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 district) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which ordered it to fund the respondent's (the parent's) son's private services delivered by AIM Educational Support Services (AIM) for the 2023-24 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 district) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which ordered it to fund the costs of respondent (the parent's) daughter's private special education services delivered by Empowered Kids for Success (Empowered) for the 2023-24 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.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which found that respondent (the district) offered their son a free appropriate public education (FAPE) and denied the parents' request for tuition funding at the Brooklyn Autism Center (BAC) for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be sustained in part and remanded for further proceedings.

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 a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which ordered it to fund the costs of respondent (the parent's) daughter's private special education services delivered by AIM Further, Inc. (AIM) for the 2023-24 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 district) appeals from a 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 compensatory education and other relief related to the 2022-23 school year.  The appeal must be sustained in part.

Appeal Withdrawn

Appeal Withdrawn

File Administratively Closed

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) fund the costs of the services delivered to her son by Always a Step Ahead, Inc. (Step Ahead) at specified rates 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.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) fund the costs of the services delivered to her daughter by Always a Step Ahead, Inc. (Step Ahead) at specified rates for the 2023-24 school year.  The district cross-appeals from the IHO's findings related to equitable considerations.  The appeal must be dismissed.  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 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 special education services delivered by Grow with Us, LLC (Grow with Us) 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.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from a decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied her request that respondent (the district) fund the unilaterally obtained services delivered to her son for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be sustained and the matter remanded for further proceedings.

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) daughter and ordered it to reimburse the parent for the tuition and transportation costs associated with the student's unilateral placement at the International Academy for the Brain (iBrain) for the 2023-24 school year.  The parent cross-appeals from the IHO's failure to address issues raised in the due process complaint notice.  The appeal must be sustained in part.  The cross-appeal must be dismissed.

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) issued after remand which denied her request that respondent (the district) fund the costs of her daughter's privately-obtained special education services delivered by Benchmark Student Services LLC (Benchmark) for the 2022-23 school year and denied, in part, her request for compensatory education.  Respondent (the district) cross-appeals from that portion of the IHO's decision which ordered it to reevaluate the student and convene a Committee on Special Education (CSE).  The appeal must be sustained.  The cross-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.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which denied their request for full payment of the costs of their daughter's tuition at Reach for the Stars for the 2022-23 school year.  Respondent (the district) cross-appeals from the IHO's determination that it failed to demonstrate that it offered the student a free appropriate public education (FAPE) for the 2022-23 school year.  The appeal must be dismissed.  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 ordered it to reimburse the respondent (the parents) or directly fund their daughter's special education services provided by Alpha Student Support (Alpha) during the 2023-24 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.  Petitioners (the parents) appeal from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which found that respondent (the district) offered their son appropriate educational programming and denied their request to be reimbursed for their son's tuition costs at the Bay Ridge Preparatory School (Bay Ridge) for the 2022-23 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.  Petitioner (the parent) appeals from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which determined that the related services respondent's (the district's) Committee on Special Education (CSE) recommended for his son for the 2023-24 school year were appropriate and which denied the parent's request that the district fund the costs of her son's privately-obtained special education services delivered by Kids Domain Childcare Center (Kids Domain).  The district cross-appeals from that portion of the IHO's decision which ordered the district to fund a bank of compensatory educational services for the student for the 2023-24 and 2024-25 school years.  The appeal must be sustained.  The cross-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 parents) appeal from the decision of an impartial hearing officer (IHO) which determined that respondent (the district) offered appropriate educational programming to their son and denied their request to be reimbursed for their son's tuition costs at the Stephen Gaynor School (Stephen Gaynor) for the 2023-24 school year.  The appeal must be dismissed.