I.M. obo R.G. v. Newark City BOE | Case 05891-25 | 2025-10-03

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer State of New Jersey OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW FINAL DECISION OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 AGENCY DKT. NO. 2025-38861 I.M. ON BEHALF OF R.G., Petitioner, v. NEWARK CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION, Respondent. __________________________________ I.M., petitioner, pro se Isabel Machado, Esq.,1 for respondent (Machado Law Group, attorneys) Record Closed: September 19, 2025 Decided: October 3, 2025 BEFORE KELLY J. KIRK, ALJ: STATEMENT OF THE CASE Petitioner, I.M. (Mom) on behalf of R.G., filed for due process against the Newark City Board of Education (Board or District), seeking placement at Garden Academy. 1 Jodi S. Howlett, Esq., appeared for the hearing.

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 2 PROCEDURAL HISTORY On or about March 28, 2025 , Mom filed a Petition for Due Process against the Board, alleging that the District’s schools were not appropriate and seeking placement at Garden Academy . The matter was transmitted by the New Jersey Department of Education (Department), Office of Special Education Policy and Dispute Resolution, to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL), where it was filed on April 30, 2025. The hearing was held on May 29, 2025 , and petitioner requested to file written summations after receipt of the transcript. The transcript was received on August 29, 2025, and the record closed on September 19, 2025, upon receipt of the Board’s written summation.2 FACTUAL DISCUSSION FINDINGS OF FACT Nichelle Wilson, Mohean Garib, and Stacey Tate testified on behalf of respondent. S.M.-W. (Aunt) and I.M. testified on behalf of petitioner. Having had an opportunity to consider the evidence and to observe the witnesses and make credibility determinations based on the witnesses’ testimony, I FIND the following FACTS in this case: R.G. was born in January 2013. In 2020, R.G. was residing in Paterson, New Jersey, and attending public school. (R-1.) He was referred to the child study team (CST) by Mom for academic , communication , and speech concerns. (R-1.) A Social Assessment was completed by Lattisha Mayo, MSW , on October 9, 2020. (R -1.) A Confidential Psychological Report was completed by Aqila Noble on October 19, 2020. 2 No submission was made by petitioner after receipt of the transcript.

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 3 (R-2.) The Confidential Psychological Report reflects , in pertinent part, the following background information: According to teacher input, Ms. Dietz shared that [R.G.] is significantly behind his peers. He does not display the skills necessary for 1st grade. He is frequently distracted, and his mother has to be seated next to him in order for him to attend to the lesson being taught. Ms. Dietz does not know if [R.G.] would respond differently if we were participating in in-person instruction. She indicated that he is a sweet boy, but he is not able to keep up with the pacing of the general education class setting. [R.G.] does not possess the communication skills to participate in class discussions. He performs better with math, especially when working with manipulatives. Upon observation during an ELA lesson, the teacher read a short paragraph and proceeded to ask the students questions about the paragraph. She attempted to engage [R.G.] by calling his name and asking him specific questions. [R.G.] was preoccupied with something occurring off screen. He did not respond to the question asked by the teacher. The class was allowed to take a break and upon their return it was noticed that [R.G.] had something in his hand. When asked to show what was in his hand, it was a t oy dinosaur. His teacher engaged him by asking him questions about the dinosaur. [R.G.] was able to name the dinosaur he was holding and proceeded to name several other dinosaurs. [R-2.] The Confidential Psychological Report also reflects the following: Behavioral Observations: At the time of testing, it took some time to establish a rapport with [R.G.]. He was easily distracted and was constantly seeking the area to find his mother. [R.G.] participated in the testing session and it was noted that he was more interested in participating in tasks that involved hands on work versus talking. Trying to get [R.G.] to talk was difficult. He did not provide responses to several of the questions asked; he instead repeated the question or phrase presented to him. [R.G.’s] activity level was above average, and he was fidgety

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 4 during the session. His attention and concentration were adequate for the test administration. In spite of his limited language, this is believed to be an accurate estimate of [R.G.’s] current ability level. Test Results and Interpretation: The results of this evaluation should be viewed with caution as the result of situations caused by COVID-19. Some students may be greatly impacted by the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) such as face masks, face shields, social distancing, and plexiglass barriers. Deviations from standardized administration procedures may impact the reliability and validity of the assessment. The use of face masks, plexiglass barriers, and social distancing may affect the examinee’s ability to hear questions and directions as well as the examiner’s ability to hear responses. This assessment was not developed and standardized for the use of face masks, plexiglass barriers, and social distancing. These adaptations may threaten the reliability and validity of the results. Potential social and emotional factors during this pandemic may also impact the results. Safety precautions during testing included the wearing of masks by both the examiner and examinee and the use of a divider which may have possible impacts on testing performance. Due to his limited expressive language skills and difficulty maintaining focus for prolonged periods of time, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition (WISC-V) was not attempted. The decision was made to administer the abbreviated version of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence-Second Edition (WASI-II) in the hope that [R.G.] would be capable of participating in the four subtests. If the WASI-II did not work out, the back up plan was to administer the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Scale-2nd Edition. [R-2.] The Confidential Psychological Report summarizes the results of the assessment, in pertinent part, as follows: On the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence -Second Edition (WASI-II), [R.G.] obtained the following scores: Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI)—45 (Extremely Low), Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI)—69 (Extremely Low) and a Full Scale

