MP vs. Unionville-Chadds Ford School District

PENNSYLVANIA
Special Education Hearing Officer

M.P., 6667 /05-06 KE

Name/File Number

[redacted] Date of Birth

8/9/06, 9/6/06, 9/21/06, 10/3/06, 10/5/06, 11/1/06, 11/29/06, 1/3/07

Dates of Hearing

Open
Type of Hearing

Parties to the Hearing: Parent[s]

Parent(s) Name(s)

Unionville-Chadds Ford School District

740 Unionville Road
Kennett Square, PA 19348-1531 School District Address

Dr. John Kenney
School District Superintendent

Anne E. Hendricks, Esq.
Levin Legal Group
1402 Mason Mills Business Park 1800 Byberry Road
Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006 School District Counsel & Address

Vivian Narehood, Esq.

Gibbel, Kraybill & Hess

41 East Orange Street

Lancaster, PA 17602 Parent Attorney & Address

01/09/07

Date Transcript Received

Date Record Closed

03/08/07

Date of Decision

Anne L. Carroll, Esq. Hearing Officer Name

I. BACKGROUND

[Student] is [an elementary school-aged] student in the Unionville Chadds Ford School District. [Student] had significant medical problems from infancy and began manifesting language and other developmental delays in the middle of [Student’s] second year. Pursuant to an early childhood diagnosis of Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD), [Student] received early intervention services. [Student] transitioned to school age IDEA eligibility while [Student] was enrolled in kindergarten in the [redacted] School District, which [Student] repeated due to a high number of absences during [Student’s] first year because of medical issues. In the middle of the 2004/2005 school year, when [Student] was in first grade, [Student’s] family moved to [redacted] County and the School District.

[Student] has had numerous psycho-educational, neurological, language and behavioral evaluations, both before and after enrolling in [the School District], some obtained privately by [Student’s] Parents and others provided by various public agencies, including an IEE requested by the Parents, approved by the School District and completed in May 2006. The results of all evaluations are consistent in detailing [Student]’s significant academic, social, language and behavioral needs, which persist despite the interventions [Student] receives in all areas, including the services of a TSS at home and in school, as well as a classroom aide. (Prior to the current school year, different persons provided those services, but the functions of both have now been combined in one person who assists [Student] with both academic and behavioral issues in school and at home).

By the end of the 2005/2006 school year, [Student]’s Parents became dissatisfied with [Student’s] progress toward the academic, social, behavioral and language goals in [Student’s] IEP, and such dissatisfaction crystallized over the School District’s refusal to provide their preferred ESY program for [Student]. When they filed the instant due process hearing to seek payment for the ESY program they had selected, they also wanted a full hearing on all of the problems they had identified with [Student]’s program and placement. Since it was not possible to compile a full record in this case within the time constraints of an expedited hearing, the parties agreed that the ESY issue would be treated as a tuition reimbursement claim and decided along with past and current program/placement issues.

III. ISSUES

  1. Did the School District provide [Student] with an appropriate educational program and placement, including related services sufficient in type and amount to assist [Student] in making reasonable educational progress in the areas of reading/language arts, math, speech, behavior and social skills at all times since [Student] enrolled in the District in January 2005?
  2. Is [Student] entitled to compensatory education for any period and if so, in which area(s), how much, and in what form(s)?
  3. Did the School District offer [Student] an appropriate educational program and placement for the 2006/2007 school year?
  4. Should the School District be required to develop an autistic support program within the District in order to meet [Student]’s special education program/placement/related service needs?
  5. Did the School District offer [Student] an appropriate ESY program for the summer of 2006?
  6. If not, are [Student]’s Parents entitled to reimbursement for the ESY program they selected and paid for during the summer of 2006?
M-P-Unionville-Chadds-Ford-ODRNo-6667-05-06-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.