Board of Education of the Township of Pennsauken, Camden County v. Lovell Pugh-Bassett, Interim Executive County Superintendent; Board of Education of Haddon Township, Camden County; and A.A. on behalf of minor child, A.L., 6/16/2022, (#122-22)

122-22
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
Board of Education of the Township of Pennsauken,
Camden County,
Petitioner,
v.
Lovell Pugh-Bassett, Interim Executive County
Superintendent, Board of Education of Haddon Township,
Camden County, and A.A. on behalf of minor child, A.L.,
Respondents.
Synopsis
In this matter on remand, the Board of Education of the Township of Pennsauken (Pennsauken) appealed the
determination of the respondents, Lovell Pugh-Bassett, Interim Executive County Superintendent (ECS), and
the Haddon Township Board of Education (Haddon Township), that A.A. and her minor child are homeless.
Pennsauken contended that A.A. and A.L. were domiciled in Pennsauken, as they had resided in the
Pennsauken home of A.A.’s mother for more than eighteen months, and further argued that Pennsauken is
therefore not financially responsible for tuition costs related to A.L.’s attendance in Haddon Township schools.
In a Commissioner’s decision issued on January 6, 2021, the Acting Commissioner determined that more
information was necessary to determine whether the Pennsauken home of A.A.’s mother is fixed, regular and
adequate such that A.L. is no longer homeless under state and federal law. Accordingly, the matter was
remanded for further proceedings to determine this issue.
On remand, the ALJ found, inter alia, that: A.A. has been living in her mother’s Pennsauken home with her
daughter A.L. since 2017; A.A. is living there with A.L. and taking care of her mother who is disabled; the
home is a fixed, regular, and adequate place to live with regular sleeping accommodations; A.A. and A.L. each
have their own bedroom; A.A. and A.L. have access to all of the home’s facilities, including the kitchen,
bathroom, and living rooms; despite A.A.’s repeated insistence that the Pennsauken house is a temporary
residence and she intends to return to Haddon Township, she has been living in the family home in since 2017.
Accordingly, the ALJ concluded that A.A. and A.L. can no longer be considered homeless; that they have been
domiciled in Pennsauken since 2018; that Pennsauken has no financial responsibility for A.L.’s attendance in
Haddon Township schools; that A.L. should be placed in the Pennsauken Public School District, if A.A. so
desires; and that the ECS’s determination of homelessness should be reversed.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurred with the ALJ’s determination that A.L. is no longer homeless as the
Pennsauken home is a fixed, regular, and adequate residence which has become the family’s permanent
residence. The Commissioner ordered that Pennsauken is not responsible for A.L.’s education costs in
Haddon Township, and A.L. shall be enrolled in Pennsauken schools for the 2022-2023 school year.
This synopsis is not part of the Commissioner’s decision. It has been prepared for the convenience of the reader. It has
been neither reviewed nor approved by the Commissioner.

OAL Dkt. No. EDU 00744-21
(EDU 16086-20 on remand)
Agency Dkt. No. 94-5/19
New Jersey Commissioner of Education
Final Decision
Board of Education of the Township of
Pennsauken, Camden County,
Petitioner,
v.
Lovell Pugh-Bassett, Interim Executive County
Superintendent, Board of Education of
Haddon Township, Camden County, and
A.A., on behalf of minor child, A.L.,
Respondents.
The record of this matter and the Initial Decision of the Office of Administrative Law
(OAL) have been reviewed, as have the exceptions filed pursuant to N.J.A.C. 1:1-18.4 by
respondent Interim Executive County Superintendent (ECS) Lovell Pugh-Bassett and respondent
Haddon Township Board of Education (Haddon Township), and the reply thereto filed by
petitioner Pennsauken Board of Education (Pennsauken). Respondent A.A. did not file
exceptions or a reply.
A.A. and her minor child, A.L., resided in Haddon Township from 2012 through 2016,
when they were evicted due to financial hardship. After temporarily living with a friend in
Bellmawr, they moved into the home of A.A.’s mother home in Pennsauken in August or
September of 2017. A.L. continued to attend school in Haddon Township. On March 28, 2019,
122-22

2
the ECS issued a determination that A.L. was homeless, as the family lost their apartment due
to financial hardship and was residing with relatives out of necessity. Accordingly, the ECS
found that Pennsauken was financially responsible for A.L.’s education, because A.L. had
resided there for more than one year. Pennsauken filed an appeal challenging the
homelessness determination, seeking for A.L. to be placed in Pennsauken’s schools, if the
family desired, and a finding that Pennsauken would not be financially responsible for A.L. to
attend Haddon Township schools.
Following an Initial Decision finding that A.L. was not homeless, the Commissioner
concluded that additional information was required and remanded the matter for further
proceedings to determine whether the Pennsauken home was fixed, regular, and adequate,
such that A.L. was no longer homeless. On remand, the ALJ found that the three individuals
living in the home each have their own bedrooms and are not doubled up. Furthermore, A.A.
and A.L. have access to all of the home’s facilities, including the kitchen, bathroom, and living
rooms. Accordingly, the ALJ concluded that the Pennsauken home is a fixed, regular, and
adequate place to live and that A.L. can no longer be considered homeless.
In her exceptions, the ECS argues that A.A. and A.L. continue to be homeless. She notes
that the family was evicted from their Haddon Township residence due to inability to pay rent, and
that A.A. lacks the resources and ability – based on her level of income and prior felony convictions
– to obtain employment that would allow her to sustain an independent residence, such that she is
doubled up in Pennsauken out of necessity. The ECS also contends that A.A. intends to return to
Haddon Township and is making an active effort to obtain an independent apartment but has been
unsuccessful. According to the ECS, because the family has been living in Pennsauken for over one

3
year, they have established a domicile there, and Pennsauken should be responsible for the cost of
A.L.’s education while A.L. continues to attend school in Haddon Township.
In its exceptions, Haddon Township argues that A.L. and A.A. are doubled up in Pennsauken,
where they moved out of necessity. Haddon Township also contends that it has always been A.A.’s
intention to move back to Haddon Township, so the Pennsauken home is not a permanent
residence. Haddon Township contends that A.L. is domiciled in Pennsauken and that Pennsauken is
therefore responsible for the costs of her education.
In reply, the Board argues that the ALJ’s decision properly considered all of the evidence and
should be adopted by the Commissioner. According to Pennsauken, the family is not doubled up, as
A.A. and A.L. have their own bedrooms and unrestricted access to the entire home. Pennsauken
also contends that A.A., her mother, and A.L. have become a cohesive family unit, such that the
Pennsauken home has become fixed and regular. Pennsauken notes that A.A. was unable to
produce any evidence of her efforts to move out of the Pennsauken home and argues that A.A.’s
stated intent is insufficient to support a finding of homelessness.
Upon review, the Commissioner concurs with the ALJ’s determination that A.L. is no
longer homeless. Under the McKinney-Vento Act, homeless children are defined as “individuals
who lack a fixed, regular and adequate nighttime residence,” which includes “children sharing
housing with other persons due to loss of their own housing, economic hardship, or a similar
reason.” 42 U.S.C.A. § 11434a. Similarly, under state law, homeless children are defined as
“child[ren] or youth who lack[] a fixed, regular and adequate residence pursuant to
N.J.S.A. 18A:7B-12 and N.J.A.C. 6A:17-2.2,” which includes children living in the “residence of
relatives or friends where the homeless child resides out of necessity because his or her family
lacks a regular or permanent residence of its own.” N.J.A.C. 6A:17-1.2 and 2.2.