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 5 IQ score of 57, which fell in the Extremely Low range of cognitive ability. Based on his performance, [R.G.’s] nonverbal reasoning abilities are much better developed than his verbal reasoning abilities. His strengths lie in processing complex visual information by forming spatial images of part - whole relationships and/or by manipulating the parts to solve novel problems without using words. Making sense of complex verbal information and using verbal abilities to solve novel problems is an area of weakness for [R.G.]. On the Vineland: Domain -Level Teacher Form, Ms. Dietz rated [R.G.’s] overall adaptive skills to fall within the Low range. She rated him as follows: Communication Skills —42, Daily Living Skills—50, Socialization Skills —53 and Motor Skills—51. [R.G.’s] overall level of adaptive functioning as described by his score on the Adaptive Behavior Composite (ABC) is 48, which is well below the normative mean of 100. [R.G.’s] four domain standard scores were compared to his mean domain standard score of 49.0 to determine possible areas of strength and weakness. The results show that Communication is a relative weakness for [R.G.]. In addition, pairwise difference comparisons were performed between all pairs of domain standard scores. The findings are that the Communication score is sig nificantly lower than the Socialization score. On the Vineland -3 Domain -Level Parent/Caregiver Form, [Mom] rated [R.G.’s] overall level of adaptive functioning, as described by his score on the Adaptive Behavior Composite (ABC ), is 66, which is well below the normative mean of 100. She rated him as follows: Communication Skills—58, Daily Living Skills —74, Socialization Skills—67 and Motor Skills—74. There was no indicated area of strength or weakness noted in her assessment. Overall, based on these resu lts, [R.G.] can be expected to perform at a level which is significantly lower than his same aged peers and may require significant accommodations to assist with instruction. The corresponding cognitive measure obtained from this testing is believed to be an accurate estimate of [R.G.’s] ability. Due to his extreme language delays it is believed that [R.G.’s] actual ability could fall within a slightly higher level of the extremely low range. If [Mom] continues to be concerned about his development, she is encouraged again to speak with her pediatrician. [R-2.]

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 6 The ND/Neuro DC Instructions from Children’s Specialized Hospital , dated June 22, 2022, reflects diagnoses of (1) autism spectrum disorder; (2) mixed receptive - expressive language disorder; and (3) poor fine motor skills. With respect to the autism spectrum disorder diagnoses, the ND/Neuro DC Instructions state: Recommend discussing diagnosis with school to confirm that [R.G.] is in the proper class setting. Recommend school-based speech therapy and occupational therapy. He would benefit from being in a small class setting based on the principles of ABA. Recommend outpatient speech therapy and occupational therapy. Recommend home-based ABA. . . . School accommodations for R.G., involving educational classification and placement decisions, are best determined as a team effort, by the child study team in conjunction with the parents and other professionals. Accommodations should start with the least rest rictive setting and services, but modified to more specialized and intensive services based on the child’s needs. Accommodations should include behavioral measures to keep the child organized and focused. Specialized instruction and tutoring recommended for specific learning disabilities. Technology support and workload modifications may also be needed. The most scientifically validated treatment at this time is enrollment in an autism intervention program. This is an instructional program set up at home or other environment comfortable and convenient for the child and the family, based on the principles of Applied Behavioral Analysis, incorporating Speech-Language Therapy, Developmental Intervention, Occupational Therapy, Sensory techniques, and tools to foster communication, such as sign language and/or picture exchange communication system, or an augme ntative communication device. Behavioral therapy in the form of Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) should be provided by a board certified behavioral analyst (BCBA) to address maladaptive behaviors.

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 7 Occupational Therapy should be considered for ongoing sensory integration deficits as well as development of fine motor, visual motor, handwriting, bilateral coordination and motor planning skills. Speech Therapy should be considered for ongoing development of speech, language and communication skills as well as conversational and pragmatic language skills. If the instruction takes place in a group setting, it is recommended that the group size be small, and the child instructor ratio be low, 4:1 or less if needed. It is also recommended that such services be provided without any prolonged breaks in programming, and include a parent training component, and provisions to make changes to the program based on the child’s need s and responses. It is generally recommended that the intensity of the program be tailored to the needs of the child, gener al guidelines are to consider 5-10 hours a week for children under age 3 years, and 20-30 hours a week for children over age 3 years. It is generally recommended that children with autism spectrum disorders attend the extended school year program as well, as they benefit from reinforcement of academics, the routine and structure of school, and the opportunity to socialize with peers. There is always the concern that children with autism spectrum disorder will regress in their behavior if there is a break in their education. [R-3.] Additionally, continuing with school-based speech therapy was recommended for the mixed receptive -expressive language disorder , and school-based and outpatient occupational therapy was recommended for difficulty with fine motor tasks, including drawing and dressing. (R-3.) For fourth grade, R.G .’s program and placement was at Paterson Public School (PS) #16 in the self-contained intellectually disabled classroom for children with cognitive disabilities to a moderate degree. (R-4.) He was receiving speech and language services two times per week in a group of no more than three in a therapy room. (R-4.)

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 8 The Educational Reevaluation, part of his triennial multi-evaluation assessment, dated December 4, 2023, conducted by Yamira Infante, LD T-C, reflects that R.G.’s standard scores on Woodcock Johnson IV (WJ -IV) achievement measures, “are within the very low range for one cluster (Academic Skills) and two tests (Letter -Word Identification, and Calculation),” and “ within the low range for Spelling. ” (R-4.) For reading, Infante recommended word recognition strategies to help build automatic sight - word recognition, like word walls, flow lists, word banks, flash cards and games, and to use high -frequency words when implementing th ose strategies because they may enhance R.G.’s ability to read independently. (R-4.) For math, Infante recommended, inter alia, determining exactly which single-digit addition and subtraction facts R.G. knows using flash cards or index cards , acquiring f oundational addition and subtraction skills , addressing any gaps in mastery of basic addition and subtraction skills or in his knowledge of the meaning of ca lculation signs, using manipulatives, and teaching R.G. the two properties of addition: commutative and associative. (R-4.) For writing, Infante recommended teaching R.G. the spellings of common irregular words , important grade- appropriate words, especially those that cannot be spelled solely by using rules or phonics knowledge, explicitly teach the five-step spelling strategy, confirm R.G. can spell most short-vowel, single-syllable words, then help him expand his knowledge of within - word patterns by te aching long -vowel patterns such as the consonant-vowel-vowel- consonant pattern (CVVC), CVC pattern, and the CVV pattern, and keep the instruction relevant and engaging by using word-building tiles, word sorts that compare and contrast spelling patterns, word hunts, and word lists that share common spelling patterns. (R-4.) The Speech/Language Evaluation, dated December 15, 2023, by Katelyn Gjini, CF-SLP, summarized her recommendations as follows: Analysis of [R.G.’s] communication skills involving receptive and expressive communication was judged to be limited. This evaluation was completed through the Functional Communication Profile-Revised, the ROWPVT, the TOLD-I:5, observations, and teacher report. At this time, [R.G.] is communicating using phrases and short sentences when prompted. He benefits from verbal prompts to elaborate on

