Special Education Hearing Officer
ODR No. 00007-0910KE
Child’s Name: S.L.
Date of Birth: [redacted]
Dates of Hearing: 5/12/11, 7/6/11
Parties to the Hearing:
301 E. Montgomery Avenue Ardmore, PA 19003-3338
Benjamin Geffen, Esq.
Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia
1709 Benjamin Franklin Parkway, 2nd Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
School District Attorney
Gail Weilhimer, Esq.
Wisler, Pearlstine, LLP
484 Norristown Road, Suite 100 Blue Bell, PA 19422
Date Record Closed: July 21, 2011
Date of Decision: August 10, 2011
Hearing Officer: Anne L. Carroll, Esq.
INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The sole substantive issue for decision in this case is whether the School District should have provided an independent educational evaluation (IEE) for Student in the fall of 2009 pursuant to Parents’ due process complaint.1 The complaint was initially dismissed based upon the IDEA regulations specifying how Parents may obtain an IEE at public expense.
Upon appeal to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the dismissal was reversed, requiring a hearing to determine the appropriateness of the District’s initial evaluation of Student during the 2008/2009 school year. The hearing was conducted over 2 sessions in May and July 2011. For the reasons that follow, the District’s initial evaluation was appropriate and yielded accurate results, justifying the District’s substantive conclusion that Student was not IDEA eligible. In addition, since Student graduated from high school before the conclusion of the hearing in this matter, no IDEA remedy could properly be awarded at this time. Parents’ request for an IEE is, therefore, denied.
Was the School District’s initial evaluation of Student during the 2008/2009 school year appropriate, and if not, is the District required to fund an independent educational evaluation of Student at this time?S-L-Lower-Merion-ODRNo-00007-0910KE