4
Thus, conducting a homelessness evaluation to determine whether a child’s home is
considered fixed, regular and adequate requires a fact-specific analysis and “cannot rest upon a
simple calculation of the amount of time that children have spent in a particular location or
municipality.” M. O’K. v. Board of Education of the Borough of Cresskill, et al, Commissioner
Decision No. 325-14, decided August 12, 2014 at 3, aff’d, A-0828-14T4 (App. Div.,
September 8, 2016). In conducting such a fact-specific inquiry, the Commissioner must
consider the totality of the circumstances, as “[t]he reasons for the children’s homelessness,
their living conditions, and the resources and intentions of the parents or custodians are
relevant.” Ibid.
The Commissioner has previously addressed the fact-specific nature of a homelessness
inquiry. In M. O’K., supra, following the foreclosure of their home in Cresskill, the O’K family
occupied the bottom floor of their relatives’ house in Little Ferry, which consisted of one small
bedroom and a common area, without a bathroom or kitchen. The parents and two of the
children shared the bedroom, while their third child slept in the common area. At the time of
the litigation, neither parent was employed, and the family’s sole income consisted of Social
Security Disability benefits. During the pendency of the litigation, the O’K family represented
that they were actively searching for a house in Cresskill. The Commissioner found, and the
Appellate Division affirmed, that the O’K family became homeless due to the foreclosure of
their home in Cresskill, and although they had been deemed domiciled in Little Ferry as a result
of their residence in the district for over one year, they continued to remain homeless due to
their shared living conditions and the parents’ economic hardship.

5
In contrast, in State-Operated School District of the City of Camden, Camden County v. C.
Ann Volk, Executive County Superintendent, New Jersey Department of Education, and E.H., on
behalf of minor child, K.M., Commissioner Decision No. 172-17R, decided June 20, 2017, the
family relocated from Voorhees to Camden due to economic hardship that prevented them
from continuing their lease. In the Camden residence, the family was able to use the entire
residence and was not relegated to a portion of the home that would otherwise be considered
inadequate. E.H., the children’s mother, argued that the residence was inadequate because the
siblings had to share a room, which the Commissioner found was not uncommon.
Furthermore, given E.H.’s ongoing employment at an annual salary of $65,000, the
Commissioner was not persuaded that she was unable to find suitable housing in Voorhees,
particularly in light of her testimony that she had stopped looking for apartments. The
Commissioner found that the family was not residing in the Camden residence of out necessity
and that it qualified as a “fixed, regular, and adequate” nighttime residence, such that the
family was not homeless. Ibid.
Similar to Volk, in J.G., on behalf of minor children, T.G. and C.G. v. Board of Education of
the Township of Edison, et al, Commissioner Decision No. 125-20, decided June 15, 2020, the
G. family moved in with J.G.’s mother in Edison after being evicted from their home in
Milltown. The family was able to use three of the four bedrooms, the kitchen, bathrooms, all
common areas, and utilities in the Edison home. J.G. and his wife were both employed, with an
income of $71,000 a year, but they did not pay rent or contribute to housing costs, other than
food and a storage facility. While they stated that their intent was to move back to Milltown,
there was no documentation of their search for a new home, and J.G. admitted that he had not

6
submitted a rental application in at least six months. The Commissioner found that, while J.G.’s
intention may be to eventually move back to Milltown, the totality of the facts and
circumstances demonstrate that the family is no longer homeless.
Homelessness, particularly in cases like the present matter, is best viewed in a
continuum. Volk, supra. For instance, a family may move into a relative’s home out of
necessity and hardship, but over time, that home may become a regular residence.1 Ibid. Here,
the family’s circumstances demonstrate that they all depend on each other in the manner of a
traditional household unit, supporting the conclusion that A.A. and A.L.’s residence has become
fixed in its current arrangement and location. In the Pennsauken home, A.A. acts as caregiver
for her mother, who is disabled and who would need to hire help if A.A. did not assist with her
activities of daily living. In turn, A.A. relies on her mother to pay for the family’s living
expenses. A.A. testified that if she moved out of the Pennsauken home, she would want to
take her mother with her, demonstrating that the living arrangement of A.A., her mother, and
A.L. residing in the same home has become fixed. Furthermore, there is no indication that the
residence is inadequate. A.A. and A.L. enjoy the use of the entire Pennsauken home, including
the kitchen, bathroom, and living rooms, and they each have their own bedroom. While A.A.
indicated that she intends to return to Haddon Township, given that her mother would
continue to live with her, that intention appears to be based solely on a preference for location
1 For this reason, an ECS’ determination that a child is homeless can be reasonable in light of the evidence she has
at the time; however, such determination can be overturned based on evidence received during the course of the
proceedings. See Bd. of Educ. of the Borough of Hawthorne, Passaic Cty. v. Bd. of Educ. of the Borough of Prospect
Park, Passaic Cty., and N.J. Dep’t of Educ., Commissioner Decision No. 196-14, decided May 12, 2014. Here, the
Commissioner finds that the ECS’ determination that A.L. was homeless was reasonable based on the information
she had at the time she made her decision, but that decision must nonetheless be overturned based on the
evidence presented at hearing.

7
and not a need for additional space to avoid doubling up or to otherwise rectify any inadequacy
in the Pennsauken home. Moreover, the ALJ found that there was no proof to support A.A.’s
attempts to find housing in Haddon Township, and her stated intention is insufficient to
support a finding of homelessness. Based on these facts, the Commissioner concludes that the
Pennsauken home is a fixed, regular, and adequate residence, which has become the family’s
permanent residence, and A.L. is therefore no longer homeless.
Although the ALJ did not make a specific finding as to when A.L. was no longer
homeless, the Commissioner finds that the Pennsauken home had become the family’s
permanent residence at the start of the 2018-2019 school year.2
Accordingly, the Commissioner orders that A.L. is no longer homeless and that
Pennsauken is not responsible for the costs of her education in Haddon Township. A.L. shall be
enrolled in the Pennsauken school district for the 2022-2023 school year.
IT IS SO ORDERED.3
ACTING COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
Date of Decision:
Date of Mailing:
2 The family’s relocation from October 2019 until April 2020 does not change this conclusion. At that time, A.A.
was in jail and rehabilitation, and A.L. lived in Bellmawr, while A.A.’s mother had to leave her home to reside with
A.A.’s brother in his home. However, the family was not homeless during this time. They had a permanent
residence in the Pennsauken home, to which they intended to return once A.A. was released, and to which they
did indeed return.
3 This decision may be appealed to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:6-9.1.
Under N.J.Ct.R. 2:4-1(b), a notice of appeal must be filed with the Appellate Division within 45 days from the date
of mailing of this decision.
June 16, 2022
June 20, 2022

State of New Jersey
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer
CORRECTED DECISION ON
REMAND
OAL DKT. NO. EDU 00744-2021
AGENCY DKT. NO. 94-5/19
(On remand EDU 16086-2019)
BOARD OF EDUCATION, TOWNSHIP
OF PENNSAUKEN, CAMDEN COUNTY,
Petitioner,
v.
LOVELL PUGH-BASSETT, INTERIM
EXECUTIVE COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT,
BOARD OF EDUCATION HADDON
TOWNSHIP, CAMDEN COUNTY AND
A.A. ON BEHALF OF A.L.,
Respondents.
____________________________
William 	C. 	Morlok, 	Esq., 	for 	petitioner, 	Board 	of 	Education, 	Township 	of
Pennsuaken, (Parker McCay, P.C., attorneys)
Michael Stanton, Esq., for respondent, Haddon Township Board of Education
(McCrosson and Stanton, P.C., attorneys)
Sadia Ahsanuddin, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent, Lovell Pugh-
Bassett, Interim Executive County Superintendent, (Matthew J. Platkin
Acting Attorney General of New Jersey, attorneys)

