proceedings in this case. Based upon all of that evidence the Court concludes that, taking into consideration the total program offered at Mamie D. Lee, that is, the day school program together with the extended program and services offered by DCPS to augment that program, and the additional fact that Alexander would be living at home with his parents, that that total program offered by DCPS is not appropriate to meet the needs of Alexander. The Court concludes that the program at Keystone -- Willow Street is an appropriate program.
The issue raised then is what portion of the program should be funded by DCPS where a part of the program consists of a non-educational facility. It is clear that the placement at the Willow Street should be funded by DCPS and should be funded by DCPS as of the beginning of the school year [Text Deleted by Court Emendation] 1984-1985 and that the placement at Willow Street constitutes Alexander's current educational placement.
With respect to the placement at Keystone, the Court understands that it is a separate and distinct placement which is not directly associated with Willow Street. The evidence presented however, demonstrates to the Court that the Keystone Residence and the program in which Alexander is involved at that home is an important part of his total educational program. The question is raised then whether DCPS should be required to pay for a part or all of Alexander's placement at the Keystone or whether the parents should be required to pay for Alexander's room and board at the group home with DCPS being required to pay for any additional charges for services rendered to Alexander including such facts as additional training at the Keystone facility. It seems that it is impossible for Alexander to live at home and to make the same gains while living at home and attending school as is being accomplished while Alexander is attending the school and living in the group home in Scranton. Thus, the Court concludes that the home itself is an important same facility is not controlling. It is the total program which controls, and the total program includes both the school and the group home. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the District of Columbia should be required to fund Alexander's placement not only at Willow Street but at the Keystone as well.
In sum, the Court finds that DCPS and its officials have acted in good faith in seeking to find an appropriate special educational placement for Alexander. The Court further finds and concludes that the Mamie D. Lee facility is not appropriate for the needs of Alexander. The Court further finds and concludes that Willow Street School and the Keystone Residence represents an appropriate placement for Alexander. The Court further finds that Willow Street and Keystone together represent an appropriate educational placement for Alexander. The Court further finds that pursuant to the decision in Burlington School Committee v. Department of Education, 471 U.S. 359, 105 S. Ct. 1996, 85 L. Ed. 2d 385 (1985), that the District of Columbia must now reimburse the parents for Alexander's placement at the above Scranton, Pennsylvania facilities since those facilities represent an appropriate educational placement for Alexander. Plaintiffs are entitled to reimbursement for the 1984-1985, 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88 school years. The Court further finds that pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e)(3) that the Keystone Residence and the Willow Street School represents Alexander's "current educational placement".
An appropriate Order will be entered.
Pursuant to the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Willow Street School and the Keystone Residence in Scranton, Pennsylvania, together, represent an appropriate educational placement for Alexander Kerkam, and it is further
ORDERED that the plaintiffs are entitled to be reimbursed for the expenses they incurred in placing Alexander Kerkam in those facilities for the 1984-1985, 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88 school years, and it is further
ORDERED that the Willow Street School and the Keystone Residence constitute Alexander Kerkam's current educational placement pursuant to 20 U.S.C. Section 1415(e)(3), and it is further
ORDERED that the plaintiffs are entitled to receive attorneys fees and costs pursuant to the Education for all Handicapped Children Act, as amended.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.