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 9 his productions. [R.G.] is able to answer yes/no questions and simple wh-questions. He can follow directions and the routine of the classroom with occasional verbal cues. He is able to identify common objects and action words. His motivation is noted to greatly affect his communication. Based upon the assessment information listed above, along with parent input and teacher input it is determined that [R.G.] continues to be eligible for special education services. [R.G.] would benefit from school-based speech and language support to improve his speech and language skills. [R-5.] The annual review Draft Individualized Education Program (IEP), dated March 26, 2024 (March 2024 Paterson IEP) , reflects disabilities of autism and mild intellectual disability, and his program and placement in Paterson PS #16 was the “cognitive- moderate special class” self-contained classroom, and related services of speech/language therapy (twice weekly for thirty minutes in the therapy room in a group of no more than two) , as well as extended school year (ESY) and specialized transportation. (R-7.) Although the October 19, 2020, Confidential Psychological Report reflected that R.G. needed a personal aide, the March 2024 Paterson IEP does not provide for a personal or shared aide. (R-7.) The March 2024 Paterson IEP reflects that his program and placement for the 2024–2025 school year was to be the “autism special class.” Mom moved from Paterson to Newark. Newark implemented R.G.’s most recent IEP, so R.G. attended Avon Avenue School (Avon School) in Newark from May 2025 to June 2025 in the cognitive–moderate program. However, Avon School does not have an autism program, so for the 2024–2025 school year, R.G. would attend the self-contained autism program at Louise A. Spencer School (Spencer School) in Newark. Nichelle Wilson, a licensed social worker for twenty -five years, is an autism case manager with the CST at Spencer School. In late August 2024/early September 2024, she reviewed R.G.’s IEP and assessments and spoke with related service providers and the CST, and she spoke to Mom and Aunt about transportation.

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 10 In August 2024, Mom requested a meeting with the Spencer School CST. By letter dated September 5, 2024, Mom was invited by the District to a meeting regarding placement on September 19, 2024. (R-8.) Per the Evaluation Determination Plan: A parent meeting was held to discuss concerns regarding their request for a private autism placement. Post discussion regarding [R.G. ’s] school history in Paterson Schools, the team determined that a reevaluation is needed at this time to determine his current skill need and to determine appropriate placement. In addition to these assessments , a request will be submitted to the district autism specialist to conduct an assessment of [R.G.’s] skills/needs in the classroom. [R-9.] Evaluations were to include an educational assessment (analysis of student’s academic performance), speech/language assessment (appraisal of receptive language), psychological assessment (appraisal of student’s cognitive skills, adaptive/life skills, emotional status, and attention/c oncentration), and occupational therapy assessment. (R-9.) In September 2024, R.G. began attending Spencer School. There was significant difficulty getting R.G. off the school bus at Spencer School. There was a total of six students in his classroom. R.G. refused to produce any written or computer work, but he is a talented artist and would create art projects and sculptures. R.G.’s teacher reported the following: [R.G.] has difficulty with transitions, participating in group and one-to-one academic tasks, and often sleeps in class at school. When he has difficulty transitioning between activities or classes, [R.G.] cries, stomps his feet, pulls items from the bulletin board, asks to go “home” or for his parents, and usually requires a break in the sensory room or Child Study Team office. He does not eat at lunch, he occasionally

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 11 requests water from the water fountain, and he does not use the bathroom, or requests to use the bathroom. He has been observed to be sensitive to food textures such as the fizziness of soda and the crunchy textures of a granola bar. He keeps his jacket and bookbag on all day and refuses to take either off for morning school routines. He does not play outside with his peers during recess, he mostly stands or paces back and forth. His teacher reports that he enjoys playing with various fidget tools and Play-Doh to make very detailed dinosaurs but no other figures. [R-16.] The Confidential Psychological Evaluation , dated October 8, 2024, by school psychologist Haniyfa Moten, summarized her assessment as follows: [R.G.] is an 11-year-old, 7-month-old student who is currently in a 5th-grade Self-contained classroom at Louise A. Spencer Elementary School. He is being seen as part of a comprehensive evaluation as required by New Jersey Special Education Law in order to assess his cognitive profile and gather information about his current educational and psychological needs. He is currently receiving Special Education and Related Services under the classification of Autism (ASD). Results on the WISC -V indicate that [R.G.’s] Full Scale IQ score of 53 is in the 0.1 percentile, meaning that [R.G.] performs as well or better than 0.1 % of his peers of the same age. [R.G.’s] FSIQ is within the Extremely Low range. While the Full Scale IQ provides a broad representation of cognitive functioning, describing [R.G.’s] specific cognitive abilities provides a more thorough understanding of his strengths and weaknesses. The Nonverbal Index (NVI) is derived from six subtests that do not require verbal responses. This index score can provide a measure of general intellectual functioning that minimizes expressive language demands for children with special circumstances or clinical needs. Subtests that contribute to the NVI are BOE drawn from four of the five primary cognitive domains (i.e., Visual Spatial, Fluid Reasoning, Working Memory, and Processing Speed). [R.G.’s] performance on the NVI fell in the Extremely Low range when compared to other children his age (NVI = 60, PR = 0.4, CI = 56 -68). Low scores in this area may occur for many reasons including slow

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 12 processing speed, poor working memory, abstract and conceptual reasoning difficulties, weak spatial reasoning skills, or low general intellectual ability. Assessment of [R.G.’s] performance on the NVI may help to estimate his overall nonverbal cognitive ability. General Ability Index (GAI) [R.G.] was administered the five subtests comprising the General Ability Index (GAI), an ancillary index score that provides an estimate of general intelligence that is less impacted by working memory and processing speed, relative to the FSIQ. The GAI consists of subtests from the verbal comprehension, visual-spatial, and fluid reasoning domains. Overall, this index score was significantly lower than other children his age (GAI = 63, PR = 1, Extremely Low range, CI = 59-70). Low GAI scores may occur for a number of reasons, including poor reasoning skills, visual -spatial processing difficulties, language deficits, or generally low intellectual ability. The GAI does not replace the FSIQ as the best estimate of overall ability. It should be interpreted along with the FSIQ and all of the primary index scores. The results of this psychological evaluation suggest that overall; [R.G.] may have difficulty accessing information presented to him in the classroom at a level that is comparable to that of his same - aged peers. Overall results of the WISC-V reveal that [R.G.] demonstrates an extremely low range of reasoning and intellectual ability. His weaknesses in verbal comprehension may cause him to experience difficulty learning and performing to his ability on tests. Furthermore, [R.G.] may have trouble understanding verbal directions with complex language, or when multiple steps are included in an instruction. [R.G.] may experience difficulty in terms of reading comprehension and may need to re-read a given text in order to fully understand the meaning. Understanding abstract concepts may prove difficult for [R.G.], particularly when asked to perform tasks that rely heavily on verbal abstract reasoning. [R.G.’s] difficulties in visual -spatial may manifest in the classroom as difficulty with organizing and processing visual information. With regard to [R.G.’s] working memory weaknesses, he may face difficulty in absorbing instructions, particularly if they contain more than one step. [R.G.] may present as needing more time than his peers in being able to pick up new skills, or in developing new concepts. Mental tasks such as being able to recall simple information that was recently presented may prove difficult for

