Appeal of M.F., on behalf of her child, from action of the Board of Education of the East Aurora Union Free School District regarding special education.

Decision No. 18,601

(July 21, 2025)

Bond, Schoeneck & King PLLC, attorneys for respondent, Jeffrey J. Weiss and Kathryn M. Stiffler, Esqs., of counsel

ROSA., Commissioner.--Petitioner appeals the refusal of the Committee on Special Education (“CSE”) of the Board of Education of the East Aurora Union Free School District (“respondent”) to recommend placement of her child (the “student”) in a nonpublic school.  The appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The student is eligible for special education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).  Upon petitioner’s request, the CSE convened in March 2025.  At this meeting, petitioner requested placement at the Mandala School (“Mandala”).  The CSE declined as Mandala has not been “approved … for the purpose of contracting with public schools for the instruction of students with disabilities” (8 NYCRR 200.1 [d]; see Education Law § 4401 [e]-[h]).  Petitioner thereafter enrolled the student in Mandala.  This appeal ensued.  Petitioner seeks an order directing respondent to pay the student’s tuition costs at Mandala. 

Respondent lacks authority to recommend placement in an unapproved nonpublic school (8 NYCRR 200.1 [d], 200.7).  Petitioner’s recourse was to seek tuition reimbursement via an impartial hearing under the IDEA (Phillips v Banks, 656 F Supp 3d 469, 479-80 [SD NY 2023]; Appeal of a Student with a Disability, 39 Ed Dept Rep 45, Decision No. 14,169).  Claims brought to enforce rights arising under IDEA must be addressed through the due process provisions of the IDEA and Education Law § 4404 or the State complaint procedure outlined in section 200.5 of the Commissioner’s regulations; such claims may not be addressed in an appeal brought pursuant to Education Law § 310 (Appeal of a Student with a Disability, 52 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 16,375; Appeal of R.J.K. and L.K., 50 id., Decision No. 16,232; Appeal of a Child with a Handicapping Condition, 32 id. 405, Decision No. 12,868).  Therefore, the appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.[1]

THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

END OF FILE