Special Education Hearing Officer


Child’s Name: T.R.

Date of Birth: redacted

Dates of Hearing: 8/4/2014, 9/22/2014, 9/24/2014, 11/3/2014, 11/7/2014, 11/10/2014, 11/12/2014, 1/21/2015, 1/22/2015, 1/23/2015, 1/26/2015, 1/27/2015, 1/28/2015, 1/30/2015, 2/23/2015, 2/27/2015, 3/17/2015, 3/23/2015, 3/25/2015, 3/26/2015, 3/31/2015, 4/6/2015 and 4/7/2015


ODR File No. 15181-13-14

Parties to the Hearing:

Parents Parent[s]

Local Education Agency Philadelphia City School District Office of General Counsel Philadelphia, PA 19130


Parent Attorney
Sonja Kerr Esq.
Public Interest Law Center
1709 Benjamin Franklin Parkway, 2nd Floor Philadelphia , PA 19103
215-627-7100 x 229

LEA Attorney
Sarah Davis Esq.
Fox Rothschild LLP, 10 Sentry Parkway Suite 200, PO Box 3001
Blue Bell, PA 19422-3001 610-397-3924

Date Record Closed: May 4, 2015

Date of Decision: May 26, 2015

Hearing Officer: Brian Ford, Esquire


This matter arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), 34 C.F.R. Part 104.4. It is the companion to the case at ODR No. 15166-1314KE. Both hearings were heard together.

The Parent, who speaks [a language other than English], alleges that the District violated the Parent’s right to meaningfully participate in meetings concerning the provision of FAPE to the Student. The Parent also alleges that the District failed to implement an IEP that carried over from the Student’s prior charter school enrollment, failed to properly evaluate the Student, incorrectly identified the Student as a student with an intellectual disability, and failed to offer an appropriate program and placement for the Student.


  1. Did the District seriously infringe upon the Parent’s meaningful parental participation in the IEP Process, by its failure to provide her with vital IEP documents and other school documents in [her native language] and in a timely manner?
  2. Did the District deny the Student a free and appropriate public education during the 2013-14 and/or 2014-15 school year by its overall by failing to implement the Student’s IEP?
  3. Did the District err in identifying the Student as having an Intellectual Disability and propose an inappropriate and unspecified out of district placement in June, 2014?
  4. What placement is currently appropriate for the Student?

Leave a Reply