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 13 [R.G.] without prompts. He may have difficulty performing tasks with several steps, and he may even miss out on steps, or make mistakes with regards to not carefully attending to details. The results of this and all other evaluations conducted as part of this CST evaluation will be shared with [R.G.’s] parents and teachers at the scheduled eligibility meeting. At that time, appropriate recommendations will be made regarding eligibility and programming needs. [R-10.] The Occupational Therapy Assessment Report, dated October 16, 2024, and October 30, 2024, was completed by Keyonah Davis, OTR/L. [R-16.] Her Assessment Narrative for the Eligibility Conference Report is as follows: Strengths: [R.G.] is a quiet and kind 11 year old boy, who demonstrates good visual motor skills and biannual3 [sic] coordination skills concerning classroom tool use (using glue [and] scissors), dressing and other everyday tasks (fastening buttons, opening containers, etc.). He demonstrates good hand -eye coordination and fine motor skills for building figures, throwing and catching, grasping, manipulating and using the muscles of his hands. Weaknesses: [R.G.] demonstrates decreased sustained attention, working memory, the ability to sequence, follow and execute multistep directions and other essential executive functional skills. He demonstrates difficulty with transitions, sensory processing and managing his emotions and self-regulation throughout the school day. He shows deficits with handwriting legibility and 3 Bimanual—per the Occupational Therapy Assessment Report.

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 14 replicating geometric shapes. He requires assistance for ADL’s [sic] (toileting). [R-17.] Beginning November 1, 2024, R.G. was kept home from Spencer School by Mom, ultimately resulting in a truancy referral. The Eligibility Conference Report, dated Nove mber 6, 2024, reflects that R.G. qualified for special education and related services under the category of “Multiple Disabilities”: autism and mild intellectual disability. (R-17.) An IEP meeting was held on November 6, 2024. (R-18.) The reevaluation IEP, dated November 6, 2024 (November 2024 IEP), reflects that his program and placement was the Spencer School autism classroom with a personal aide, with related services of individual occupational therapy (once weekly for thirty minutes in the therapy room), group occupational therapy (once weekly for thirty minutes in the therapy room), and group speech/language therapy (twice weekly for thirty minutes in the therapy room) , and specialized transportation and ESY. (R-18.) Mom expressed concerns that “his autistic related condition-behaviors and academic needs can be most effectively addressed in a private school rather than a public school.” (R-18.) Despite the addition of a personal aide and individual and group occupational therapy, R.G. continued to have difficulty in the Spencer School. He was resisting the strategies employed to get him off the bus and into the building and to transition during the day. He did no written or computer classwork. He did not eat at school or utilize the school bathroom and instead wore pull-ups. He did not socialize with other students and would yell and protest, tear things from the walls, and kick or hit students and staff. Wilson was regularly called to assist the classroom teacher, and R.G. was often escorted to the CST office, which was quieter, to try to calm R.G. Mom was receiving calls from school weekly—sometimes to speak to R.G. to try to calm him so he would remain at school and sometimes to pick him up.

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 15 A referral was made for R.G. to attend Fourteenth Avenue School. Fourteenth Avenue School is a specialized school for only special education students with moderate to severe disabilities. Fourteen th Avenue School includes a cognitively impaired – moderate program, autism program, multiply disabled program, and a pre -Kindergarten autism program. Mohean Garib is a licensed social worker and has been employed by the District for twenty-five years. He is a social worker on the CST at Fourteenth Avenue School. Fourteenth Avenue School utilizes the Antecedent –Behavior–Consequence (ABC) model and utilizes the Rethink, an applied behavior analysis (ABA)–type computer program. Rethink allows the school to do pretests, trials and post -tests, collect data, establish and structure goals, determine required prompting levels, and chart progress. An IEP meeting was held on January 31, 2025 , for a change in related services , whereby the CST agreed to implement transportation via a special education van based upon a discussion of R.G.’s educational needs and history of difficulties on a larger bus. (R-19.) Mom expressed concerns that “his autistic related condition -behaviors and academic needs can be most effectively addressed in a private school rather than a public school.” (R-19.) In February 2025, R.G. was transferred to and began attending Fourteenth Avenue School. R.G. had not attended school since October 31, 2024. The autism program consists of a teacher and three aides : R.G.’s one-to-one aide, a shared aide, and a classroom aide . Fourteenth Avenue School is utilizing the ABC model and Rethink program with R.G. A thirty-day review IEP meeting was held on March 13, 2025. (R-20.) Per the IEP, dated March 13, 2025 (March 2025 IEP), R.G.’s program and placement was at Fourteenth Avenue School , in the special education autism classroom, with small bus transportation due to autism-related behaviors. (R-20.) His related services remained the same. (R-20.) Mom expressed concerns that “his autistic related condition-behaviors

