Advance Decisions Search
(* = Appeal Withdrawn)
24-337
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioners (the parents) appeal from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied, in part, their request for compensatory education services and home-based applied behavior analysis (ABA) services for the 2023-24 school year. The Respondent (district) cross-appeals alleging that the IHO should have further reduced or denied relief in the form of a prospective placement and home-based ABA services. The appeal must be sustained in part. The cross-appeal must be dismissed.

24-336
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which dismissed her due process complaint notice regarding respondent's (the district's) provision of special education services to her daughter for the 2023-24 school year with prejudice. The appeal must be sustained.

24-335
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which dismissed her due process complaint notice regarding respondent's (the district's) provision of special education services to her daughter for the 2023-24 school year with prejudice. The appeal must be sustained.

24-334
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which dismissed her due process complaint notice regarding respondent's (the district's) provision of special education services to her daughter for the 2023-24 school year with prejudice. The appeal must be sustained.

24-333
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which dismissed her due process complaint notice regarding respondent's (the district's) provision of special education services to her son for the 2023-24 school year with prejudice. The appeal must be sustained.

24-332
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which dismissed with prejudice her request that respondent (the district) fund the costs of her son's tuition at the Yeled v'Yalda School (Yaled) for the 2023-24 school year. The appeal must be sustained.

24-331
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which dismissed her due process complaint notice regarding respondent's (the district's) provision of special education services to her daughter for the 2023-24 school year with prejudice. The appeal must be sustained.

24-330
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which dismissed her due process complaint notice regarding respondent's (the district's) provision of special education services to her daughter for the 2023-24 school year with prejudice. The appeal must be sustained.

24-329
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from that portion of a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied in part her request that respondent (the district) fund her daughter's unilaterally obtained services from EDopt, LLC (EDopt) for the 2023-24 school year. The district cross-appeals from those portions of the IHO's decision that found that the unilateral services from EDopt were appropriate and that equitable considerations favored the parent. The appeal must be dismissed. The cross-appeal must be dismissed.

24-328
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request for direct funding of her son's unilaterally obtained special education teacher support services (SETSS) delivered by Higher Level Education Resources, LLC (HLER) at an enhanced hourly rate for the 2023-24 school year. The appeal must be sustained in part.

24-327 *
24-326
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) reimburse her for the cost of her son's attendance at Reach for the Stars Learning Center (RFTS-LC) for the 2023-24 school year. The appeal must be dismissed.

24-325
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioners (the parents) appeal from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied their request that respondent (the district) fund the full costs of their son's private services delivered by Perspective Applied Behavioral Analysis, PLLC (Perspective ABA) for the 2024-25 school year and to fund compensatory education at enhanced rates. The district cross-appeals the amount of compensatory education awarded to the parent by the IHO. The appeal must be sustained in part. The cross-appeal must be dismissed.

24-324
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) reimburse the parent for her son's tuition costs at the Vincent Smith School (Vincent Smith) for services delivered during the extended (12-month) 2022-23 school year. The appeal must be sustained in part.

24-323
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) issued after remand, which denied in part her request that the district directly fund the costs of her son's tuition at the International Academy for the Brain (iBrain) and related expenses for the 2023-24 school year. The district cross-appeals from that portion of the IHO's decision that ordered the district to directly fund a portion of the student's tuition at iBrain for the 2023-24 school year. The appeal must be dismissed. The cross-appeal must be dismissed.

24-322
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioners (the parents) appeal from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied their request for funding by respondent (the district) for the full costs of their son's services provided by Reach for the Stars (RFTS) during the 2023-24 school year. The appeal must be sustained.

24-321
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) fund the costs of her daughter's private services delivered by Tachlis Ed Services, LLC (Tachlis) for the 2023-24 school year. The district cross-appeals from those portions of the IHO's decision which ordered it to conduct evaluations of the student and which dismissed the parent's request for compensatory education without prejudice. The appeal must be sustained. The cross-appeal must be sustained in part.

24-320 *
24-318
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioners (the parents) appeal from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which found that respondent (the district) offered their daughter appropriate educational programming and denied their request for reimbursement of their daughter's tuition costs at The Windward School (Windward) for the 2023-24 school year. The appeal must be dismissed.

24-317
This proceeding arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. §§ 1400-1482) and Article 89 of the New York State Education Law. Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) to the extent it did not order the full costs under the parent's contracts for transportation services from Sisters Travel and Transportation Services, LLC (Sisters Travel) and nursing services from B&H Health Care, Inc. (B&H Health Care) for the 2023-24 school year. The district cross-appeals from that portion of the IHO's decision which found that it failed to offer an appropriate educational program to the student and ordered it to reimburse the parent for her daughter's tuition costs at iBrain for the 2023-24 school year and other related costs. The appeal must be sustained. The cross-appeal must be sustained in part.
