BSEA:Decisions

See also fully searchable record of rulings back to 1998

The DESE web site contains the rulings but it posts them in no particular order under links with cryptic names.

The following links and summaries make it easier to find relevant legal and educational references on special education.

The school systems almost always win these cases because they only go to hearing if they are sure they will win. If they have any doubt, they settle in advance. Nonetheless, each case gives a detailed description of the experience of one child and family. Those descriptions are very valuable for learning about services and practices in special education.

Under each link I note the key points of the case as I see them. These stories are very sad, but the perserverance and committment of parents and children is uplifting.

Index of Experts and School System Employees

These are extracted from the decisions. There may be copy and paste errors or mistakes in the links or other information so double check the data before using it.

Specialty	Name	Case	School Employee?	Link	Comments
Reading specialist	Michelle Dufresne	Anonymous Reading Case	N	http://www.heinemann.com/authors/3925.aspx ?
Parent Advocate (and Physics pedagogy expert/teacher?)	Robert Dufresne	Anonymous Reading Case	No	http://www.bedu.com/Publications/UMASS.html ?
School System Lawyer	Regina W. Tate	Anonymous Reading Case	Yes	http://www.mhtl.com/rtate/	Appears to be an attorney only for school systems. Also appears other cases (not full list): Blackstone-Millville RSD Groton-Dunstable R.S.D. Leominster Public Schools
Parent’s/Student’s Advocate	Shelly Greene	Lexington	No
Private Writing Tutor	Kristen Mallett Bator	Lexington	No
Bedford Public Schools/Private Math and Physics Tutor	Lisa Rainen	Lexington	No ?
Clinical Psychologist, Cambridge Health Alliance	Dr. Anjana Rajan	Lexington	No
Psychiatrist, Consultant to the Lexington Public Schools	Dr. Jeff Bostic	Lexington	Yes
Vocational Coordinator, Merrimack Special Education Collaborative	Karen Rowe	Lexington	Yes
Merrimack Special Education Collaborative	Brad Brooks	Lexington	Yes
Out of District Coordinator, Lexington Public Schools	Barbara Fortier	Lexington	Yes
Director of Student Services, Lexington Public Schools	Linda S. Chase	Lexington	Yes
Attorney for School	Colby Brunt	Lexington	Yes	[1]
Director of Pupil Personnel, Salem Public Schools	Karen Malio	Salem	Yes
Assistant Director of Pupil Personnel, Salem Public Schools	Gina Gavegnano	Salem	Yes
Bowditch School Principal, Salem Public Schools	Ana Hanton	Salem	Yes
Adjustment Counselor, Bowditch School, Salem Public Schools	Donna Gfroerer	Salem	Yes
Paraprofessional, Bowditch School, Salem Public Schools	Natalie Clara Dudar	Salem	Yes
Student’s Guardian at Litem	Garrett McManus, Esq.	Salem	No
Attorney for Schools	Colby Brunt	Salem	Yes	[2]
Therapist	Grant Bialek		No
Therapist	Michael Bird		No
School Psychologist – Greenfield Public Schools	Scott Rice		Yes
School Social Worker- Poet Seat School	Hillary Cronin		No
Teacher – Poet Seat	Brian Winslow		No
Teacher – Poet Seat	Clara McCoy		No
Alternative Educator – Greenfield Public Schools	Elaine Mount		Yes
Special Education Coordinator – Greenfield Public Schools	Christie Fontaine		Yes
Director of Student Services – Greenfield Public Schools	Kathleen Titus		Yes
Attorney for the School	Peter Smith		Yes
Attorney for the Parent	Benjamin Barnes		No

Decisions

Framingham v Natick and DESE. Assignment Decision 5-28-2010

Dispute over which school system the student belongs to.

Anonymous Reading Decision 5-24-2010

The school system is kept anonymous to protect the family's confidentiality.
This decision includes details on reading methodologies, especially the Reading Recovery program (http://www.readingrecovery.org/) with some mention of "sequential, rules-based special education methods such as Wilson, Project Read, or Orton-Gillingham". Lots of examples of reading tests and diagnostic tools. Also gives a very good explanation of how difficulty with learning to read can cause a child emotional stress.
The hearing officer decided "where the School’s chosen methodology is solidly grounded on unrefuted diagnosis of the Student’s area of weakness, there is no basis for the BSEA to disturb the School’s decision". I interpret that to mean, only the school gets to decide which method will be used and it doesn't matter if it works or not. What matters to the law is if the school thought it might work based on the information they had at the time the IEP was written.