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 16 and academic needs can be most effectively addressed in a private school rather than a public school.” (R-20.) R.G.’s 2024–2025 third quarter Progress Report reflects the following: English Language Arts 5: [R.G.] demonstrates confidence and exhibits great transitional skills within the classroom environment. Although he is hesitant to complete activities he is redirected with motivators. General Music 5: 02—Showing Improvement Mathematics 5: [R.G.] is hesitant to work, however he is able to complete his work when given motivators. He was excited and engaged during measurement when the class made "President Parfait" a recipe that edible [sic]. Science 5: [R.G.] exhibits interest in class and participates. He enjoyed science activities because he was able to work on creating various Ecosystems dioramas. Physical Education 5: 04—Actively Participates in Class Health 5: [R.G.] actively engages in class and participates in classroom activities. Social Studies 5 : [R.G.] exhibits enthusiasm and positive attitude in class. He is courteous and interacts kindly with his classmates. Visual Arts 5 : 02—Showing Improvement 04 —Actively Participates in Class [R-29.] R.G.’s February 28, 2025 Fundations Test Recording Form reflects that in “Student Correctly Identified Lower -Case Letters and Give Sounds,” he scored 10 out of 10 (naming letters) and 0 out of 10 (sounds), noting that R.G. refused to verbalize sounds , in “Student Correctly Identifies Letter Corresponding to Sound ,” he scored 0 out of 10 , and in “Student Correctly Forms Lower-Case Letters,” he scored 5 out of 10. (R-25.) On “Student Correctly Blends Sounds to Form Words,” there was no score, and it was noted

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 17 that “Student spelt [ sic] the words but refused to verbalize ,” and “Copied the word —did not spell on his own,” and for “Student Correctly Reads CVC Words” there was also no score, and it was noted that “Student wrote the words in notebook. Refused to verbalize. Copied the words did not spell independently.” (R-25.) On “Student Correctly Forms Upper-Case Letters” his score was 10 out of 10, and on “Student Correctly Names Letters in Alphabetical Order,” he placed the letter tiles onto the letter board an d recited the alphabet in order, but it was noted that “Student did work only when motivators were introduced, first work then outside/gym.” (R-25.) R.G.’s March 9, 2025 Fundations Mid-Unit Check reflects that on “Student Correctly Identifies Lower-Case Letters and Give Sounds,” he scored 8 out of 10 (naming letters) and 7 out of 10 (sounds), and it was noted that he cooperated for testing. (R-26.) On “Student Correctly Identifies Letter Corresponding to Sound,” R.G. scored 7 out of 10, and in “Student Correctly Forms Lower-Case Letters,” he scored 10 out of 10. (R-26.) A letter dated April 11, 2025, from Garib to R.G.’s parents, advised that R.G. had experienced some difficulties that day and encouraged the parents to schedule a meeting with the school and potentially follow up with a medical center and/or pediatrician for evaluations. Specifically, the letter states: [R.G.] repeatedly expressed a desire to go home at lunchtime and attempted to elope from the lunchroom. Student became confrontational to staff when redirect [sic] to return to his seat and expressed that he wanted to die. Student returned to class after lunch and observed for the remainder of the day. [R-39.] The assessment in the letter reflects that “[R.G.’s] statement is inconsistent with previous academic history as noted from teachers and staff in the building,” and that “[d]ue to inclement weather student was unable to go outside for recess, when unable to obtain preferred activity student usually states that he wishes to go home.” (R-39.)

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 18 R.G.’s May 12, 2025 Fundations Unit 1 and Unit 2 Test Recording Forms reflect that on “Student Correctly Identified Lower-Case Letters and Give Sounds,” he scored 10 out of 10 (naming letters) and 9 out of 10 (sounds), noting great cooperation during testing. On “Student Correctly Identifies Letter Corresponding to Sound,” he scored 8 out of 10, and in “Student Correctly Forms Lower-Case Letters,” he scored 10 out of 10. On “Student Correctly Blends Sounds to Form Words,” he scored 4 out of 5 . On “Student Correctly Reads CVC Words,” he scored 9 out of 10. On “Student Correctly Forms Upper- Case Letters,” his score was 10 out of 10 , and on “Student Correctly Names Letters in Alphabetical Order,” he placed the letter tiles onto the letter board and recited the alphabet in order, but it was noted that “Student accurately does the activity, however motivator (playground) and First/Then Board.” (R-27.) R.G.’s May 19, 2025 OT update from Adrian Bituin, OTR/L, states: [R.G.’s] participation in Occupational Therapy services are making steady progress. [R.G.] transitioned from the classroom into the therapy room with 1 or less redirection in all of the sessions in May. [R.G.] participates well with a visual schedule and use of FIRST/THEN sequence with a timer. Writing has been a low interest task for [R.G.], however, he has engaged with writing activities that involve motivating topics, such as animals. [R.G.] generally prefers to write in full upper-case letters, however he is able to be redirected to writing with accurate case letters in short durations. [R.G.] near-point copies 5 -7 word sentence prompts with omission of 1 word in 4/5 sentences. He omits punctuation in 2/5 trials. Given a visual spacer cue, [R.G.] carried-over acceptable spacing in 70% of his work. He demonstrates acceptable legibility in 80% of the words written during the May work sample collected. [R-34.] R.G.’s Speech-Language Progress Report, dated May 13, 2025, by Shavanne Williams-Robinson, CCC-SLP, states:

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 19 1. Answering WH- Questions (who, what, where, when, why) using Subject-Verb-Object (SVO) sentence structure Progress: Emerging [R.G.] has demonstrated emerging skills in responding to “who,” “what,” and “where” questions when presented with visual supports such as picture cues. He benefits from listening to short stories of approximately five sentences and is able to identify some answers by pointing. However, he continues to require maximum verbal and visual cues to verbalize responses. His responses are typically one -word utterances, and he benefits from a model to expand responses into SVO sentences (e.g., “The boy is eating. ”). Visual aids that label each question type help support his understanding. He continues to require direct instruction and repetition, especially for “when” and “why” questions, which remain challenging. 2. Following 1 -2-step directions with age -appropriate embedded basic concepts Progress: Partially Achieved [R.G.] is able to follow 1 -step directions containing simple concepts (e.g., colors, in, beside) with moderate to maximum support. He demonstrates limited attention span, sustaining engagement for up to 5 minutes before needing significant redirection or preferred reinforcers. When directions include more complex concepts (e.g., between, under, above), [R.G.] typically does not respond accurately and benefits from visual demonstrations and picture-based concept instruction. When tasks get difficult for h im, he points to the door to request going back to the classroom. He works best when given short, structured tasks and a visual timer or reinforcement schedule that includes access to preferred activities (e.g., dinosaurs, play-dough). 3. Requesting, turn-taking, and commenting during peer interactions Progress: Emerging with Maximum Support [R.G.] continues to require maximum modeling and prompting to initiate peer interactions. He is typically quiet during small group sessions and does not independently request, take