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 2 -
A.A., on behalf of A.L., respondent, pro se
Record Closed: February 28, 2022 	Decided: March 24, 2022
BEFORE CATHERINE A. TUOHY, ALJ:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Petitioner, Board of Education of the Township of Pennsauken (Pennsauken),
challenges the homelessness determination by the county executive superintendent.
Petitioner contends that A.A. and her minor child, A.L., are not homeless, but are
domiciled in their school district, having lived with A.A.’s mother (and A.L.’s grandmother)
in the township of Pennsauken for over one and a half years. 	At issue is whether A.A.
and her minor child are homeless.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This matter arose with the filing of a petition of appeal by Pennsauken on May 6,
2019, (EDU 16086-2019.) 	The State’s respondents; the New Jersey Department of
Education (DOE) and Interim Executive County Superintendent, Lovell Pugh-Bassett
(ECS or Dr. Pugh-Bassett) filed an answer on October 29, 2019. 	Respondent, Haddon
Township Board of Education (Haddon Township), filed its answer on November 12,
2019. 	The 	matter 	was 	transmitted 	by 	the 	Department 	of 	Education 	Office 	of
Controversies and Disputes to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) as a contested
matter where it was filed on November 13, 2019, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 to -15;
N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to -13. An initial telephone prehearing conference was conducted on
January 9, 2020, and subsequent telephone conferences were conducted February 19,
2020, February 26, 2020, and March 11, 2020. A.A. did not appear for these conference
calls. 	An initial hearing was scheduled for March 26, 2020, but was adjourned due to
COVID-19. A follow-up telephone conference was conducted on June 12, 2020, at which
time A.A. appeared and agreed to file an answer and provide discovery.

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 3 -
A.A., on behalf of her minor child A.L., filed an answer to the petition and provided
answers to interrogatories and responses to requests to admit on July 6, 2020. 	A
subsequent telephone conference was conducted on July 9, 2020, at which time all
parties appeared. 	It was agreed that the matter was appropriate for summary decision
as there were no material facts in dispute as evidenced by A.A.’s answer to the petition,
answers to interrogatories and responses to requests to admit. 	Pennsauken filed a
motion for summary decision dated July 14, 2020. The State respondents filed opposition
to same and cross-moved for summary decision dated August 10, 2020. 	Pennsauken
filed its reply and opposition to the cross-motion on August 17, 2020. 	There being no
further submissions filed, the motion record closed on August 27, 2020.
An initial decision was rendered October 9, 2020, concluding that 	A.A. and A.L.
are not homeless as they have resided at a fixed, regular and adequate place to live with
regular 	sleeping 	accommodations 	for 	over 	twelve 	months 	in 	Pennsauken; 	that
Pennsauken has no financial responsibility for A.L.’s attendance at Haddon Township
schools; and A.L. should be placed in the Pennsauken Public School District, if A.A. so
desires; and that the ECS’ determination should be reversed.
Based on the foregoing, it was ordered that the motion for summary decision filed
by Pennsauken was granted; the cross-motion for summary decision filed by the DOE
and ECS was denied; and the March 28, 2019, determination by the ECS was reversed.
Exceptions to the initial decision were filed on behalf of the State respondents by
letter brief, dated November 3, 2020. Pennsauken filed its reply to the State respondent’s
exceptions by letter brief, dated November 5, 2020. 	No exceptions were filed by
respondent Haddon Township or respondent, A.A.
The acting commissioner of education, by final decision, dated January 6, 2021,
denied Pennsauken’s motion for summary decision and the ECS’ cross motion for
summary decision and remanded the matter to the OAL because she could not determine

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 4 -
from the present record whether the family is homeless and that further information was
necessary to determine whether the home is fixed, regular and adequate such that A.L.
is no longer homeless under state and federal law.
A telephone conference was conducted on March 4, 2021, at which time the
parties were afforded time to conduct additional discovery in light of the commissioner’s
decision. 	Another telephone status conference was conducted on May 5, 2021, and a
hearing date set for July 26, 2021. 	This hearing date was adjourned until August 23,
2021, with the consent of all the parties.
The hearing was conducted on August 23, 2021, via zoom audio/video technology,
due to the continued suspension of in-person hearings at the OAL due to the COVID-19
pandemic. 	The 	record 	closed 	on February 28, 	2022, 	following 	receipt 	of 	closing
submissions from petitioner, the state respondents and respondent, Haddon Township
Board of Education. No closing submissions were filed on behalf of respondent A.A.
FACTUAL DISCUSSIONS AND FINDINGS
Testimony
A.A. has one biological child, A.L. who is thirteen years old. She has also raised
a twenty-three-year-old male, D.H.L. 	A.A. has a masters’ degree in social work and
worked in the social work field approximately ten years. She has been out of the field for
ten years and last worked for Laurel Rehabilitation Agency that helped people with
traumatic brain injury in approximately 2012 or 2013. 	She also worked for Ann Marie
Sparks, another private agency that works with traumatic brain injuries. She worked there
for approximately one year in 2014 as a case manager. To prepare for the hearing she
spoke with the DAG about what would happen at the hearing. She was told to be honest
but did not review any testimony with her. 	A.A. has received the Pennsauken exhibit
binder. 	The back of the exhibit book has a picture of her mother’s house, which is the
white house on the right in the photograph. 	(Pennsauken Exhibit 2.) 	This is the house

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 5 -
she grew up in and has been residing in at Hillcrest Ave, Pennsauken. 	J-1 is her
handwritten answer that she provided. A.A. has lived in the Pennsauken home until the
time she was twenty-one and left and then returned there when she was thirty-nine. She
is forty-three now. 	The Pennsauken home has three bedrooms, a bathroom, a kitchen,
electricity, running water, a refrigerator, oven, and stove top. 	J-1 is A.A.’s handwritten
answer to the petition.
The Pennsauken home has three bedrooms. 	In November 2016, her father
passed away and she moved back to the Pennsauken house at the very end of 2016, or
the beginning of 2017. 	In 2017, her mother had her own bedroom. 	No one was in her
father’s bedroom. 	A.A.’s daughter, A.L. and D.H.L. shared the third bedroom. 	At the
present time, everyone has their own room. 	The third bedroom is occupied by her
daughter, A.L. 	A.A. has her father’s bedroom and her mother still has her own room.
When A.A. had to leave in 2019, D.H.L. left the Pennsauken home permanently.
They are currently living in her mother’s home. A.A. is not paying any rent because
she cannot afford it. She does not contribute to any of the household bills. She has not
bought food for the home on a regular basis. 	She might have on occasion brought in
lunchmeat. 	She had been receiving food stamps but lost those benefits. 	Before her
father passed away, he was caring for her mother, but he could not do much as he also
was sick. A.A. currently helps her mother with shopping, showering, laundry, and all
activities of daily living, as her mother is unable to live by herself. 	When A.A. was
incarcerated and then in rehab for a time, her brother Art. A. took care of their mother at
his house in Cinnaminson. 	Unless someone is with the grandmother, she is unable to
live by herself. A.A. has been in the Pennsauken home for approximately four years aside
from the time she was incarcerated and then in rehab.
In her answers to interrogatories, A.A. wrote in her handwriting that she has lived
in the Pennsauken home from 2016 to the present. (J-2.) She is currently employed by
Forman Mills and has also worked part-time delivering pizzas and at a campground. (J-
4.) 	She was employed by Traitalia before she went away. 	A.A. has not provided any

