Downey USD Failed to Include Behavioral Goals for Autistic Student Across Three IEPs

What Happened

Student is a seven-year-old girl diagnosed with autism at approximately age three-and-a-half. She attended Downey Unified School District from preschool onward, and was found eligible for special education services in early 2005. She received services in a Special Day Class (SDC) and a one-to-one Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) program provided by the district. Her parents grew increasingly concerned that her IEPs were not meeting her needs — particularly around her self-stimulatory behaviors, difficulty attending, and communication delays. They requested more intensive ABA therapy, including in-home services, and eventually began privately funding ABA services through an outside agency called CUSP and speech-language services through a provider called More Than Words.

Parents filed for due process in July 2008, challenging the adequacy of three IEPs: January 25, 2007, June 1, 2007, and June 5, 2008. They argued the district's ABA program was insufficient in hours and quality, that staff were underqualified, that IEP goals were inadequate, and that speech-language services were too limited. The district maintained that Student had made meaningful progress and that each IEP offered an appropriate education.

What the District Did Wrong

The ALJ found one significant and consistent flaw running through all three IEPs: none of them contained any behavioral goals, despite the fact that the district was aware Student engaged in self-stimulatory behaviors and had persistent difficulty attending — problems that directly interfered with her ability to learn. The ALJ credited the testimony of Student's expert, Dr. Freeman, that behavioral goals were essential to develop the "learning readiness skills" Student needed to benefit from her educational program. Without these goals, the district's various service providers were not coordinated around addressing these foundational barriers. This omission was found to constitute a denial of FAPE in all three IEPs.

The June 5, 2008 IEP carried an additional flaw: it completely removed Student's one-to-one ABA therapy services without replacing them with an equivalent direct service, offering only consultation and training instead. Because Student had previously been receiving 10 hours per week of individual ABA therapy and making progress, eliminating that service without adequate justification was also found to deny her a FAPE.

The ALJ rejected several of the parents' other claims. The district's ABA staff — including the primary ABA specialist, Ms. Barrios — were found sufficiently qualified to implement the IEPs, even without a Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA) credential. The amount of ABA therapy offered in the 2007 IEPs was not found to be deficient. Speech-language services were found appropriate for the 2007 IEPs and the June 2008 IEP. Goals in the 2007 IEPs were found measurable, and the failure to designate ABA staff as responsible for specific goals was not found to rise to a FAPE denial.

What Was Ordered

1. District must provide a one-to-one ABA-trained classroom aide from CUSP or another California-certified NPA of the parents' choice, for 30 hours per week through the end of the 2008-2009 school year, including the 2009 Extended School Year (ESY). Twenty of those 30 weekly hours are compensatory (to make up for past denial) and expire at the end of ESY 2009.
2. District must fund a behavioral analysis by CUSP or another certified California NPA of the parents' choice, to identify the appropriate ABA behavioral goals Student needs in the classroom.
3. Within 10 days of receiving the behavioral analysis report, district must convene an IEP to review the results and develop goals and services based on the analysis.
4. District must provide up to eight hours per month of supervision of the ABA aide by a qualified behavior analyst from CUSP or another certified NPA, through the end of the 2008-2009 school year and ESY.
5. District must reimburse parents for 10 hours per week of ABA therapy provided by CUSP from June 5, 2008, through the date of the decision. (Full reimbursement for all CUSP hours was denied because parents did not provide the required 10-day advance notice before withdrawing from the district's program.)

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Behavioral goals are not optional for students with autism who have attention and self-regulation challenges. If your child's IEP does not include goals targeting behaviors like self-stimulation or inattention that interfere with learning, this case establishes that the absence of those goals — on its own — can constitute a denial of FAPE. Ask at every IEP meeting: "What goals address my child's ability to attend and stay regulated?"

2. A district cannot simply remove a service that was working without providing an equivalent replacement. The June 2008 IEP's elimination of one-to-one ABA therapy was found to deny FAPE. If your district proposes reducing or eliminating a service your child has been successfully receiving, ask for data showing why that service is no longer needed.

3. Staff credentials matter less than whether staff can actually implement the IEP. The ALJ declined to find a FAPE denial based on staff not holding BCBA credentials, focusing instead on whether staff were capable of carrying out the IEP. Parents challenging staff qualifications need to show that the staff actually failed to implement the program — not just that they lack a specific credential.

4. Give written notice before privately placing your child or seeking reimbursement. Parents here were denied reimbursement for some private ABA services because they did not give the district the required 10-day written notice before shifting to the private provider. Even when a district is denying FAPE, following the notice requirement protects your right to reimbursement.