Lexington 5-21-2010

Case of a child with Aspergers who wants to go to "school with like peers, that is, other gifted students within his age range". Lexington says he should go to Pathways. Detailed explanation of the challenges and opportunities facing a high school student "on the spectrum". Lexington wins, because they don't need to provide the best placement, only an "appropriate" one. This case uses the "you don't get a Cadillac you get a working Chevy" metaphor. The parents are also rebuked for not providing Lexington with all available information which allows the school system to say their IEP was valid based on the limited information they had at the time.

Salem 5-14-2010

Hearing issues:

1. Whether Student is safe in school?
2. Whether Student’s paraprofessional is appropriate?

Excellent explanation of the challenges faced by a girl with PDD in middle school.
Involves a 13 year old child with ASD who was in a partial inclusion program which I believe is called the Compass program. The parent felt it wasn't working: she was "having many problems and was coming home in crisis every day". The school system used a CHINS against the parents. Extensive discussion of a Behavior Plan and details on social skills issues for a student with PDD. The student testified at this hearing and the hearing officer made comments on the relationship between the student and parent. Both points above ruled in favor of Salem so the student was denied the opportunity to change class or change aide.

Somerset vs Fall River and DESE 5-10-2010

A dispute between Somerset and Fall River about a Kindergarden age student from Somerset who is put in foster care in Fall River by DCF. Somerset tries to block her from attending school in Somerset, saying Fall River is responsible. Hearing officer disagrees and says Somerset is responsible since the DCF foster home is analogous to being homeless and so she has a right to continue going to school in the same place as before.
No one spoke on behalf of the best interests of the child.

Greenfield 4-13-2010

High school student with emotional challenges whose Parent’s wanted him to go to the Hampshire Educational Collaborative Academy (www.collaborative.org). Greenfield wanted him at the Poet Seat school which had become part of the Greenfield public schools (http://www.gpsk12.org/poetseat/poetseathome.html). Good description of Poet Seat school and an explanation of "desensitization" for handling school aversion/anxiety at the high school level. Greenfield wins due to lack of experts and evidence presented by parents.

Randolph 4-9-2010

Issues

1. Is Randolph’s most recently proposed individualized education program (IEP) calling for Student to be placed in a substantially-separate classroom at the Therapeutic Learning Center (TLC) at the Lyons Elementary School (exhibits S-1, P-30) reasonably calculated to provide Student with a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment?
2. If not, can Student’s special education and related services be appropriately provided by his continuing placement within a general education classroom?

11 year old student with PTSD and ADHD and behvaioral issues. There is detailed discussion of behavior plans, their implementation and creation. Also, very informative testimony from a Professor of Psychology at Harvard (the school's expert) who designs and implements behavior plans. Parents win and the student can go back to school with the staff and plan written by the professor.

Sudbury 4-9-2010

1. It is not disputed that Sudbury did not provide Student with an individualized education program (hereinafter, IEP) for Student’s 5th grade (2008-2009 school year). Was Sudbury responsible for providing an IEP for 5th grade?
2. If so, did Parent’s unilateral placement at The Carroll School provide Student with a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment?
3. If so, is Parent entitled to reimbursement for part or all of her out-of-pocket expenses for The Carroll School for 5th grade?
4. Is the IEP most recently proposed by Sudbury for 6th grade (2009-2010 school year) reasonably calculated to provide Student with a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment?
5. If not, did Parent’s unilateral placement at The Carroll School satisfy this standard?
6. If so, is Parent entitled to reimbursement for part or all of her out-of-pocket expenses for The Carroll School for 6th grade?

Parents represented themselves without a lawyer (aka pro se).
Sudbury wanted the student in their Language Learning Disabilities program (http://fc.sudbury.k12.ma.us/~sseac/?OpenItemURL=S00E757D1#What%20specific%20programs). Parents wanted him in The Carrol School in Lincoln (http://www.carrollschool.org/). There is extensive discussion of each prorgam and how it addresses Language Learning Disabilities. Also a good explanation of how background noise affects a students ability to learn. Here's an example from an audiologist:
"She explained further that Student “is at risk of inaccurately perceiving auditory information. This is particularly true when information is presented in a noisy background, involves multiple parts, is presented quickly or contains unfamiliar language concepts.” She also emphasized that “[t]he mishearing would affect all academic learning in the classroom and social communication situations, particularly in larger classrooms and noisy settings.… The mishearing difficulty should not be underestimated and can interfere greatly in a classroom setting.”

No reimbursement for unilateral placement in 5th grade, but school system pays for 6th grade and I think that means the student gets to stay at Carroll school.

Anonymous High School Transition for Child with Aspergers 3-26-2010

School system is anonymous to protect the confidentiality of the student.
Parents wanted the student to go to the League school (http://www.leagueschool.com/) and school system wanted him in regular education classroom. Very smart student who's challenge is social skills and is teased and bullied at school. School system wins. A few additional services were required but the student was denied the opportunity to go to League School.