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 6 -
documents in this case. 	She did not produce any rental applications or housing
assistance applications. Everything was oral and she did not know to save anything even
though there had been conference calls in this case since 2019. 	She is claiming she
wanted to find a home in Haddon Township but did not save anything regarding her
attempts to do so even though she knew this was matter was going to a hearing.
A.A. completed McKinney-Vento homeless paperwork in both Haddon Township
and Pennsauken Township. (J-8–J-15.) Any time she did, she was asked if she needed
McKinney-Vento assistance for A.L., such as transportation, tutoring, and counselling
services. A.A. indicated that she was not in need of those services. When she went to
Pennsauken to fill out their McKinney-Vento paperwork she was in contact with Mr.
Fitzpatrick, who worked at A.L.’s school, Strawbridge Elementary School. 	He had
advised A.A. not to fill out the Pennsauken paperwork. A.A. had met with Ms. Elliott, the
homeless liaison for Pennsauken. Ms. Elliott extended an offer for A.L. to attend school
in Pennsauken. 	A.A.’s goal was to continue A.L. at her same school, Strawbridge
Elementary in Haddon Township. 	In the Haddon Township Homeless Students Parent
Consultation and Educational Placement form, A.A. wrote in her own handwriting “I want
A.L. to attend Strawbridge Elementary again!!!” (J-13, page DOE 036.)
Dr. Pugh- Bassett reviewed the situation to determine if she was homeless. 	(J-
16, page DOE 039.) A.A. did not speak with anyone from Dr. Pugh Bassett’s office. She
did not provide any paperwork to Dr. Pugh-Bassett describing the living arrangements at
the Pennsauken home. The only paperwork A.A. has submitted is the discovery that was
requested.
In early 2017, A.A. moved into the Pennsauken home because she was evicted
from her Haddon Crossings apartment for non-payment of rent. Her father passed away
and he had been assisting her with the rent when she was residing in Haddon Township.
After she was evicted, she was not able to rent another apartment because she could not
afford it. She was working that summer at a campground and odd jobs cleaning to make
some money. 	She did not have sufficient income to pay rent or utilities. 	After being

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 7 -
evicted from their Haddon Township residence, they resided for a couple of months in
Belmar with A.A.’s fiancé’s mother. A.A.’s family did not want to see her and her family
on the street. 	She does not remember the exact date she moved into the Pennsauken
home, but it was around the beginning of 2017. She did not have a bedroom when she
first moved into Pennsauken home, she did not have a bedroom until she came back from
rehab. A.L. got her own bedroom when her son moved out when she went away. 	A.A.
stated that her mother stays in the living room a lot and her and A.L. stay upstairs. A.A.’s
mother pays for everything because A.A. cannot afford to pay. 	Whatever A.A. makes
goes towards A.L.’s needs such as clothes. A.A. makes twelve dollars per hour at Forman
Mills and works twenty-five hours per week and she is paid bi-weekly.
A.A. is a recovering drug addict. She has two felony charges and was sent to jail
October 15, 2019, for a month before going into an in- patient facility for two months and
then a half-way house. 	She was discharged April 10, 2020. 	A.L. was in Belmar during
this time. A.A.’s mother went to live with her son, A.A.’s brother, at his home. Her brother
got the Pennsauken house ready for them and then they all came back to Pennsauken in
mid-April 2020. In September 2020, A.A. got a job at Forman Mills. She had no job for
five months between the time of her discharge in April 2020 and September 2020. She
did not save any of her job applications. 	The obstacles she faced in obtaining
employment were her two felony convictions for theft by deception and unlawful taking.
She believed the only reason she got a job with Forman Mills is that they did not do a
background check.
A.A. receives Medicaid. 	If her mother passed away, they would have no home.
School is important to A.A. because it is the only stable thing in her daughter’s life. She
was looking for another place in Haddon Township but did not save any paperwork
regarding her attempts to find an apartment in Haddon Township. 	She looked on-line,
but she did not have any money. 	She cannot even get a loan. 	She has incurred debts

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 8 -
from her drug addiction in the amount of $80,000 including her student loans. She does
not pay anything towards her debts and only pays for what A.L. needs.
Her ultimate plans are that she has another year left of drug court and then after
two years she can start applying for social work jobs. 	In the meantime, she will stay at
Forman Mills and climb the ladder. Her ultimate goal is to move out of her mother’s home,
but she has no money.
A.A. answered interrogatories indicating that her current address is the Hillcrest
Ave., Pennsauken address where she resides with her mother and A.L. 	She indicated
that she does not intend to live there permanently but wants to get her own place with
A.L. and possibly take her mother with her. (J-2, #5.) In A.A.’s answers to requests for
admissions, she indicated that she does not intend to permanently reside at the
Pennsauken address. 	(J-3, #8.) 	A.A. indicated that “we don’t like living in Pennsauken
at all, but we are stuck here for now.” (J-4, #7.)
A.A. has consistently stated that Pennsauken is a temporary residence, and she
is living in Pennsauken as a necessity.
A.A.’s mother does not pay A.A. to take care of her. A.A.’s ultimate goal is to move
back into Haddon Township. 	She would like to take her mother with her because her
mother would have to be cared for by either her or her brother or health insurance. Her
brother and his family took care of her mother when she was in jail.
A.A. noted that she was not in need of any McKinney-Vento services but if things
changed, and she did she would contact them. 	(J-5, page DOE 019, question 4.) 	A.A.
has never requested McKinney-Vento services in the last four years because she did not
want to cause any trouble. A.A. and her daughter each have their own bedroom and they

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 9 -
have access to all parts of the house and all of the facilities including the kitchen,
bathroom, and living room.
Rochelle Marie Meyers Elliott (Ms. Elliott) testified on behalf of Pennsauken. She
was the homeless liaison for the district and is familiar with A.A. who came in and filled
out McKinney-Vento paperwork. 	Ms. Elliott is currently the residency secretary for the
school district. 	J-14 and J-15 are the papers that A.A. filled out when she came to the
Pennsauken District. 	J-14 and J-15 were completed by A.A. in her handwriting. 	J-8, is
the in-house summary form which Ms. Elliott completed after her interview with A.A.
When Ms. Elliott gave A.A. enrollment paperwork to fill out, A.A. telephoned the homeless
liaison from Haddon Township School District. 	Ms. Elliott made the determination that
A.A. was not homeless based on the interview. 	It was determined that she was living
back in her childhood home and was not planning on leaving anytime soon as they were
taking care of mom. 	Ms. Elliott did not feel that A.A. was “doubled up” and the home
seemed adequate with the appropriate number of bedrooms and sleeping arrangements.
Ms. Elliott’s determination is what lead to this matter being brought before the Executive
County Superintendent, Ms. Pugh-Bassett. 	Ms. Elliott offered A.A. McKinney-Vento
services 	which included 	resources 	such as 	transportation 	services, 	medical 	care,
eyeglasses, those things would be provided. 	A.A. said she was not in need of any
services and if she was, she would be in contact with them. (J-14.) To date, A.A. has not
contacted Pennsauken for any McKinney-Vento services.
Ms. Elliott did not feel A.A. was homeless because she considered how many
rooms were in the home, how many people in the home, are they sleeping on the floor or
the couch and in speaking with A.A. there were adequate sleeping arrangements. 	A.A.
was evicted because her father had passed away and he had paid half of her rent, so she
had to go back to her home and after being there a year she was considered domiciled
in Pennsauken. Ms. Elliott did not consider her resources because they were considering
the sleeping arrangements. A.A.’s intentions were to go back to Haddon Township which

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 10 -
had been her intentions for many years, but her mother became ill and then she remained
to take care of her mother.
The factors Ms. Elliott considered were the number of bedrooms and the sleeping
arrangements. A.A. was evicted because her father had passed away and he was paying
the rent. 	A.A. had been in Pennsauken for one year and then became domiciled in the
district. 	Ms. Elliott would not consider A.A.’s resources because she is considering the
sleeping arrangements. She did consider the intentions of A.A. that she wanted to return
to Haddon Township, but her mother became ill and then she was there taking care of
the mother in Pennsauken.
Dr. Lovell Pugh-Bassett recently became employed by Camden County College
as the vice president of Institutional Effectiveness and Advancement. 	She has been in
this position for two weeks. 	Prior thereto, she was the executive county superintendent
of schools for Camden County and served as the liaison for the DOE and the local school
districts. They provide technical assistance to school districts and various other supports
to school districts including compliance issues. 	Her homeless liaison was Arenda Kelly
who did most of the day-to-day work. Dr. Pugh Bassett does not usually get involved with
a homelessness determination unless it rises to the level of requiring some type of
mitigation with the school district. 	When Ms. Kelly is having difficulty working out a
response to a dispute, she and Dr. Pugh-Bassett would review the regulation, discuss the
case, and sometimes reach out to internal legal counsel for assistance.
The factors they take into account in making a determination of homelessness
include looking strictly at the circumstances that caused the homelessness in the first
place, either an eviction or a fire, and that as a result of those circumstances whether they
are living in their current arrangement out of necessity. 	They do not look at the “soft”
issues as to the nature of the living arrangements such as the makeup of the house, how
many bedrooms there are in the house or the sleeping arrangements or whether there