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 20 turns, or comment. With verbal prompting (e.g., “You can ask, and you’ll get it”) and modeling simple phrases (e.g., “I want play-dough”), he can request preferred items in a structured setting. Turn-taking is supported through tactile cues (e.g., hand-over-hand gestures) and provider facilitation. He is able to take 2 -3 turns when highly supported but tends to lose patience and attempts to control the materials. He does not yet make comments during peer interactions and will continue to work on this goal. Strengths: • Responds well to visual supports and structured routines • Motivated by preferred items (dinosaurs, play-dough) • Can follow basic directions with concrete language and visuals • Demonstrates emerging joint attention with support Barriers to Progress: • Inconsistent school attendance has significantly impacted his ability to generalize and retain skills. • Limited attention span and difficulty sustaining engagement in group settings • Requires maximum cueing to initiate and maintain interactions with peers Recommendations: [R.G.] continues to benefit from speech and language services targeting receptive and expressive language, particularly WH- question comprehension, direction following, and functional communication with peers. Continued emphasis on visual supports, modeling, and structured routines is recommended. Collaboration with the classroom team to provide carryover opportunities during daily routines will support generalization of skills. [R-35.]

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 21 R.G.’s 2024–2025 fourth quarter Progress Report reflects the following: English Language Arts 5: [R.G.] has shown steady improvement in ELA despite his absences. He engages and participates with motivators and is cooperative when given work activities. General Music 5: 02—Showing Improvement Mathematics 5: [R.G.] demonstrates enthusiasm in Math class. He listens carefully to instructions before completing work activities which is a positive factor in his steady progress. He completes his work when given motivators in a timely manner. Science 5: [R.G.] exhibits interest in Science. He is excited during hands on activities and completes his activities given support and guidance. Physical Education 5: 04—Actively Participates in Class Health 5: [R.G.] is co-operative and participates in classroom activities. Social Studies 5: [R.G.] is enthusiastic about learning new things. He actively participates in class and completes his classwork when given motivators. He exhibits outstanding effort. Visual Arts 5: 02 —Showing Improvement 04 —Actively Participates in Class 06—Exhibits Insight and Interest [R-30.] TESTIMONY Nichelle Wilson In August 2024, it was made known to her by R.G.’s Avon School case manager that Mom and Aunt mentioned an out -of-district placement, and it was made very clear by Mom and Aunt at the September 2024 meeting that they wanted R.G. to attend Garden Academy. However, R.G. had never been in an autism setting before, and the District wanted R.G. to attend the Spencer School autism program to allow the District to observe him while waiting for evaluations to be conducted. When an out -of-district placement is

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 22 requested, she tries to find out the parent concerns and reason for the request, but it was difficult to obtain that information because Mom and Aunt were adamant that R.G. attend Garden Academy. Mom did not identify anything about the Newark program that she did not like or did not agree with. Mom’s statement was that she does not like Newark, does not like “number schools,” and she wants R.G. to attend a school outside Newark until he is twenty-one years old, specifically Garden Academy. While the District was completing evaluations, R.G. was having a really difficult time at Spencer School. The evaluations showed he had more potential than what he was exhibiting. A meeting was held in November 2024. The evaluation reports were read, and it was recommended that he remain in an autism program, and OT and a personal aide were added to the IEP. In discussing placement, Mom and Aunt only wanted him to attend Garden Academy and wanted to know how to get him into Garden Academy. There was discussion about the District’s policy and that R.G. would try the District’s autism program at Fourteenth Avenue School and the District would arrange for Mom to observe and tour the school. There was pushback from Mom and Aunt because Mom did not like Newark schools or number schools. She tried to assure Mom that Fourteenth Avenue School would provide the more intense supports R.G. required because unlike Spencer School, where he was in a special education program within a general education school, Fourte enth Avenue School was solely a special education school, with a behaviorist. An out-of-district placement could be considered if Fourteenth Avenue School was not successful. Mohean Garib On his first day at Fourteenth Avenue School, R.G. was quiet and introverted, and it seemed like it would be difficult to reach him. But later that day, R.G.’s aide showed him a picture that R.G. had colored. The aide said that R.G. showed no interest in work and just scribbled, but when the class was coloring , R.G. appropriately used color and stayed within the lines , and his picture was amazing. It was like two different students. Initially, R.G. was selective in talking, wanted to go home, and would repeat “home.” They

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 23 kept working with him and trying to engage him. He started to talk more in his classroom with his teacher and aide, and they were able to get more work out of him. He showed more skills. Fourteenth Avenue School was able to engage with R.G. and have success with him. R.G. was making friends, talking and interacting with a friend, and liked to play sports, especially basketball, on the playground. Per R.G.’s classroom teacher, he is engaging in the lesson and participating in class. He will do some cooperative work with his friend. He likes math. His class is reading about Rumpelstiltskin using different modalities. R.G. is more comfortable and interacts with the other kids more. He is making social-emotional progress. He has academic abilities. He works toward preferred choice activities. He does not refuse to comply. There are no reports of violence or property damage. The biggest concern is consistency, because R.G. is absent about one day per week for unknown reasons. Missing a day or more when requiring that level of routine makes it tough to return to structure. In the morning, students are greeted at the bus and staff finds out who is present/absent from the bus attendants. Students are escorted to their meeting location by bus group, and teachers pick up their students and transition them to the classroom. In class, they have breakfast and start their daily rout ine, including announcements and activities. They use visual schedules so students can anticipate what is next to avoid upset, outbursts, or refusal to participate, and students are prepared for the change with a transition plan. The students in the classroom are on different levels of functioning and are pushed to what they are capable of. The students go as a group to lunch, to the playground, and to afternoon activities like music, art, gym, and sometimes special activities like Friday free time movies or dance videos on YouTube. Sometimes students interact with other classes at lunch or gym, which allows for guided activities and interactions and opportunities for social and emotional learning for those able to participate based upon abilities. Everyone owns his or her own actions , and nobody is blamed for someone else’s actions. R.G. does not have difficulty getting off the bus and transitioning into school. He likes to be independent going into school , and he does not like to be crowded. He does still ask to go home, which could happen at any point. Yesterday, he came in and said he wanted to go home, but his teacher reinforced “first

