West Covina Student with Rare Neurological Condition Wins Partial FAPE Victory

A 16-year-old West Covina student with Opsoclonus-Myoclonus Syndrome prevailed on multiple special education issues after years of inadequate IEP goals, missing behavioral supports, and a flawed assistive technology assessment. The ALJ found wide-ranging FAPE denials from 2006 ESY through the 2007-2008 school year, ordering reimbursement for private Stowell Learning Center services, grade removal, independent assessments, and course credits. The district prevailed on a substantial number of other issues, including the parent's request for an IEE and private school placement at Stowell going forward.

What Happened

Student is a 16-year-old boy with Opsoclonus-Myoclonus Syndrome (OMS), a rare neurological condition affecting roughly 4,600 Americans. OMS can impair fine and gross motor skills, balance, cognitive ability, emotional functioning, and speech. Student returned to West Covina Unified School District in April 2006 after attending schools in Oakland and New Mexico. His grandmother consented to an interim placement in a special day class (SDC) at a middle school while his mother completed a medical residency out of state. From that point through the 2007-2008 school year, the family raised serious concerns about whether the district was meeting Student's significant needs in reading, writing, math, behavior, assistive technology, and transition planning.

Parent filed a due process complaint in December 2007 seeking reimbursement for private services at the Stowell Learning Center, compensatory education, an updated behavior plan, grade removal, and a private school placement going forward. After eight days of hearing spread across March and April 2008, the ALJ issued a 121-page decision in June 2008 finding that District committed numerous FAPE violations over a two-year period, though it also prevailed on a significant number of the issues raised.

What the District Did Wrong

The ALJ identified a broad pattern of failures across multiple school years. Most significantly, District's IEP goals repeatedly failed to cover all of Student's documented areas of need. The May 2006 IEP offered goals only in reading comprehension, written expression, math reasoning, and money calculations — leaving unaddressed Student's needs in decoding, reading fluency, writing fluency, spelling, math calculation, and math fluency. Because so many areas of need went unmet, the ALJ found the goals as a whole were not reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit, denying Student a FAPE from April 2006 through the 2006 Extended School Year (ESY).

District also failed Student in the area of behavior. During 2006 ESY, Student had significant behavioral difficulties — including noncompliance, inappropriate verbal outbursts, and an incident requiring the school psychologist — but District never provided structured instruction in self-regulation or appropriate communication. This failure likely contributed to a serious behavioral episode on a school bus in fall 2006. District did not develop a formal behavior plan until October 2006, and even then left unaddressed Student's needs around work completion and inattention through the following school year.

The ALJ also found District's assistive technology assessment to be legally inadequate. Despite knowing Student had a hand tremor affecting his fine motor skills and handwriting, District waited until May 2007 to even approve an AT assessment (after Parent requested it). The assessment ultimately conducted in October 2007 was insufficient — it failed to gather detailed information from Parent, spent inadequate time evaluating a voice-activated device, and did not gather enough information to meaningfully guide the IEP team. For the 2007-2008 school year, additional violations included a vague and inadequate transition plan offering no meaningful post-school preparation, a failure to issue a clear written placement offer that even District staff couldn't consistently describe, and improperly assigning Student failing grades in classes Parent had not consented to.

What Was Ordered

District must reimburse Parent for Stowell Learning Center services from June 2007 through the date of the decision — covering 555 hours at up to $73/hour (approximately $40,515), plus transportation costs of $2,682.50, with additional documented expenses reimbursed within 45 days of invoice submission.
District must fund an independent assistive technology assessment (not to exceed $2,000), with the assessor chosen by Student.
District must fund an independent Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA) of Student's behavior (not to exceed $5,000), chosen by Student, and must convene an IEP team to consider results and develop appropriate behavioral services.
District must award Student elective course credits equal to the instructional hours he spent at Stowell Learning Center.
District must permanently remove all failing grades from Student's transcript and educational records for 2007-2008 courses to which Parent had not consented.
All other requested relief — including prospective Stowell placement, 600 hours of compensatory education, tutoring reimbursement, and sports training funding — was denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

IEP goals must cover every documented area of need — not just some. The ALJ found that even when some goals are appropriate, leaving major skill areas completely unaddressed can make an entire IEP legally insufficient. Parents should review whether their child's goals match every area identified in assessments and present levels of performance.
If your child has motor difficulties, the district must evaluate the need for assistive technology. District knew Student had a hand tremor affecting writing and still failed to assess AT needs for over a year. Parents do not need to wait for the district to raise AT — you can request an AT assessment in writing at any IEP meeting.
A district's written offer must be specific enough that a parent can actually evaluate it. The ALJ found that when even District staff cannot clearly explain what was offered, the offer is legally inadequate. Parents should insist on a clear, written description of all services and placement before signing or rejecting an IEP.
Districts cannot assign failing grades for classes a parent did not consent to. When Parent partially rejected a proposed schedule, District enrolled Student in — and gave failing grades for — courses she had not approved. The ALJ ordered those grades permanently removed. Parents should document their partial consent carefully in writing at IEP meetings.
Private program reimbursement is possible even when prospective placement there is not ordered. The ALJ reimbursed Stowell services already provided but could not order future Stowell services because the program had lost its state certification. Parents considering private placements should verify the program's certification status and provide proper written notice to the district before removing their child.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

What Was Ordered

District must reimburse Parent for Stowell Learning Center services from June 2007 through the date of the decision — covering 555 hours at up to $73/hour (approximately $40,515), plus transportation costs of $2,682.50, with additional documented expenses reimbursed within 45 days of invoice submission.
District must fund an independent assistive technology assessment (not to exceed $2,000), with the assessor chosen by Student.
District must fund an independent Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA) of Student's behavior (not to exceed $5,000), chosen by Student, and must convene an IEP team to consider results and develop appropriate behavioral services.
District must award Student elective course credits equal to the instructional hours he spent at Stowell Learning Center.
District must permanently remove all failing grades from Student's transcript and educational records for 2007-2008 courses to which Parent had not consented.
All other requested relief — including prospective Stowell placement, 600 hours of compensatory education, tutoring reimbursement, and sports training funding — was denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

IEP goals must cover every documented area of need — not just some. The ALJ found that even when some goals are appropriate, leaving major skill areas completely unaddressed can make an entire IEP legally insufficient. Parents should review whether their child's goals match every area identified in assessments and present levels of performance.
If your child has motor difficulties, the district must evaluate the need for assistive technology. District knew Student had a hand tremor affecting writing and still failed to assess AT needs for over a year. Parents do not need to wait for the district to raise AT — you can request an AT assessment in writing at any IEP meeting.
A district's written offer must be specific enough that a parent can actually evaluate it. The ALJ found that when even District staff cannot clearly explain what was offered, the offer is legally inadequate. Parents should insist on a clear, written description of all services and placement before signing or rejecting an IEP.
Districts cannot assign failing grades for classes a parent did not consent to. When Parent partially rejected a proposed schedule, District enrolled Student in — and gave failing grades for — courses she had not approved. The ALJ ordered those grades permanently removed. Parents should document their partial consent carefully in writing at IEP meetings.
Private program reimbursement is possible even when prospective placement there is not ordered. The ALJ reimbursed Stowell services already provided but could not order future Stowell services because the program had lost its state certification. Parents considering private placements should verify the program's certification status and provide proper written notice to the district before removing their child.