T.C. has a history of cognitive disorders including learning disabilities and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Mother asserts that her son's IEP team failed to conduct adequate evaluations to determine the root cause of his performance discrepancies and identify his unique needs. She argues that without an understanding of his unique needs the IEP team could not properly describe how his disabilities affected his involvement and progress in the general education curriculum; could not draft appropriate annual goals; could not identify appropriate progress monitoring tools; and could not provide teachers with sufficient information to develop specially designed instruction.
Mother also asserts that the District failed to comply with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requirements for post-secondary transition planning and failed to consistently provide the accommodations required by his IEP.
The District made significant efforts to individualize the instruction provided to T.C. to address his unique educational needs. Teachers also made a good faith attempt to consistently provide him with each of the accommodations listed in his IEP.
ALJ finds the Respondents complied with the mandates of the IDEA and provided student with an educational program reasonably calculated to allow him to receive some educational benefit. Respondents prevail on all issues and Complainant is entitled to no relief.