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 11 -
are pictures on the wall or are they living with a family member. 	They are not given
authority to consider those factors.
To determine which district is responsible to pay the tuition for a homeless student,
they follow the domicile rule. 	The domicile rule is that the district where the child has
been living for a year becomes the district of domicile and responsible for the education
and transportation of the child. 	Depending on what the parent desires, the parent can
enroll the child in that district, or the domicile district becomes responsible to pay for the
child’s attendance at their original school of enrollment before they became homeless.
In 2019, ECS, Dr. Pugh Bassett through her homeless liaison, Ms. Kelly, was
asked to render a homeless determination regarding student A.L. 	The only information
they had was the documentation that they had received that A.A. had submitted to
Haddon Township. 	Haddon Township had reached out to Ms. Kelly about the question
of A.A.’s being homeless and had submitted paperwork from their homeless liaison. (J-
14.) 	Ms. 	Pugh-Bassett’s office had also received paperwork 	from Pennsauken’s
homeless liaison in- take process (J-8), as well as various emails. The Gloucester County
Special Services School District McKinney-Vento Regional Education Program form
provides services for homeless students. (J-15.) She recalls reviewing the intake forms
regarding 	homelessness including 	J-8, 	J-14 	and 	J-15. 	From a 	review 	of 	these
documents, Dr. Pugh-Bassett learned that A.A. indicated that they had been evicted from
their home in Haddon Township and was living with her mother in Pennsauken out of
necessity. A.A. indicated that she was doubling-up with family. (J-14.)
Dr. Pugh-Bassett made a determination that A.A. was homeless. A.A. was evicted
and deemed homeless and they were living with A.A.’s mother out of necessity.
Therefore, Pennsauken would be responsible for A.L.’s attending Haddon Township
schools. By letter, dated March 28, 2019, to the Pennsauken School District, Dr. Pugh-
Bassett 	stated 	that 	A.L. 	is 	McKinney-Vento 	eligible 	and 	Pennsauken 	is 	fiscally
responsible for the student based on the fact that the family lost their apartment due to
financial hardship and that the family is residing with friends/relatives out of necessity.

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 12 -
(J-16.) They also offered the opportunity to appeal and if any further questions to contact
them.
When she looked at this case, she was not aware A.A. was providing care to her
mother. 	She heard A.A. testify at this hearing. 	A.A.’s father passed away in November
2016 and A.A. moved into her mother’s home to take care of her. They do not look into
the circumstances of the living arrangements, only the paperwork submitted. They have
not spoken to A.A. or reached out to her for more information. The DOE has not advised
them to reach out to the family. They do not inquire as to the living arrangement or ‘soft’
indicators as a compliance agency, like the number of bedrooms. They do not have the
authority to look into these factors or a template to consider these factors or the resources
to investigate these factors. 	Although the statute requires that the home be fixed, regular
and adequate, the DOE does not make those subjective determinations. 	The primary
focus of the DOE is on the continuity of education. 	Since the DOE does not look at soft
indicators, they would not know if the homeless family were in a small apartment or in a
mansion. They do not determine how homeless they are, just whether they are homeless.
When Dr. Pugh-Bassett wrote her determination of homelessness letter (J-16), she was
not aware of any of these “soft” indicators.
Arenda Kelly- Fleming is employed by the NJDOE Camden County Office of
Education as an education planning specialist and has been since 2009. 	Under the
direction of the executive county superintendent, they provide technical assistance and
are responsible for ensuring that the forty-four public and charter schools in the county
are compliant with state and federal regulations. She also has responsibilities for making
homelessness determinations. 	If a district or parent calls their offices and needs
information about McKinney-Vento Eligibility, they will provide guidance and resources if
there is a dispute and they will determine if a student is McKinney-Vento eligible. 	To
arrive at a homelessness determination, they would review all of the information provided
to their office and see if they require more information and then she will take the
information into the county executive superintendent to meet and review the information.
They look at what the family situation is, whether they are displaced from their home, any

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 13 -
economic hardship and what type of living arrangement they are in. The district of origin
for the first year pays for the tuition and transportation of the homeless student. After the
first year, the district where the homeless student is residing is then responsible for
payment of tuition and transportation cost to still attend the district of origin.
In 2019, she received an inquiry regarding student A.L. The parent sent in a letter
and the school district was having trouble contacting the parent and they wished help
from their office. They had the McKinney-Vento forms, the district’s form the parents fill
out and a letter form the parent. 	The basics of the case were that they were displaced
from their home and moved in with a relative. The executive superintendent had enough
information to make a decision that they were still McKinney-Vento eligible.
Anthony Joseph Fitzpatrick is currently employed by Delsea Regional and Elk
Township School District since August 18, 2021. Prior to that time, he was employed by
the Haddon Township School District February 3, 2017, until August 18, 2021. 	He was
the district supervisor of instruction from June 3, 2017, until June 30, 2019, and then an
elementary school principal from July 1, 2019, until August 17, 2021. 	As supervisor of
instruction 	he 	was 	the 	McKinney-Vento 	liaison 	as 	well 	as 	the 	district 	residency
coordinator. His responsibilities included advocating for their homeless families who were
experiencing various educational needs, transportation needs, and free lunches. 	He
would try to provide basic material needs for their homeless families.
He is familiar with A.A. through the annual check on the families to see if they are
still 	experiencing homelessness. 	He made the determination that they were still
McKinney-Vento eligible in the summer of 2017, which was the first determination he
made before the beginning of the 2017-2018 school year. 	After one year, Pennsauken
became the district of domicile, but Haddon remained the district of enrollment. J-9 was
the letter he sent to Pennsauken to inform them that the family was legally domiciled in
their district for one year and at that point the responsibility to educate the child became
the district responsible financially to pay for their education and bill them for tuition. They
did in fact bill Pennsauken, but the bill did not get paid to his knowledge. 	Pennsauken

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 14 -
conducted a residency investigation and made a determination that the child was not
homeless.
In December 2018, he recalled a telephone call with A.A. who was at the registrar’s
office in Pennsauken and Pennsauken was trying to get her to enroll the child in
Pennsauken. 	The enrollment record should stay with Haddon Township if she was
McKinney-Vento eligible. 	He believes he did speak to someone from Pennsauken who
he believed he advised that the child was not supposed to be enrolled in Pennsauken but
remain enrolled in Haddon Township, as long as they continued being doubled up out of
necessity. 	He investigated and met the child’s mother and asked questions regarding
employment, the reason they went homeless to assess stability of living situation and the
intention to move back to Haddon Township. 	After the investigation he determined the
child was still doubled up out of necessity and was still McKinney-Vento eligible. 	This
occurred in the fall of 2018, after the school year started and before the phone call in
December and was around the same time as the formal appeal was filed with the County
office. 	After the phone call of December 2018, he had no further contact with A.A. or
Pennsauken. 	Haddon Township was responsible for 2017-2018 school year but from
that point on it would be the responsibility of the Pennsauken School District.
He made two determinations in the summer and then in meeting with mom in the
fall of 2018 after Pennsauken said they were not homeless. 	He did not do any reviews
after 2018 since he was no longer the person who handled these matters. 	In the fall of
2018, Pennsauken’s investigation revealed that A.A. was in the Pennsauken home caring
for her mother in her mother’s home. 	That was not something that was part of his
assessment.
Discussion
Although A.A. has repeatedly maintained that the Pennsauken residence is only
temporary and her intent is to move back to Haddon Township, she has not offered any
proof indicating either her efforts to locate and obtain housing in Haddon Township or of

