Pennsylvania
Special Education Hearing Officer

DECISION

Child’s Name: R.C.

Date of Birth: [redacted]

ODR No. 13124-12-13-AS

CLOSED HEARING

Parties to the Hearing: Parent

School District of Philadelphia 440 North Broad Street, Suite 313 Philadelphia, PA 19130

Representative: Pro Se

Judith Baskin, Esquire
Office of General Counsel
School District of Philadelphia 440 North Broad Street, Suite 313 Philadelphia, PA 19130

Dates of Hearing: November 1, 2012; November 7, 2012

Record Closed: November 7, 2012

Date of Decision: November 13, 2012

Hearing Officer: William F. Culleton, Esquire, CHO

INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The child named in the title page of this decision (Student) is an eligible student enrolled in the District named in the title page of this decision (District). (NT 10.) Student is placed in an alternative disciplinary setting. Parent appeals the District’s manifestation determination concerning Student’s violation of the District’s Student Code of Conduct, and its decision to place Student in an alternate school for disciplinary reasons, pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §1401 et seq. (IDEA). The District asserts that the Student’s behavior was not a manifestation of Student’s identified disability, and that its plan to transfer Student to the alternate setting is appropriate.

The hearing was concluded in two sessions on an expedited basis, and the record closed at the second session. I conclude that the District’s manifestation determination and placement decision were appropriate under the IDEA.

ISSUES

1. Was the District’s manifestation determination appropriate?

2. Was the District’s decision to transfer Student to an alternative school for disciplinary reasons appropriate?

R-C-School-District-of-Philadelphia-ODRNo-13124-12-13-AS

Leave a Reply