Whether the local school division offered the student a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the current IEP and, if not should the parent be provided with reimbursement for a private placement?
Whether a party who bears the burden of proof but does not offer any evidence at the hearing in support of their case shall prevail on their allegations?
Whether the Local Education Agency's (LEA) proposed individualized education program (IEP) for the 2005-2006 school year would provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to the student and whether the parent's request for reimbursement for private placement would be granted?
Whether the proposed individualized education program (IEP) for the 2005-2006 school year offered the student a free appropriate public education and whether the parent's request reimbursement for private placement should be granted?
Whether the local school division provided a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to the student when the student was removed from a portion of his academic classes for speech therapy?
Whether the local school division properly implemented the student's individualized education program (IEP) in a manner that provided the student a free appropriate public education (FAPE)?
Whether the student would be denied a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment if he were transitioned to a public school setting as proposed in the local school division's individualized education program (IEP)?
Whether the failure to provide certain hours of homebound instruction during the 2004-2005 school year denied the student a free appropriate public education?
Whether the failure to provide certain hours of homebound instruction during the 2005-2006 school year denied the student a free appropriate public education (FAPE)?
Whether the individualized education program (IEP) proposed by the school division that includes a change in placement from regular classrooms to self contained special education settings for four periods a day provides a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least environment (LRE)?
Whether an individual education program (IEP) team's determination that the Virginia Alternate Assessment Program (VAAP) should be utilized was a denial of a free appropriate public education (FAPE)?
Whether the individualized education program (IEP) team meetings met the procedural requirements of Notice to the parents and inclusion of individuals necessary to meet regulatory requirements?
Whether a manifestation review was required when the student voluntarily agreed to a change in the location of special education services subsequent to an allegation of student misconduct?
Whether evaluations completed by the local school division were sufficient to determine the student's eligibility for special education services?
Whether the student's parents were provided with a significant opportunity to participate in the decision making process regarding the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE)?
Whether the local school division offered the student a FAPE despite the student's personal issues including drug use and temper management issues, etc.?
Whether the student will receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE) based on the individualized education program (JEP) proposed by the local school division that utilizes a trained lay person rather than a licensed nurse to support the student's — medical needs?
Whether failure of the school division to implement the student's 2004-2005 school year TEP, including certain homebound services, denied the student a free appropriate public education (FAPE)?
Whether by including a present level of performance alleged to be below the student's actual level of functioning the local school division denied a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to the student?
Whether the local school division denied transition services to the student so that the student was denied a FAPE?
Whether a party who requests a due process hearing can meet his burden of persuasion when no documents or witness names are exchanged by that party five days prior to the hearing?
Whether a hearing officer may incorporate an individualized education program (TEP) in a decision or order when no issues have been determined related to the IIEP or TEP addendum?