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 24 school then home ” and he accepted it. He does not respond well to “no,” but does respond well to “if/first—then.” If he had a bad morning and did not want to go to school, staff try to get him to be active and engage with friends so he can get beyond wanting to go home, and sometimes they create alternative plans and activities. R.G. eats lunch at school. Initially, he did not like to , but this past week he has eaten lunch every day. Initially, he would not use the bathroom, but now he will use the bathroom with minimal supervision. He was notified about R.G.’s statement at lunch that he wanted to die. He tried to figure out what was going on and what led to the statement. R.G. only stated it once, and there has been no art or drawings of that nature and no suicidal ideation. R.G.’s preferred activity is the playground. R.G. wanted to go outside but was told no. R.G. was frustrated by being told no, and he believes that is what led to the statement. Mom said that R.G. made statements of that nature before in relation to a game he was playing. R.G. did not try to harm himself at home or at school. It was a one-off, but they are mindful of it. They have made certain he has had ample time to complete tasks and create an alternative if there is something he does not want to do. Since that incident , there have been no statements like that or any behavior that would cause concern in that regard. Multiple staff members have attended Handle With Care training for crisis management and de - escalation over the years. Stacey Tate Stacey Tate has an elementary school teacher certificate and is a learning disabilities teacher-consultant (LDT-C) who has been employed by the Board for twenty- three years. The Spencer School CST believed R.G. would be a good fit for Fourteenth Avenue School. She briefly observed R.G. when he started, at which time he was quiet, and did not speak. R.G. is verbal but chooses not to speak at times. She observed no unusual behavior. She has observed R.G.’s class several times, and compared to when he first started , R.G. was much more relaxed and happier. He responded to “good morning” when prompted, chimed his bell in music , and he was engaged and looked

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 25 comfortable. In the past week, she had observed him eating pizza in the cafeteria. His Fundations cooperation has improved, and his scores have improved. He is not refusing as much and is more motivated to work . He is engaging in classroom instruction , cooperating more , and participating more. His work product ivity has increased. He worked well with a timer. He is showing improvement and making progress . Updates from OT and speech therapy show improvement. His work sample from March to May shows improvement. Her observations of R.G. are consistent with the comments in his third-quarter and fourth -quarter 2025 progress reports. Fourteenth Avenue School is appropriate for R.G., and she recommends that he continue at Four teenth Avenue School. S.M.-W. It is good to hear testimony that R.G. is making progress at Fourteenth Avenue School, but the District’s program cannot give R.G. all the tools he needs. They do not know the credentials of the District teachers. They asked the teachers for their credentials, and are entitled to that information, but they were refused, and it makes them not trust the District. They knew Spencer School would not work from the beginning. The District was putting things in motion to move R.G. to Fourteenth Avenue School without even discussing it with Mom and Aunt. Garden Academy is a highly ranked school and best suits R.G.’s needs. Garden Academy has trained and skilled in-house employees. The OT email addresses in Newark do not have Newark District email addresses, so the therapists must be outsourced and are not Newark’s employees. Garden Academy has teachers/instructors that assist parents at doctor and dentist appointments , and it has a mock doctor and dentist office inside the school. Garden Academy takes autistic kids to work at local stores alongside the employees. Fourteenth Avenue School does not offer that. At Garden Academy, he would attend just one school from now until age twenty- one. Once R.G. ages out of Fourteenth Avenue School, she believes the District will send him to Central High School. That is a “no go.” At Central High School, he will not be in a contained e nvironment. There will be all different types of students at Central High School. She and Mom want the best for R.G. They want to see more than two or three

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 26 documents. They want to know exactly where he started and where he is now. The District keeps bouncing him from school to school, and that will happen again when he ages out of Fourteenth Avenue School . Change is a big issue for R.G., and they just want to acclimate him to one school that he can attend, where he can be the best version of himself. I.M. R.G. was okay with Avon School, but he did not eat or use the bathroom for the entire day. When he was at Spencer School, she would get called three to four times a week, if not every day, and sometimes several times a day. She does not mind talking to her child, but it was a constant thing. Then they said he got violent and was smacking substitutes and aides, and sometimes she had to pick him up when he became too aggressive, so she decided to keep him home. That is not behavior she was used to from R.G., and Spencer School could not handle him. PerformCare said that home instruction only lasts eight weeks and that because of his condition, R.G. could not get home instruction. She agrees that R.G. is doing much better. However, R.G. is often late and misses the bus. Recently, R.G. was having a hard time getting on the bus . If he is fighting her at home, she lets him stay home so that there is not a problem with school. She agrees with the District’s “if/first—then” strategy, and to get him to go to school, she will say “school first,” and then he can go to the store, movies, or whatever. It hurt her as a parent to hear testimony that she was annoyed by constant calls. There is a school out there that is local for him to attend. The best fit for his needs is Garden Academy. The District has bounced him from school to school, and at Fourteenth Avenue School, he said he wanted to die . That shocked her because he has never spoken like that , except when she is doing his hair or cleaning his nose, when he will say, “don’t kill me, I don’t want to die.”

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 27 LEGAL ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 –1482, ensures that all children with disabilities have available to them a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living, and ensures that the rights of children with disabilities and parents of such children are protected. 20 U.S.C. § 1400(d)(1)(A), (B); N.J.A.C. 6A:14 -1.1. Under the IDEA, a “child with a disability” means a child with intellectual disabilities, hearing impairments (including deafness), speech or language impairments, visual impairments (including blindness), serious emotional disturbance, orthopedic impairments, autism, traumatic brain injury, other health impairments, or specific learning disabilities, and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related services. 20 U.S.C. § 1401(3)(A). States qualifying for federal funds under the IDEA must assure all children with disabilities the right to a free “appropriate public education.” 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(1); Hendrick Hudson Cent. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Rowley , 458 U.S. 176 (1982). Each district board of education is responsible for providing a system of FAPE. N.J.A.C. 6A:14- 1.1(d). A FAPE means special education and related services that (A) have been provided at public expense, under public supervision and direction, and without charg e; (B) meet the standards of the state educational agency; (C) include an appropriate preschool, elementary-school, or secondary-school education in the state involved; and (D) are provided in conformity with the individualized education program required u nder 20 U.S.C. § 1414(d). 20 U.S.C. § 1401(9); Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982). An IEP is a written statement for each child with a disability that is developed, reviewed, and revised in accordance with 20 U.S.C. § 1414(d), 20 U.S.C. § 1401(14) , and 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(4). When a student is determined to be eligible for special education, an IEP must be developed to establish the rationale for the student’s educational placement and to serve as a basis for program implementation. N.J.A.C. 6A:14-1.3, -3.7. FAPE requires that the education offered to the child must be sufficient

