District Wins Assessment Dispute; Student Must Be Moved Out of Full-Inclusion Class

Rialto Unified School District filed for due process to defend the appropriateness of its evaluations of a nine-year-old student with cerebral palsy, speech/language delays, and auditory processing disorder. The ALJ found the district's assessments were appropriate, denied the parent's requests for reimbursement of independent evaluations, and ruled that no compensatory education was owed. However, the ALJ ordered the district to move Student out of her full-inclusion fourth-grade classroom — into either a Special Day Class or a non-public school called Big Springs — within 30 days.

What Happened

Student is a nine-year-old girl born prematurely at 25 weeks and has received special education services from Rialto Unified since 1999. Her disabilities include probable mild cerebral palsy, oral motor dyspraxia, fine motor delays, a history of seizures, and an auditory processing disorder. She had been eligible under the categories of speech and language impairment and other health impairment (OHI). Student was performing at a first-grade level while enrolled in the fourth grade.

The dispute had a long history. A 2002 due process hearing had already required the district to conduct additional assessments in several areas, including speech and language, feeding, auditory processing, and dyslexia risk. The district complied and held an IEP meeting in early 2003. But Student's parents remained dissatisfied and continued requesting further evaluations. In September 2003, rather than agreeing to fund more independent evaluations, the district took the unusual step of filing its own due process petition to establish that its evaluations were appropriate. While that case was pending — and knowing the district was challenging their position — the parents went ahead and obtained five independent evaluations at their own expense. The parents also disagreed with the district's recommended placement in a Special Day Class (SDC), insisting instead that Student be placed at Big Springs, a non-public school. The hearing finally went forward in December 2005.

What the ALJ Found

The district's assessments were appropriate. The ALJ found that the district had thoroughly evaluated Student in all areas of suspected disability, including speech and language, occupational therapy, adapted physical education, auditory processing, and psychoeducation. Student's parents presented no expert testimony or other credible evidence to challenge the quality or completeness of those evaluations.

The parents were not entitled to reimbursement for independent evaluations. Under federal law, when parents disagree with a district's evaluation, the district must either fund an independent evaluation or file for due process to defend its own evaluation. Here, the district chose to file for due process. By obtaining independent evaluations while that case was still pending, the parents assumed the legal risk that they would not be reimbursed — and since the district's evaluations were ultimately found appropriate, the reimbursement request was denied.

No compensatory education was owed. Because the district had provided Student with a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) through third grade, there were no missed educational opportunities to compensate for.

However, Student's current placement was not appropriate. The ALJ agreed with all parties — including the district's own psychologist and teachers — that Student's placement in a full-inclusion general education fourth-grade class (which had grown to 34 students) was no longer providing her with a FAPE. Both a district SDC and Big Springs were found to be appropriate placements. The ALJ gave the district the discretion to choose between the two.

What Was Ordered

The district's petition was granted on all issues.
The district must place Student in either Big Springs (a non-public school) or a district Special Day Class within 30 days of the decision.
If the district chooses Big Springs, it must pay all costs of that placement, including transportation.
Student's requests for compensatory education and reimbursement for independent evaluations were denied.
Student's request for reimbursement of litigation expenses (photocopying, mailing, lost wages, witness costs) was denied because Student was not the prevailing party.

Why This Matters for Parents

Timing matters when you obtain independent evaluations. If the district has already filed for due process to defend its own assessments, getting independent evaluations while that case is pending is a legal risk. You may not be reimbursed if the district's evaluations are later found appropriate. Before spending money on private evaluations, consult with a special education advocate or attorney about the status of any pending proceedings.
Even when a district wins on assessments, placement can still be ordered. This case shows that different issues can have different outcomes. The district prevailed on whether its evaluations were adequate, but the ALJ still required a placement change because Student's current classroom was too large and overwhelming. Parents should evaluate each issue separately rather than treating a hearing as all-or-nothing.
Document your placement concerns with specifics. The teachers, psychologist, and speech pathologists themselves testified that a class of 34 students was inappropriate for Student. When school staff raise concerns about a child's environment, parents should ensure those concerns are documented in writing and brought into the IEP process — because they can become powerful evidence.
Districts can choose between equally appropriate placements. The ALJ found that both the district SDC and Big Springs were appropriate, and gave the district — not the parent — the authority to decide which placement to use. Parents should be aware that if more than one placement is found appropriate, the district may select the one it prefers, even if it is not the parent's first choice.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

The district's petition was granted on all issues.
The district must place Student in either Big Springs (a non-public school) or a district Special Day Class within 30 days of the decision.
If the district chooses Big Springs, it must pay all costs of that placement, including transportation.
Student's requests for compensatory education and reimbursement for independent evaluations were denied.
Student's request for reimbursement of litigation expenses (photocopying, mailing, lost wages, witness costs) was denied because Student was not the prevailing party.

Why This Matters for Parents

Timing matters when you obtain independent evaluations. If the district has already filed for due process to defend its own assessments, getting independent evaluations while that case is pending is a legal risk. You may not be reimbursed if the district's evaluations are later found appropriate. Before spending money on private evaluations, consult with a special education advocate or attorney about the status of any pending proceedings.
Even when a district wins on assessments, placement can still be ordered. This case shows that different issues can have different outcomes. The district prevailed on whether its evaluations were adequate, but the ALJ still required a placement change because Student's current classroom was too large and overwhelming. Parents should evaluate each issue separately rather than treating a hearing as all-or-nothing.
Document your placement concerns with specifics. The teachers, psychologist, and speech pathologists themselves testified that a class of 34 students was inappropriate for Student. When school staff raise concerns about a child's environment, parents should ensure those concerns are documented in writing and brought into the IEP process — because they can become powerful evidence.
Districts can choose between equally appropriate placements. The ALJ found that both the district SDC and Big Springs were appropriate, and gave the district — not the parent — the authority to decide which placement to use. Parents should be aware that if more than one placement is found appropriate, the district may select the one it prefers, even if it is not the parent's first choice.