Arlington 3-15-2010

Language based learning disability case for student entering high school. Parents placed student at Landmark School (http://www.landmarkschool.org/) when she wasn't making progress in Middle School. "It is Arlington’s position that any failure on Student’s part was due to Student’s failure to access the in-class support offered and because she did not use the learning center time properly as she chose to use it to complete homework or 'chill'."

Arlington agreed that Landmark is appropriate but said that the Arlington High School program was also appropriate so they don't need to pay.

Extensive examples of tests including results and how they are interpreted.

Parents win re-imbursement for Landmark and continuation at Landmark, but Arlington can reconvene the "Team" and try to force the student to come back in 2011 school year.

Harwich 3-8-2010

Is an extended evaluation of Zack necessary in order to write an appropriate IEP for Zack and provide FAPE? If so, is the Stony Brook program the appropriate placement for the extended evaluation? Some discussion of Stony Brook program and 4th grade child's problematic behavior in regular education class. Parents want him evaluated in public school and want him to remain in public school. School system wants him evaluated in private, therpeutic day placement. School system wins.

Hingham 2-1-2010

School system wants the 17 yeard olf child in therapeutic day program (READS Academy http://www.readscollab.org/Academy.htm). Parents want him in a residential program (Chauncy Hall Academy http://www.nafi.com/program_detail.htm?id=29). Parents win.

Anonymous Dispute Over Testing 1-8-2010

School system name is removed to protect the privacy of the family.

Newton 11-20-2009

Student privately placed in Learning Prep School (http://www.learningprep.org/) in 3rd, primarily for language and auditory challenges which interfer with learning. Newton insists on the Reach program (http://www.newton.k12.ma.us/central_admin/documents/SPEDProgramGuide_final_merged.pdf). Excellent description of Newton's Reach program with a lot of added detail beyond what is posted on NPS site. Lots of testing and evaluation data related to learning and auditory challenges. NPS tries to criticize LPS and the child's work. Hearing officer gave more credence to parents experts than to NPS employee re: LPS being appropriate.
Parents ask for recovery of costs and prospective placement at LPS going forward. They don't recover the costs but do win the prospective placement.

Attleboro 11-18-2009

Issues:
- Whether Attleboro was responsible to provide Student transportation to Willett Elementary School during the 2008-2009 school year? If so,
- Whether Parents are entitled to reimbursement for provision of transportation during the 2008-2009 school year? Also includes a denied request for the hearing officer to recuse himself. Parents win.

Rulings

These are a little more legalistic and less education focused. Some contain statements of fact and they show the tricks of the trade used by lawyers on both sides to advance their case.

• Worcester CORRECTED RULING ON MOTION TO JOIN 3-9-2010
• Shrewsbury RULING ON REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF LEGAL STANDARD 2-18-2010
• Hudson MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 2-2-2010
• Attleboro Parents’ Motion to Recuse Hearing Officer 10-09-2009
• Westwood Public Schools’ Motion To Dismiss Parent’s Hearing Request With Prejudice and/or Motion for Summary Judgment and Mother’s Motion to Require the District to Allow the Parent to Audiotape the Team Meeting 10-07-2009
• Attleboro Public Schools’ Motion To Dismiss Parents’ Hearing Request With Prejudice 9-29-2009
• RULING ON WORCESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS’ MOTION FOR DIRECTED VERDICT 8-07-2009
• Bridgewater-Raynham Ruling on Parent’s/Student’s Motion for Re-Assignment of the Hearing Officer/Recusal and Bridgewater-Raynham Public Schools’ Request for Issuance of Subpoena to Dr. Steven Auster and Motion to Leave Open the Record for the Testimony of Dr. Auster 7-29-2009
• Brockton Recusal Motion 7-08-2009
• Fall River RULING RE JOINDER OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH 6-24-2009
• Motion of the Springfield Public Schools to Join the Department of Mental Retardation, the Department of Public Health and the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind in this appeal. 6-03-2009
• RULING ON HUDSON PUBLIC SCHOOLS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 2-02-2009
• Scituate RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY DECISION 4-28-2009
• Natick RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS 4-07-2009

---

This project and information is not affiliated with the Mass DESE. It is an independent effort by private citizens intended to help the people of Massachusetts learn more about the Special Education in our state.

Much of this information is extracted from BSEA Searchable List of Rulings

Additional comments and information from public sources has also been included. The contents and links may have been edited as well. No representation is made as to the accuracy or validity of this information. This page is only intended to help people more easily keep in touch with the work of the Bureau of Special Education Appeals

Please add your comments on the discussion page and add to or update any other pages. Make sure to preface the names of any new pages with "BSEA:"