Law Office of Dominic Buchmiller

Case Review: A Family’s Journey to Tuition Reimbursement

When advocating for your child with special needs, the process can feel overwhelming. This blog post highlights one family’s experience in seeking tuition reimbursement for their child’s placement at the Shefa School in New York City for the 2023-2024 school year. It walks through the arguments made, what the impartial hearing officer (IHO) decided, what the State Review Officer (SRO) decided on appeal, and the lessons parents can learn to strengthen their own cases.

This blog draws on the decision issued by the New York State Review Office in appeal number 24-153. While I was not involved in the case, I regularly review these publicly available decisions as they serve as a valuable resource for understanding the nuances of special education disputes. You can access the full decision by clicking here. This case sheds light on one family's journey and provides helpful context for others facing similar challenges. Please note that the outcome of this appeal is specific to its circumstances and should be viewed as informational rather than a guarantee of similar results.

The Context: Understanding the IDEA

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) ensures that students with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE). In this case, the parents argued that the New York City Department of Education (DOE) failed to provide their daughter with FAPE, forcing them to enroll her at a private school and seek reimbursement for tuition and transportation.

The Backstory: What Led to the Dispute?

  • Preschool and Early Concerns: The student was eligible for special education during preschool and later attended a nonpublic religious school in kindergarten. Her parents noticed difficulties with focus and motor skills, prompting them to arrange a private neuropsychological evaluation in early 2023.
  • Evaluation Findings: The student underwent a neuropsychological evaluation and the evaluation diagnosed the student with ADHD (combined type), developmental coordination disorder, and significant challenges in fluency. The evaluator recommended additional services, including a paraprofessional and Special Education Teacher Support Services (SETSS).
  • Reaching Out to the DOE: In June 2023, the parent contacted the DOE, sharing her concerns and asking how to proceed with securing more support. She also asked about applying for SETSS.

The Parents’ Next Steps

The DOE never scheduled an IEP for their child, and due to a lack of any kind of public option, the family decided to enroll their child at the Shefa School, a private school specializing in children with learning challenges. The parents signed the enrollment contract in July 2023 and sent a 10-day notice to the DOE in August, informing them of the placement and their intent to seek reimbursement.

The Legal Dispute: Filing a Due Process Complaint

The parents filed a due process complaint in September 2023, alleging that the district:

  1. Failed to evaluate their child in a timely manner.
  2. Did not develop an Individualized Education Program (IEP) for the 2023-24 school year.
  3. Left them no choice but to place their child in a private school.

The District’s Response and IEP Meeting

In October 2023 (after the start of the school year), the DOE convened a Committee on Special Education (CSE) meeting, also called an IEP meeting. The resulting IEP recommended:

  • Integrated co-teaching (ICT) classroom for core subjects.
  • Weekly speech-language therapy and occupational therapy.
  • Placement in a district public school without specialized programming.

The parents believed this plan was a denial of a FAPE and therefore inadequate and pursued their case.

The Impartial Hearing Officer’s Decision: Partial Reimbursement

After several days of an impartial hearing, the IHO ruled that:

  1. FAPE Violation: The DOE failed to offer the child FAPE for the 2023-24 school year.
  2. Appropriateness of Shefa: Shefa met the student’s needs and was an appropriate placement.
  3. Equitable Considerations: The IHO reduced the reimbursement by 50% because the parents:
    • Did not give sufficient notice of their desire for public school placement.
    • Did not fully cooperate with the district in developing an IEP.
  4. Religious Component: The religious aspects of Shefa’s program were not essential to the student’s needs and further reduced the reimbursement by 13%.

Ultimately, the district was ordered to reimburse $27,565 for tuition and provide special transportation services. The parents appealed the decision, arguing that they should be entitled to full funding for their child's tuition.

The SRO's Reasoning on Appeal

The IHO reduced reimbursement by 50%, citing the parents' alleged lack of cooperation in the IEP process. However, the SRO found that the district failed to convene a CSE meeting or develop an IEP/IESP before the 2023–24 school year, leaving the student without services. The parent made efforts to communicate with the district, shared concerns, and gave proper notice of unilateral placement at Shefa. The SRO found that the IHO's conclusion that the parent was uncooperative was inconsistent with legal precedent, which holds that a parent's intent not to use a public school placement is not grounds to reduce reimbursement absent obstruction. Equitable considerations favored the parents.

Regarding tuition reduction of 13% based on Shefa's religious components, the SRO found that the DOE's reliance on federal regulations prohibiting IDEA funding for religious instruction is misplaced, as the parents, not the district, are seeking reimbursement. Legal precedent supports full reimbursement for unilateral placements, regardless of religious elements, as IDEA funding is neutral and benefits qualifying students without discrimination.

The SRO ordered that the NYC DOE shall reimburse the parents for the FULL cost of the private program for the 2023-2024 school year!

Final Thoughts

The parents' advocacy in this case led to financial relief and recognition of their child’s needs. If you’re navigating a similar situation, don’t hesitate to seek support by contacting me for a free consultation. Remember, you’re not alone, and every step you take helps ensure your child gets the education they deserve.


Law Office of Dominic Buchmiller, PLLC

43 West 43rd Street, Suite 360

New York, NY 10036

(646) 866-7336

dominic@buchmillerlaw.com

Disclaimer:

This website is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Viewing this website or communicating with our firm through this site does not create an attorney-client relationship. Any information provided here is not a substitute for consulting with a qualified attorney regarding your specific legal situation.

This is a legal advertisement. Past results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

For legal advice, please contact our office directly.

Contact Form Privacy Policy:

No mobile or email information will be shared with third parties/affiliates for marketing/promotional purposes. All the above categories exclude text messaging originator opt-in data and consent; this information will not be shared with any third parties.