LC vs. School District of Philadelphia

PENNSYLVANIA
SPECIAL EDUCATION HEARING OFFICER

DECISION
DUE PROCESS HEARING

Name of Child: LC

ODR #5713/05-06 KE

Date of Birth: xx/xx/xx

Dates of Hearing:

November 1, 2005 December 21, 2005

CLOSED HEARING

Parties to the Hearing: Parent

School District of Philadelphia 440 N. Broad Street, 3rd Floor Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19130

Representative:

Frederick Stanczak, Esquire
179 North Broad Street Doylestown, Pennsylvania 18901

Kenneth Cooper, Esquire
Office of General Counsel School District of Philadelphia 440 N. Broad Street 3rd Floor Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19130

Date Transcript Received and Record Closed: December 28, 20051

Date of Decision: January 15, 20062

Hearing Officer: Linda M. Valentini, Psy.D.

Background

Student is a xx-year-old young woman who graduated from a School District of Philadelphia (hereinafter District) high school in June 2004. From kindergarten on Student has been identified as an eligible student with learning disabilities in need of learning support. Ms. [redacted] Student’s mother (hereinafter Parent) asserts that Student has never been provided with a free appropriate public education (FAPE), specifically in the areas of reading and mathematics, during the entire time Student was a student in the District. The Parent also asserts that Student was not provided with an appropriate transition plan from the time Student turned 16 years old, and that this is a detriment to Student at the present time. The Parent requests compensatory education for the two-year period prior to her original filing for due process in April 2005, in accord with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA).

The District asserts that it provided Student with special education programs designed to meet Student’s needs and that Student made “steady progress although …not substantial progress” (NT 13). The District also asserts that it provided Student with a vocational program in high school to aid Student‘s transition. Should the hearing officer find that compensatory education is due, the District asks that a one-year limitation period back from April 2005 be imposed given that the District and the Parent agreed to honor that filing date, and the recovery period at that time under Montour School District v. S. T., 805 A.2d 29, 40 (Commw. Ct. 2002) was one year absent mitigating circumstances.

Issues

  1. Did the District offer Student a free appropriate public education in the area of reading?
  2. Did the District offer Student a free appropriate public education in the area of mathematics?
  3. Did the District offer Student a free appropriate public education in the area of transition planning?
  4. If the School District did not offer Student a free appropriate public education in any of the above areas, is Student entitled to compensatory education and in what amount?
LC-School-District-of-Philadelphia-ODRNo-5713-05-06-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.