Goldstein, Ackerhalt & Pletcher
70 Niagara Street, Suite 200 Buffalo , New York, 14202
Phone: 716-362-1533
Fax: 716-362-1534

The GAP Attorneys Blog

Meeting the needs of people with disabilities, their families, educators & service providers

Posts Tagged ‘Partial reimbursement’

Tuition reimbursement reduced by 75% where parents failed to make student available for intake interview, precluding placement.

Thursday, April 19th, 2012

J.G. v. Scarsdale Union Free School District, 58 IDELR 16 (S.D.N.Y. 2011):  A U.S. District Court awarded parents of a student with an emotional disability tuition reimbursement for their unilateral placement of their daughter.  However, in light of the parents’ failure to make the student available for an intake interview, the Court reduced the award by 75%.

The student was very successful early in high school, but developed emotional issues , including suicide ideation, that ultimately had an adverse effect on her academic performance and school attendance.  In light of her emotional difficulties, the parents placed her in private programs in Vermont and, ultimately, in Montana.  Despite the unilateral placement, the parents continued to work with the school district to develop an IEP and find an appropriate program.  However, each of the potential programs at which the student would be placed required an intake interview with the student.  The parents decided not to bring the student home for such an interview, based on advice from their mental health professionals that such a visit could have negative effects on the student’s emotional state.  Accordingly, since the student was never available for an intake interview, none of the potential public placements accepted her.

In light of the district’s failure to provide a FAPE, and the appropriateness of the private program selected by the parents, the Court determined that the parents were entitled to reimbursement.  However, despite the parents’ willingness to visit potential public placements, their failure to make the student available for an intake precluded the district from recommending an appropriate program.  Therefore, reimbursement was awarded, but reduced by 75%.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Tuition reimbursement reduced by 75% where parents failed to make student available for intake interview, precluding placement.

Student’s guardian entitled to full reimbursement for unilateral placement even though private school did not meet all of student’s educational needs

Tuesday, June 21st, 2011

C.B. v. Garden Grove Unified School District, 56 IDELR 121 (9th Cir. 2011): The Court of Appeals agreed with the decision of the district court that a hearing officer erroneously awarded the guardian of a student with autism and attention deficit disorder (ADD) only half the tuition cost at a private school placement because the private program did not meet all of the student’s educational needs.  Instead, the Court awarded the guardian full reimbursement.  Although the private placement did not offer a program meeting the student’s math needs, the student made significant growth in many academic areas and in social development.  The Court refused to set a standard that requires a parent to find a private placement that meets all of a student’s needs in order to obtain full reimbursement.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Student’s guardian entitled to full reimbursement for unilateral placement even though private school did not meet all of student’s educational needs

Student’s guardian entitled to full reimbursement for unilateral placement even though private school did not meet all of student’s educational needs

Friday, June 3rd, 2011

C.B. v. Garden Grove Unified School District, 56 IDELR 121 (9th Cir. 2011): The Court of Appeals agreed with the decision of the district court that a hearing officer erroneously awarded the guardian of a student with autism and attention deficit disorder (ADD) only half the tuition cost at a private school placement because the private program did not meet all of the student’s educational needs.  Instead, the Court awarded the guardian full reimbursement.  Although the private placement did not offer a program meeting the student’s math needs, the student made significant growth in many academic areas and in social development.  The Court refused to set a standard that requires a parent to find a private placement that meets all of a student’s needs in order to obtain full reimbursement.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Student’s guardian entitled to full reimbursement for unilateral placement even though private school did not meet all of student’s educational needs

Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS).