, eligible student during the 2005-2006 school year. On June 13, 2006, [REDACTED] (i.e., Student’s Parents) made a due process hearing request, alleging that Student did not receive proper supervision and management, and suffered repeated injuries at the [REDACTED] (here-in-after “Institute”). Based on a Pittsburgh City School District (i.e., District) recommendation and Parental approval, Student attended Institute from 2002 until the start of the 2006-2007 school year. The Parents opined that Student did not make appropriate progress while at Institute during the 2004-2005 school year. Further, the Parents contended that Student’s 2003 reevaluation report (ER), (i.e., his operational ER during the 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 school years), was insufficient in scope and information to support appropriate programming (Hearing Officer Exhibit 4, pages 26-29: HO 4, 26-29).
IV. ISSUES
The parties agreed to the hearing issues on the record (NT 23):
- Was Student improperly supervised and monitored, and repeatedly injured at Institute?
- Did Student make inappropriate progress in the 2004-2005 school year?
-
Was the 2003 reevaluation insufficient in scope and information to support programming through the 2004-2005 IEPs and the 2005-2006 IEPs?