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 15 -
seeking suitable full-time employment within the field of her masters’ degree such that
she could afford an apartment of her own. 	There was no documentary evidence
submitted as to A.A.’s financial situation. 	A.A. is residing in her family home with her
daughter A.L. and is taking care of her disabled mother. They are not doubled up as they
are three people living in a single family three-bedroom home, each with their own
bedroom. 	The Pennsauken home where she grew up in and is now residing with her
daughter and caring for her mother is an adequate, regular, and fixed residence with
suitable sleeping arrangements. 	No evidence has been offered by any party to the
contrary.
Based 	upon 	due 	consideration of 	the 	testimonial 	and 	documentary 	evidence
presented at this hearing, I FIND the following as FACT:
Respondent, A.A., and her minor child A.L., resided in Haddon Township from 2012
through 2016. 	Due to financial hardship, A.A. was evicted from her Haddon Township
residence in 2016 and she and her daughter moved in temporarily with a friend in Bellmawr.
In August or September 2017, A.A. and her daughter moved in with A.A.’s mother in her
Pennsauken home and continue to reside there. 	At all times relevant herein, A.L. has
attended school at Strawbridge Elementary in Haddon Township.
On September 13, 2017, A.A. completed a Haddon Township Homeless Students
Parent Consultation and Educational Placement form indicating that the Pennsauken
address was a temporary address and that her last district of residence was the Haddon
Township address and her previous school attended was Strawbridge Elementary in Haddon
Township. A.A. indicated on the form that her goal was to move back to Haddon Township
so A.L. could finish out elementary school at Strawbridge Elementary. (J-11.) A.A. also filled
out a McKinney-Vento Education Program registration form, dated September 13, 2017, but
noted that she did not need any of those services, but if things changed, she would contact
them. (J-12.)

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 16 -
On July 31, 2018, A.A. completed another Haddon Township Homeless Students
Parent Consultation and Educational Placement form indicating that the Pennsauken
address was still a temporary residence, and her last district of residence was in Haddon
Township. She indicated that she wanted A.L. to attend Strawbridge Elementary again. (J-
13.)
By letter, dated August 2, 2018, Anthony Fitzpatrick, Haddon Township supervisor of
instruction wrote to Mitzi Giletto, the Pennsauken homeless education liaison and advised
that A.L. will become a legal resident of Pennsauken on September 1, 2018, after one full
year of being categorized as being homeless, based on the Egg Harbor v. Mainland decision
that established that a homeless family is considered to be legally domiciled in a school
district after being in that district for a year. (J-9.)
On December 17, 2018, A.A. met with the homeless liaison for Pennsauken, Rochelle
Elliott, who completed a Pennsauken School District Family in Transition form – Family
Information interview with A.A. 	The form indicated that the last school attended was
Strawbridge Elementary and her last permanent address was her Haddon Township
address. 	The handwritten notes on the form indicate that “Mom is back in her childhood
home.” Under the “Reason for being homeless” section of the form, there is a handwritten
note “Father passed who was paying half of the rent which resulted in her being evicted.
Since his passing her mom has become handicapped. 	She is the caregiver @ this time.
She wants her dgt to complete Strawbridge.” (J-8.)
A.A. also completed a Pennsauken School District Student Residency affidavit as to
Homeless Status, dated December 17, 2018, and indicated that her current Pennsauken
address was a temporary living arrangement due to loss of housing or economic hardship.
A.A. indicated on the form that her last permanent address was the Haddon Township
address and where the form indicated “Student’s Present Living Situation”, A.A. checked off
“Doubling-Up 	with 	more 	than 	one 	family 	in 	a 	house 	or 	apartment 	for 	economic
hardship/similar reason.” 	A.A. indicated on the form that it was her wish that her child return
to her previous school, Strawbridge Elementary in Haddon Township. (J-14.)

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 17 -
Also, 	during 	the 	meeting 	of 	December 	17, 	2018, 	A.A. 	completed 	another
McKinney-Vento Regional Education Program intake form but wrote on the form that A.L.
was in no need of additional services, but if anything changed, she would notify the
Pennsauken liaison. (J-15.)
Rochelle Marie Meyers Elliott, the Pennsauken homeless liaison interviewed A.A.
after A.A. completed paperwork when she came to the Pennsauken district. (J-14 and J-15.)
Ms. Elliott prepared the in-house summary form. (J-8.) Ms. Elliott made the determination
that A.A. was not homeless based on her interview. It was determined that A.A. was back
living in her childhood home and was not planning on leaving anytime soon as she was taking
care of her mother. Ms. Elliott did not feel that A.A. was ‘doubled up’ as the home seemed
adequate with the appropriate number of bedrooms and sleeping arrangements. She would
not consider A.A.’s resources because they were considering the sleeping arrangements.
She did consider the intentions of A.A. that she wanted to return to Haddon Township, but
her mother became ill and then she was there taking care of her mother in the Pennsauken
home. Ms. Elliott’s determination that the family was not homeless is what brought this matter
before the ECS.
By letter, dated March 28, 2019, respondent ECS Pugh-Bassett, advised the
Pennsauken superintendent that the DOE Camden County Office of Education had been
contacted by A.A. to make a McKinney-Vento eligibility determination for A.L. Based on the
criteria 	outlined 	at 	N.J.A.C. 	6A:17-2.2, 	the 	county 	office 	determined 	that 	A.L. 	is
McKinney-Vento eligible and that Pennsauken is fiscally responsible for the student based
on the fact that the family lost their apartment due to financial hardship and that the family is
residing with friends/relatives out-of-necessity. (J-16.)
ECS Pugh-Bassett did not take into consideration the adequacy of the living
arrangements of the family when making her homeless determination. She did not consider
how many bedrooms are in the house, the sleeping arrangements or whether they were in a
small apartment or a mansion. These were “soft” factors that she does not consider. She

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 18 -
also did not know that A.A. was residing in her family home and taking care of her mother.
The ECS strictly looks at the circumstances that caused the homelessness in the first place
and whether they are living in their current arrangement out of necessity.
A.A. had previously lived in the Pennsauken home for over fifteen years of her life, as
it was her family home. The Pennsauken home has three-bedrooms; a bathroom; a kitchen
with a refrigerator, oven and stove top, running water, electricity and a television.
A.A. is living in the Pennsauken home with her daughter A.L. and taking care of her
mother who is disabled. A.A. assists her mother with all of her activities of daily living.
A.A. has a master's degree in social work but is a recovering drug addict with two
felony convictions. 	She went to jail October 15, 2019, for a month before going into an
inpatient facility and then a half-way house until her discharge April 10, 2020. During this
time, her mother moved in with her brother and A.L. was in Bellmawr. 	When A.A. was
discharged, she returned back to her Pennsauken family home with her mother and A.L.
where they continue to reside.
A.A., her mother, and A.L. are the only three people residing in the home and they
each have their own bedroom. A.A. and A.L. have access to all parts of the house and all
of the facilities. 	A.A. does not pay her mother rent or reimburse her for any household
expenses.
A.A. has had various part time jobs and is currently working at Forman Mills,
twenty-five hours per week and makes twelve dollars per hour. 	Whatever A.A. makes
goes toward A.L.’s needs. 	There has been no documentation submitted as to A.A.’s
financial status or employment searches or applications.

