- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 Divisions
  Overview
  Academic Policy & Innovation
  Accountability, Assessment, and Data Systems
  Career and College Readiness
  Communications, Partnerships, and Grants
  Curriculum, Assessment & Accountability
  Educator Effectiveness
  Early Childhood Development
  Finance
  Information Technology
  Library Services
  Office of the State Superintendent
  Rehabilitation Services
  Special Education and Early Intervention
     Overview
     Individuals With Disabilities Education Act
     Information
     Early Intervention and Preschool Special Education
     Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004
     Mod-HSA Procedures and Processes
     Interagency Rates
     Upcoming Events
     Fact Sheets
     Family Support and Dispute Resolution Branch
        Hearing Decisions
           2010
           2011
           2012
              Due Process Hearing Decisions - FY12 - 2nd Quarter
        Complaint Letters
     IDEA
     State Interagency Coordinating Council
     Policy and Accountability Branch
     Interagency Collaboration Branch
     Specialized Services Branch
     Resource Management and Monitoring Branch
     Programmatic Support and Technical Assistance
  Student, Family, and School Support
Divisions
Divisions > Special Education and Early Intervention > Family Support and Dispute Resolution Branch > Hearing Decisions > 2012
Due Process Hearing Decisions - FY12 - 1st Quarter

(July 1, 2011 - September 30, 2011)

In cases where MSDE has been informed that a hearing decision is being appealed in accordance with Section 615(i) of IDEA 2004, an asterisk (*) is placed next to the OAH Case #.  The civil or district court number of the case is provided when available.
Public Agency OAH Case #
______________
Decision Date
Hearing Requested By Issues
Anne Arundel County Public Schools
11-H-AARU-10459 7/15/2011 Parent/Guardian Nonpublic Placement/Tuition Reimbursement
Decision Summary
____________

The ALJ concluded that AACPS was able to implement the student’s IEP during the 2009-2010 school year and that the placement proposed by the school system for the 2010-2011 school year would provide the student with a FAPE.  As a result, the ALJ concluded that the parents are not entitled to reimbursement for their unilateral placement.


Public Agency OAH Case #
______________
Decision Date
Hearing Requested By Issues
Baltimore County
Public Schools
11-H-BCNY-22519 8/11/2011 Parent/Guardian IEP Development/Review/Revision, Placement/LRE
Decision Summary
____________

The ALJ concluded that the IEP proposed by BCPS for the 2011-2012 school year offered the student a FAPE in the least restrictive environment and therefore denied the parent’s request for the student to be assigned to another public school.


Public Agency OAH Case #
______________
Decision Date
Hearing Requested By Issues
Frederick County
Public Schools

11-H-FRED-14997

8/23/2011 Parent/Guardian Identification/Evaluation/Reevaluation, Placement, Tuition and transportation reimbursement
Decision Summary
____________

The ALJ concluded that the IEP implemented by FCPS for the 2009-2010 school year did not provide the student with a FAPE and that, as a result, the parents were entitled to reimbursement of tuition for their unilateral placement of the student.  However, the ALJ further concluded that the parents were not entitled to reimbursement for the travel expenses they incurred in transporting the student to school and were not entitled to the prospective placement of the student. 


Public Agency OAH Case #
______________
Decision Date
Hearing Requested By Issues
Montgomery County
Public Schools
11-H-MONT-16691 08/09/2011 Parent/Guardian IEP Development/Review/Revision, Placement , Tuition Reimbursement
Decision Summary
____________

The ALJ concluded that the parents did not meet their burden of proof to demonstrate that the IEP was not reasonably calculated to provide the student with a FAPE in the least restrictive environment.  As a result, the ALJ determined that the parents were not entitled to reimbursement for tuition and expenses for their unilateral placement.

Public Agency OAH Case #
______________
Decision Date
Hearing Requested By Issues
Montgomery County
Public Schools
11-H-MONT-19201 08/12/2011 Parent/Guardian IEP Development/Review/Revision, IEP Implementation-Placement
Decision Summary
____________

The ALJ concluded that the IEP and placement was reasonably calculated to offer the student a FAPE.  As a result, the ALJ denied the parents’ request that MCPS fund the cost of an nonpublic educational placement.

Public Agency OAH Case #
______________
Decision Date
Hearing Requested By Issues
Prince George's County
Public Schools
11-H-PGEO-17550 08/19/2011 Parent/Guardian IEP Implementation-accommodations, aids & services, modifications, FAPE, Reimbursement
Decision Summary
____________

The ALJ determined that once PGCPS became aware of its failure to implement the student’s IEP, it corrected the error and provided the student with compensatory education services. The ALJ also concluded that the IEP was reasonably calculated to provide the student with meaningful educational benefit and that the school system provided the student with a FAPE. As a result, parent’s request for compensatory education or a nonpublic placement was denied.


Public Agency OAH Case #
______________
Decision Date
Hearing Requested By Issues
Prince George's County
Public Schools
11-H-PGEO-24920 09/29/2011 Parent/Guardian Identification/Evaluation/Reevaluation-Placement, Compensatory Services
Decision Summary
____________

The ALJ concluded that the parents failed to establish that the IEPs that had been implemented by PGCPS since the start of the 2009-2010 school year had not been reasonably calculated to offer the student educational benefit.  The ALJ further concluded that the placement was reasonably calculated to offer the student a FAPE.


 

 

 


Contact Information
Maryland State Department of Education
Division of Special Education/Early Intervention Services
200 West Baltimore Street
Baltimore, MD 21201
MSDE Privacy Statement Disclaimer  | Copyright © 2003 MSDE