Decisions

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 portion of a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied, in part, his requested relief for respondent's (the district's) failure to offer his son an appropriate program for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

Appeal Withdrawn

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 the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which determined that respondent (the district) offered their son appropriate educational programming and denied their request for direct funding of their son's tuition costs at the Gersh Academy (Gersh) for the 2022-23 and 2023-24 school years.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

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 the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied, in part, their request that respondent (the district) fund the costs of services delivered to their daughter by Kids Domain Childcare Center (Kids Domain) at a specified rate for the 2023-24 school year.  The district cross-appeals from the IHO's determination that the parents were entitled to an award of compensatory education.  The appeal must be dismissed.  The cross-appeal must be sustained in part.

Appeal Withdrawn

Appeal Withdrawn

Appeal Withdrawn

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 district) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which awarded respondent (the parent) a nonpublic school placement for her son, funding of related services, and funding of a physical therapy (PT) evaluation.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

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 to be reimbursed for her son's tuition costs at the Hamaspik School (Hamaspik) for the 2021-22 school year.  The appeal must be sustained.

Appeal Withdrawn

Appeal Withdrawn

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 district) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which found that it failed to offer an appropriate educational program to respondent's (the parent's) son and ordered it to fund four hours per week of special education teacher support services (SETSS) to be provided to the student for the 2023-24 school year.   The appeal must be sustained in part.

Appeal Withdrawn

Appeal Withdrawn

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 for an order regarding transportation services for her son for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be dismissed.

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 the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which, among other determinations, found that respondent (the district) did not violate its child find obligations, and denied the parents' request to be reimbursed for their daughter's tuition costs at the Staten Island Academy (SIA) for the 2020-21, 2021-22, and 2022-23 school years.  The appeal must be dismissed.

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 the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied their request to be reimbursed for their son's tuition costs at the Beit Rabban Day School (Beit Rabban) for the 2021-22 and 2022-23 school years.  Respondent (the district) cross-appeals from the IHO's determination that equitable considerations favored reimbursement and from the IHO's award of compensatory educational services.  The appeal must be sustained.  The cross-appeal must be dismissed.

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 district) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which awarded the parent monetary compensation for lost wages she incurred due to the district's failure to provide the student with adequate transportation for the 2022-23 school year.  The appeal must be sustained.

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, in part, her request for relief for respondent's (the district's) failure to offer the student an appropriate educational program for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

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 those portions of a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied, in part, her request for direct funding for special transportation services for the 2023-24 school year.  Respondent (the district) cross-appeals from the IHO's determination that the parent's unilateral placement of her daughter at the International Academy for the Brain (iBrain) was an appropriate placement and ordered it to fund the student's tuition costs at iBrain for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be sustained.  The cross-appeal must be dismissed.