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 19 -
A.A. has not produced any rental applications, housing assistance applications, or
any documents in furtherance of her claim that it was her intent to find a home in Haddon
Township.
LEGAL ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
Although N.J.S.A. Const., Art. 8, section 4, paragraph 1 provides that free public
education is a fundamental right under the New Jersey Constitution, it is well known that
parents may not simply choose the school district that they wish their children to attend:
the general rule is that school districts are responsible for providing a free education to
children “domiciled” within the school district. N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(a) states that public
schools shall be free to any person over five and under twenty years of age who is
domiciled within the school district. “A student is domiciled in the school district when he
or she is the child of a parent or guardian whose domicile is located within the school
district.” N.J.A.C. 6A:22-3.1(a)(1).
Under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Assistance Improvement Act of
2001, 42 U.S.C.A. § 11431 et seq., state educational agencies must ensure that each
homeless child and youth has equal access to the same public education as every other
child and youth.
The protections offered to homeless students and their parents under the federal
McKinney-Vento Act and New Jersey’s corresponding state law represent an exception
to otherwise applicable residency rules. 	In contrast to the basic premise that students
must change schools when they leave a school district, the laws protecting homeless
students generally allow parents the choice to keep their children enrolled in their original
school district if the parents relocate to another school district as the result of being
homeless. 	N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(f); N.J.A.C. 6A:22-3.2(d). 	The district of residence for
children whose parents temporarily moves from one school district to another as the result

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 20 -
of being homeless shall be the district in which the parent or guardian last resided prior
to becoming homeless. N.J.S.A. 18A:7B-12(c).
Under the federal McKinney-Vento Act and New Jersey’s corresponding law, the
term “homeless” refers to individuals who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate residence.
Federal law refers to the lack of an adequate “nighttime” residence. 	42 U.S.C.
Sec.11434a (referring to 42 U.S.C.A. Sec.11302(a)(1)); N.J.S.A. 18A:7B-12(c); N.J.A.C.
6A17-1.2.
N.J.A.C. 6A:17-2.2 states that:
(a) A district board of education shall determine that a child
is homeless for purposes of this subchapter when he or
she resides in any of the following:
1. 	A publicly or privately operated shelter designed to
provide temporary living accommodations, including:
i. 	Hotels or motels;
ii. 	Congregate shelters, including domestic violence and
runaway shelters;
iii. 	Transitional housing; and
iv. 	Homes for adolescent mothers;
2. 	A 	public 	or 	private 	place 	not 	designated 	for 	or
ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation,
including:
i. 	Cars or other vehicles including mobile homes;
ii. 	Tents or other temporary shelters;
iii. 	Parks;
iv. 	Abandoned buildings;
v. 	Bus or train stations; or
vi. 	Temporary shelters provided to migrant workers and
their children on farm sites;
3. 	The 	residence 	of 	relatives 	or 	friends 	where 	the
homeless child resides out of necessity because his
or her family lacks a regular or permanent residence
of its own;

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 21 -
4. 	Substandard housing; or
5. 	Any temporary location wherein children and youth
are awaiting foster care placement.
[N.J.A.C. 6A:17-2.2.]
This subchapter and subsection, however, must be read, in conjunction with 42
U.S.C.A. § 11302(a)(1), which defines “homeless” for the McKinney-Vento Act, and
N.J.S.A. 18A:7B-12(c), which defines “homeless” for school-funding purposes. Under the
former, “homeless” means lacking “a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence.”
Under the latter, “homeless” means temporarily lacking “a fixed, regular and adequate
residence.” Thus, both definitions have at their core the concept of a fixed, regular, and
adequate place to live with regular sleeping accommodations.
This shared concept is not a coincidence, as the New Jersey regulatory scheme,
looks to the federal regulatory scheme for its definition of terms. See N.J.A.C. 6A:17-2.1
(“Nothing in this subchapter shall limit the educational rights of homeless children and
youth or school district responsibilities under Subtitle VII-B of the Stewart B. McKinney-
Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11431 et seq.”.))
Financial responsibility of the district of residence terminates when the family is
deemed “domiciled” in another district, which occurs when the family has lived in another
district for a full year or longer. 	At this time, financial responsibility shifts to the school
district in which the student now resides. N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(d) states:
Any person whose parent or guardian, even though not
domiciled within the district, is residing temporarily therein, but
any person who has had or shall have his all-year-round
dwelling place within the district for one year or longer shall
be deemed domiciled within the district for the purposes of this
section.

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 22 -
Haddon Township, as the district of residence, was responsible for A.L.’s tuition
when she first became homeless, and she continued to go to school there throughout the
2017-2018 school year. After residing in Pennsauken for more than one year, A.A. and
A.L. were deemed domiciled in Pennsauken pursuant to N.J.S.A. 18A:38-1(d) and
financial responsibility shifted to Pennsauken. 	Pennsauken welcomes A.L. to enroll in
school in their district but disputes the fact that she is homeless and therefore entitled to
continue in Haddon Township at Pennsauken’s expense. 	Respondents argue that A.A.
and A.L. remain homeless and A.L. is entitled to continue school in Haddon Township at
Pennsauken’s expense since Pennsauken is now the district of domicile. 	Respondents
argue that A.A. is living with her mother out of necessity since she lacks the financial
ability to obtain an apartment of her own. Respondents do not address the fact that the
Pennsauken home is a fixed, regular, and adequate place to live which is the focus of a
homelessness determination. 	Petitioner submits that A.A. and A.L. are living in A.A.’s
family home and taking care of her disabled mother. 	The Pennsauken home has three
bedrooms, a living room, a kitchen, bathroom facilities, heat, and electricity. A.A. and her
daughter each have their own bedroom and have the use of all household facilities. They
have resided in the Pennsauken home continually since 2017 (aside from when A.A. was
incarcerated) until the present time, which indicates that this residence is fixed and regular
as well as adequate.
The ECS’ determination that A.L. is McKinney-Vento eligible and that Pennsauken is
fiscally responsible for the student was based on the fact that the family lost their apartment
due to financial hardship and that the family is residing with friends/relatives out-of-necessity.
There was no other analysis undertaken with regards to homelessness. It does not appear
that any consideration was given to the fact that A.A. is currently residing in her family home
and is the caregiver to her disabled mother. 	The ECS admitted that they do not consider
“soft” factors such as the adequacy of the Pennsauken home or the length of time A.A. has
lived there.
The determination of whether a student is considered “homeless”, triggering the
protections for homeless students available under the law, is fact sensitive. 	In M. O’K.

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 23 -
and S. O’K., A. O’K. and C. O’K. v. Bd. Of Educ. of the Borough of Cresskill and Bd. Of
Educ. of the Borough of Little Ferry, OAL No. 14830-13, Agency No. 214-9/13 (N.J.
Comm’r of Educ. Aug. 12, 2014); aff’d, 2016 WL, 4699166 (N.J. Sup. Ct. App. Div. Sept.
8, 2016, the school district argued that the students who lived with their parents in the
grandparents’ home were no longer “homeless” where they had lived there for over a
year. 	The family prevailed in their argument that they were still “homeless” in part
because five people occupied the bottom floor of the house which had no shower, sink or
kitchen. This was found to be less than a regular and adequate nighttime residence. This
is distinguishable from the facts in this case as A.A. and A.L. each have their own
bedroom and full access to all of the household facilities.
More recently, an administrative law judge (ALJ) wrote that “homelessness is best
viewed in a continuum.” 	State-Operated Sch. Dist. of Camden v. Volk, EDU 4521-16,
Initial 	Decision 	(March 	22, 	2017), 	modified, 	Comm’r 	(June 	20, 	2017), 	at 	*11,
http://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/oal/. 	In that case, the ALJ thoroughly examined
whether a family in a borderline situation was homeless and considered the totality of the
circumstances. Among the factors the ALJ considered were intent, fixed location, regular
use, and adequacy. The ALJ determined that the family intended to stay in their current
living situation because they stopped looking for another place to live; that the location
was fixed and that the use was regular because the family had lived in the same place
for several years; and that their living situation was adequate because the children had a
designated sleeping area and access to a kitchen and bathroom facilities, despite the
sharing of rooms and limited space. 	To the extent that homeless status is identified as
one without a “fixed, regular and adequate” living place, given the very lengthy period of
residence, the adequacy of the living place and the regularity of occupation, the ALJ found
that the child did live in a “fixed, regular, and adequate residence” and concluded that she
was not homeless. See also L.C. on behalf of her Minor Child B.C. v. Bd of Educ. of the
Twp. of Branchburg, Somerset County, 96 N.J.A.R. 2d(EDU)1003 (Commissioner found
that “while her living arrangements with her brother [in his apartment] may not be
permanent in the sense that she may wish to eventually return to Branchburg, the

