District Wins: Public School Placement Offered FAPE for Student with Pachygyria and OCD

What Happened

Student is a young woman with Pachygyria (a congenital brain malformation), a seizure disorder, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD), and learning disabilities. She had spent much of her childhood overseas and, after her family moved to Rolling Hills, California in 2004, enrolled in Summit View School — a private non-public agency specializing in students with learning disabilities — rather than attending the local public high school. In May 2005, Student's parents asked the district to assess her for special education eligibility and to consider funding her continued placement at Summit View.

The district conducted a comprehensive assessment involving a school psychologist, occupational therapist, speech-language pathologist, assistive technology consultant, physical therapist, and a pediatric psychiatrist. IEP meetings were held in October 2005 and January 2006. The district offered Student placement at Palos Verdes High School with RSP support, counseling, speech-language therapy, social skills groups, occupational therapy consultation, a daily navigation aide, and numerous classroom accommodations. Student's parents rejected the offer, believing Summit View was superior, and kept Student enrolled there. Student graduated from Summit View in 2007 and enrolled in a local junior college. Parents filed for due process in April 2007.

What the ALJ Found

On the OCD assessment claim: Parents argued the district never assessed Student in the area of OCD. The ALJ disagreed. School psychologist Linelle Mitchell reviewed Student's medical and educational history, interviewed parents and teachers, administered multiple standardized instruments (including behavioral rating scales completed by Student, parents, and teachers), and conducted classroom observations. Though no specific OCD-focused test was administered, Mitchell gathered information from multiple sources that allowed her to determine the functional impact of Student's OCD in the educational setting. The ALJ concluded that Student was assessed in all areas of suspected disability, including OCD.

On the FAPE and placement claim: Parents argued Student needed a small, highly structured private school setting with daily individual counseling to receive any meaningful educational benefit. The ALJ found that the district's offer — which included RSP services, weekly counseling, social skills groups, speech-language therapy, a navigation aide, and extensive classroom accommodations — was reasonably calculated to provide Student with educational benefit. The law does not require a district to offer the best possible program or one that maximizes a student's potential. The ALJ also found that the placement at Palos Verdes High School was the least restrictive environment because, unlike Summit View (which enrolled only students with disabilities), it gave Student access to non-disabled peers and a general education curriculum.

The ALJ noted that Student's parents came to the district hoping it would fund Summit View, and rejected the district's offer because it was not better than what Summit View provided — but that is not the legal standard. The question is whether the district's offer was appropriate, not whether it was superior to a preferred private placement.

What Was Ordered

1. The student's requests for relief were denied in their entirety.
2. The district prevailed on both issues: the adequacy of the OCD assessment and the FAPE offer.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. An OCD assessment doesn't have to be a stand-alone test — but it must be addressed. The district satisfied its legal obligation by gathering information about OCD through observations, interviews, and behavior rating scales, even without a dedicated OCD instrument. Parents who believe their child's OCD (or another specific condition) has not been evaluated should put that request in writing and ask the district explicitly to assess the functional educational impact of that condition.

2. "Better than the private school" is not the legal standard for FAPE. Districts are only required to offer a program reasonably calculated to provide some educational benefit — not the best possible program. If you prefer a private placement, you generally cannot win a due process case simply by showing the private school is superior. You must show the district's offer would not provide meaningful educational benefit.

3. Attending the IEP meeting matters — even without your full team present. Student's parents skipped the January 2006 IEP meeting because their attorney and expert were unavailable. While the ALJ declined to rule on procedural violations related to that meeting (since it wasn't properly raised as an issue), missing IEP meetings can weaken your legal position. If you cannot attend, request a reschedule rather than skipping.

4. LRE cuts both ways. The ALJ found that the public high school — because it included non-disabled peers — was actually the less restrictive setting compared to the all-disabled private school. Parents should be prepared to address the LRE factors directly when advocating for a private placement, including evidence of why their child cannot benefit from a general education environment even with supports.