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 28 to “confer some educational benefit upon the handicapped child,” but it does not require that the school district maximize the potential of disabled students commensurate with the opportunity provided to non -disabled students. Rowley, 458 U.S. at 200. Hence, a satisfactory IEP must provide “significant learning” and confer “meaningful benefit.” T.R. v. Kingwood Twp. Bd. of Educ., 205 F.3d 572, 577–78 (3d Cir. 2000) (citation omitted). The Supreme Court discussed Rowley in Endrew F. v. Douglas C ounty School District RE-1, 580 U.S. 386 (2017), noting that Rowley did not “establish any one test for determining the adequacy of educational benefits,” and concluding that the “adequacy of a given IEP turns on the unique circumstances of the child for whom it was created.” Id. at 394, 404. Endrew F. warns against courts substituting their own notions of sound education policy for those of school authorities , and notes that deference is based u pon application of expertise and the exercise of judgment by those authorities. Id. at 404. However, t he school authorities are expected to offer “a cogent and responsive explanation for their decisions that shows the IEP is reasonably calculated to enable the child to make progress appropriate in light of his circumstances.” Ibid. Additionally, in accordance with the IDEA, children with disabilities are to be educated in the least restrictive environment (LRE). 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(5); N.J.A.C. 6A:14-1.1(b)(5). To that end, to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are to be educated with children who are not disabled, and special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment should occur on ly when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(5)(A); N.J.A.C. 6A:14-4.2. The Third Circuit has interpreted this to require that a disabled child be placed in the LRE that will provide the child with a “meaningful educational benefit.” T.R., 205 F.3d at 578. Petitioner argues that Fourteenth Avenue School is not the best fit for R.G. and that the District has not shown that R.G.’s teachers are properly credentialed to address

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 29 his special education needs. Petitioner further argues that Garden Academy is an appropriate placement for R.G. Conversely, the District argues that it has provided R.G. with a FAPE in the LRE, and that petitioner presented no evidence of the appropriateness of Garden Academy and further argues that Mom’s actions were unreasonable because she was adamant that R.G. attend Garden Academy and she kept him home from school for more than three months. The law requires that R.G. be educated in least restrictive environment that will provide him with a “meaningful educational benefit,” and where he will make appropriate progress in light of his circumstances. While Fourteenth Avenue School is more restrictive than Spencer School, as it is a strictly special education school, the evidence reflects that it is an appropriate placement for R.G. The District’s witnesses consistently and credibly testified that R.G. is making progress at Fourteenth Avenue School, which is also reflected in the progress reports and other documentation from the District. There is no longer daily difficulty in getting R.G. off the bus. Although sometimes still hesitant to complete activities in certain classes, R.G. is now able to be redirected with motivators and is no longer refusing to produce any written or computer work. R.G.’s test scores have improved. R.G. eats at school during lunch and utilizes the school bathroom. His transition skills have improved, and he interacts with friends. There are no reports of violent behavior or property damage. His attendance, though still problematic, has also improved. Based upon the testimony and documentary evidence, I CONCLUDE that R.G. has made meaningful educational progress in spite of the challenges posed by his diagnoses and his significant absences from school . I further CONCLUDE that the District’s IEPs were appropriate to meet R.G.’s educational needs and provided him with a FAPE in the least restrictive environment. As such, there is no legal support for placement at Garden Academy at this time.

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 30 ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that the relief sought by petitioner is DENIED and the due process petition is DISMISSED. This decision is final pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(1)(A) and 34 C.F.R. § 300.514 (2025) and is appealable by filing a complaint and bringing a civil action either in the Law Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey or in a district court of the United States. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(2); 34 C.F.R. § 300.516 (2024). If the parent or adult student feels that this decision is not being fully implemented with respect to program or services, this concern should be communicated in writing to the Director, Office of Special Education. October 3, 2025 DATE KELLY KIRK, ALJ Date Received at Agency Date Mailed to Parties:

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 31 APPENDIX WITNESSES For Petitioner: I.M. S.M.-W. For Respondent: Nichelle Wilson Mohean Garib Stacey Tate EXHIBITS For Petitioner: None For Respondent: R-1 Social Assessment, dated October 9, 2020 R-2 Confidential Psychological Report, dated October 19, 2020 R-3 ND/Neuro DC Instructions, dated June 22, 2022 R-4 Educational Reevaluation, dated December 4, 2023 R-5 Speech/Language Evaluation, dated December 15, 2023 R-6 (Not in evidence) R-7 Paterson DRAFT IEP, dated March 26, 2024 R-8 Invitation to a Meeting, dated September 5, 2024 R-9 Evaluation Determination Plan, dated September 23, 2024 R-10 Confidential Psychological Evaluation, dated October 8, 2024 R-11 School Companion Sensory Profile 2 Teacher Questionnaire & Score Summary

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 05891-25 32 R-12 Beery VMI Test R-13 Cutting Samples R-14 Test of Handwriting Skills Record Form R-15 BOT Fine Motor Test R-16 OT Assessment Report, dated October 2024 R-17 Eligibility Conference Report, dated November 6, 2024 R-18 IEP, dated November 6, 2024 R-19 IEP, dated January 31, 2025 R-20 IEP, dated March 13, 2025 R-21 (Not in evidence) R-22 (Not in evidence) R-23 (Not in evidence) R-24 (Not in evidence) R-25 Fundations Unit 2 Assessment R-26 Fundations Mid-Unit Check R-27 Fundations Unit 1 Test R-28 (Not in evidence) R-29 Progress Report, Quarter 3 2024–2025 R-30 Progress Report, Quarter 4 2024–2025 R-31 (Not in evidence) R-32 (Not in evidence) R-33 (Not in evidence) R-34 May 2025 OT Update Email R-35 Speech-Language Progress Report, dated May 13, 2025 R-36 (Not in evidence) R-37 (Not in evidence) R-38 (Not in evidence) R-39 Garib Letter, dated April 11, 2025