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 24 -
evidence shows them to have become sufficiently fixed, regular, and adequate so as to
preclude a finding of homelessness.”)
Similar to Volk, in J.G., on behalf of minor children, T.G. and C.G. v. Board of
education of the Township of Edison, et al, Commissioner’s Decision No. 125-20, decided
June 15, 2020, the G. family was evicted from their home in Milltown and moved in with
J.G.’s mother in Edison. The family had the use of three of the four bedrooms, the kitchen,
bathrooms, all common areas and utilities in the Edison home. Although both J.G. and
his wife were employed, with an income of $71,000 a year, they did not pay rent or
contribute to the housing costs, other than food and a storage facility. While they stated
that their intent was to move back to Milltown, there was no documentation of their search
for a new home. 	J.G. admitted that he had not submitted a rental application in at least
six months. 	The Commissioner found that while J.G.’s intentions may be to eventually
move back to Milltown, the totality of the facts and circumstances demonstrated that the
family was no longer homeless.
The ECS’ determination that A.L. is McKinney-Vento eligible and that Pennsauken is
fiscally responsible for the student was based on the fact that the family lost their apartment
due to financial hardship and that the family is residing with friends/relatives out-of-necessity.
There was no other analysis undertaken with regards to homelessness. It does not appear
that any consideration was given to the fact that A.A. is currently residing in her family home
and is the caregiver to her disabled mother. The ECS did not undertake the fact sensitive
inquiry as to the adequacy of the Pennsauken home or the length of time A.A. has lived there.
A.A. has been living in her mother’s Pennsauken home with her daughter A.L.
since 2017. The Pennsauken home is A.A.’s family home and she had previously resided
there for fifteen years. A.A. is currently living there with A.L. and taking care of her mother
who is disabled. 	The home is a fixed, regular, and adequate place to live with regular
sleeping accommodations. A.A. and A.L. each have their own bedroom. Although A.A.
has repeatedly indicated this is a temporary residence and she intends to return to
Haddon Township, she has been living in her family home in Pennsauken since 2017.

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 25 -
A.A. has offered no proofs to support her attempts to find housing in Haddon Township.
Although A.A. may say she does not intend for Pennsauken to be her permanent
residence, she has resigned herself to living in Pennsauken for the time being because
of her financial situation and the fact that she is taking care of her mother. 	Even after
A.A. was forced to temporarily leave her Pennsauken home when she was in jail and then
rehab, the Pennsauken home is the home they all returned to when A.A. was discharged
in April 2020. Even if initially, she was considered homeless after being evicted from her
Haddon Township apartment in 2016, she has resided in Pennsauken for more than one
year in a fixed, regular, and adequate home and can no longer be considered homeless
as both the federal and New Jersey definitions of homelessness, have at its core, the lack
of a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence. The Pennsauken home has three
bedrooms and the three individuals residing there, A.A., A.A.’s mother, and A.L. each
have their own bedroom. 	There is no “doubling up” as A.A. and A.L. live in the
Pennsauken home with A.A.’s mother/A.L.’s grandmother. They have access to all of the
homes’ facilities including the kitchen, bathroom and living rooms unlike the family of five
in M.O’K. who occupied the bottom floor of a house with no shower, sink, or kitchen. The
Pennsauken home is a fixed, regular, and adequate place to live with adequate sleeping
accommodations.
While A.A..’s intentions may be to eventually move back to Haddon Township,
A.A. has not produced any rental applications, housing assistance applications, or any
documents in furtherance of her claim that it was her intent to find a home in Haddon
township.
The totality of the facts and circumstances demonstrate that A.A. and A.L. are no
longer homeless.
For the reasons stated, I CONCLUDE that A.A. and A.L. are not homeless and
that they have been domiciled in Pennsauken since September 2018; that Pennsauken
has no financial responsibility for A.L.’s attendance at Haddon Township schools; and
A.L. should be placed in the Pennsauken Public School District, if A.A. so desires. 	I

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 26 -
further 	CONCLUDE 	that 	the 	ECS’ 	determination 	of 	homelessness 	should 	be
REVERSED.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED that the relief requested in the
petition is GRANTED and that the March 28, 2019, determination by the ECS is
REVERSED.
I 	hereby 	FILE 	this 	initial 	decision 	with 	the 	COMMISSIONER 	OF 	THE
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION for consideration.
This recommended decision may be adopted, modified, or rejected by the
COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, who by law is authorized
to make a final decision in this matter. 	If the Commissioner of the Department of
Education does not adopt, modify, or reject this decision within forty-five days and unless
such time limit is otherwise extended, this recommended decision shall become a final
decision in accordance with N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10.

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 27 -
Within thirteen days from the date on which this recommended decision was
mailed to the parties, any party may file written exceptions with the COMMISSIONER OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ATTN: 	BUREAU OF CONTROVERSIES AND
DISPUTES, 100 Riverview Plaza, 4th Floor, PO Box 500, Trenton, New Jersey 08625-
0500, marked “Attention: 	Exceptions.” 	A copy of any exceptions must be sent to the
judge and to the other parties.
March 24, 2022
DATE 	CATHERINE A. TUOHY, ALJ
Date Received at Agency: 	emailed 3/24/22
Date Mailed to Parties: 	emailed 3/24/22
CAT/gd/tat

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 28 -
APPENDIX
LIST OF WITNESSES
For Petitioner
Rochelle Marie Meyers Elliott
For Respondents:
A.A.
Lovell Pugh-Bassett
Arenda Kelly-Fleming
Anthony Joseph Fitzpatrick
LIST OF EXHIBITS IN EVIDENCE
Joint Exhibits
J-1 	A.A. Answer to petition of appeal
J-2 	A.A. Answers to first set of interrogatories, July 6, 2020
J-3 	A.A. Answers to first request for admissions, July 6, 2020
J-4 	A.A. Answers to second set of interrogatories, April 13, 2021
J-5 	A.A. Answers to second request for admissions, April 13, 2021
J-6 	A.A. Answers to second requests for production of documents, April 13,
2021
J-7 	A.A. Answers to third set of interrogatories

OAL DKT. NO EDU 00744-2021
- 29 -
J-8 	Pennsauken 	School 	District 	Family 	in 	Transition 	form 	– 	Family
Information, December 17, 2018
J-9 	August 2, 2018, letter from Anthony Fitzpatrick
J-10 	Agreement for Homeless Student Attendance on Tuition Basis, 2018-
2019 School Year
J-11 	Haddon 	Township 	Homeless 	Students 	Parent 	Consultation 	and
Educational Placement form, September 13, 2017
J-12 	Gloucester County Special Services School District, McKinney-Vento
Education Program form, September 13, 2017
J-13 	Haddon 	Township 	Homeless 	Students 	Parent 	Consultation 	and
Educational Placement form, July 31, 2018
J-14 	Pennsauken School District Student Residency Affidavit as to Homeless
Status, December 17, 2018
J-15 	Gloucester County Special Services School District, McKinney-Vento
Regional Education Program form, December 17, 2018
J-16 	Interim 	Executive 	County 	Superintendent 	Lovell 	Pugh-Bassett’s
Determination, March 28, 2019
Petitioner’s Exhibits
P-1 	Petition
P-2 	Pictures of A.A.’s residence