Compton USD Denied FAPE by Skipping Behavior Assessment for Violent Kindergartner

A six-year-old kindergartner with ADHD and severe behavioral challenges, including biting, kicking, and suicidal ideations, was denied a free appropriate public education by Compton Unified School District. The district failed to conduct a required Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA), delayed assessing the student for Emotional Disturbance, and offered an IEP with no behavior goals and an untrained aide. The ALJ ordered the district to fund independent FAA and neuropsychological assessments, provide a trained one-on-one aide, and convene a new IEP meeting to develop an appropriate program.

What Happened

Student was a six-year-old kindergartner living with his grandparents, who were his legal guardians, within the Compton Unified School District. He had been diagnosed with ADHD and exhibited extreme, dangerous behaviors at school — including hitting, kicking, biting his teacher, destroying property, and eventually expressing suicidal thoughts. Despite these serious warning signs, Student had never previously received special education services. His grandparents enrolled him in a general education kindergarten class in September 2007, where teachers quickly recognized that his behaviors were far beyond what was typical for his age. The school held a Student Support Team (SST) meeting in December 2007 to discuss strategies, but no formal behavior plan was ever developed.

In January 2008, Student's grandparents formally requested a special education assessment and an IEP, and a dependency court separately ordered them to pursue this referral. The district's school psychologist initiated an assessment in February 2008, but critically failed to conduct a Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA) — a required evaluation for students with serious behavior problems — even after grandparents specifically requested one in writing. Three IEP meetings were held between May and June 2008, but the district did not make a complete offer until June 12, 2008. That IEP had no behavior goals, no behavior intervention plan, and offered an untrained classroom aide. Grandparents filed for due process in July 2008.

What the District Did Wrong

1. Failed to conduct a Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA). Grandparents requested an FAA in writing on February 8, 2008. The district never responded to the request and never conducted one. Without an FAA, the IEP team had no scientific basis for developing behavior goals or a behavior intervention plan — the very supports Student needed most. The ALJ found this failure denied Student a FAPE.

2. Delayed assessing Student for Emotional Disturbance (ED). The school psychologist's initial assessment focused narrowly on ADHD and did not investigate whether Student qualified for special education under the ED category, even though Student's behaviors were extreme, dangerous, and unresponsive to general education interventions. The ED assessment was not completed until June 1, 2008 — months after the information needed to conduct it was already available.

3. Offered an IEP with no behavior goals and inadequate services. Despite acknowledging that Student's behaviors impeded learning for himself and others, the June 12, 2008 IEP contained zero behavior goals. The only behavior interventions offered were verbal praise and tangible rewards. The district assigned an untrained, unprofessional aide who worked with Student for only a few weeks. The IEP also failed to offer an appropriate placement — the district itself admitted it had no suitable SDC for a student with severe behaviors but grade-level academics.

4. Failed to assess for co-morbid conditions. Evidence showed that Student's biological parents were substance abusers, Student's father had a bipolar disorder diagnosis, and Student's behaviors were not fully explained by ADHD alone. The district did not assess for conduct disorder, in utero drug exposure, bipolar disorder, or other neurological conditions, leaving the IEP team without critical information about what interventions might actually help.

What Was Ordered

Student is entitled to remain in a general education placement at his home school until the district and grandparents agree on a different placement at an IEP meeting, or a due process hearing determines the district has made an appropriate FAPE offer.
The district must provide Student with a one-on-one aide throughout the school day who has documented training in behavior analysis and positive behavioral interventions, for as long as Student remains in general education.
Within 15 days of the decision, the district must contract with and fund an independent assessor of Student's choice to conduct a Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA), prepare a report with IEP recommendations, and attend IEP team meetings. The district must also fund development of a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) if the FAA warrants one.
Within 15 days of the decision, the district must fund an independent neuropsychological assessment to identify co-morbid psychological or neurological conditions — including bipolar disorder, conduct disorder, and in utero drug exposure — and recommend appropriate interventions.
The district must convene an IEP team meeting within 60 days to develop a complete and appropriate IEP using the results of both independent assessments.
Student's requests for compensatory education and play therapy were denied, as insufficient evidence was presented to support those specific remedies.

Why This Matters for Parents

Put your assessment requests in writing — every single one. In this case, grandparents made a written request for a Functional Analysis Assessment on February 8, 2008. The district ignored it entirely. The ALJ used that written request as key evidence that the district violated its legal duty. If you believe your child needs a specific type of assessment, send a dated letter or email requesting it by name.
Behavior goals are not optional — they are legally required. If your child's IEP acknowledges that behavior interferes with learning, the district cannot simply offer verbal praise as its only strategy. The law requires measurable behavior goals tied to your child's specific needs. An IEP without behavior goals for a student with significant behavioral challenges is legally deficient.
A one-on-one aide must be trained for the job. The district in this case assigned an untrained aide who lasted only a few weeks. The ALJ specifically ordered that any aide provided must have documented training in behavior analysis and positive behavioral interventions. If your child is assigned an aide, you have the right to ask about that person's training and qualifications.
You can request that the district look beyond the obvious diagnosis. When a child's behaviors are extreme and not fully explained by a single diagnosis like ADHD, parents can push the district to assess for co-occurring conditions. In this case, the ALJ ordered a neuropsychological assessment at district expense because ADHD alone did not account for Student's behavior — and untreated co-morbid conditions were preventing effective intervention.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

What Was Ordered

Student is entitled to remain in a general education placement at his home school until the district and grandparents agree on a different placement at an IEP meeting, or a due process hearing determines the district has made an appropriate FAPE offer.
The district must provide Student with a one-on-one aide throughout the school day who has documented training in behavior analysis and positive behavioral interventions, for as long as Student remains in general education.
Within 15 days of the decision, the district must contract with and fund an independent assessor of Student's choice to conduct a Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA), prepare a report with IEP recommendations, and attend IEP team meetings. The district must also fund development of a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) if the FAA warrants one.
Within 15 days of the decision, the district must fund an independent neuropsychological assessment to identify co-morbid psychological or neurological conditions — including bipolar disorder, conduct disorder, and in utero drug exposure — and recommend appropriate interventions.
The district must convene an IEP team meeting within 60 days to develop a complete and appropriate IEP using the results of both independent assessments.
Student's requests for compensatory education and play therapy were denied, as insufficient evidence was presented to support those specific remedies.

Why This Matters for Parents

Put your assessment requests in writing — every single one. In this case, grandparents made a written request for a Functional Analysis Assessment on February 8, 2008. The district ignored it entirely. The ALJ used that written request as key evidence that the district violated its legal duty. If you believe your child needs a specific type of assessment, send a dated letter or email requesting it by name.
Behavior goals are not optional — they are legally required. If your child's IEP acknowledges that behavior interferes with learning, the district cannot simply offer verbal praise as its only strategy. The law requires measurable behavior goals tied to your child's specific needs. An IEP without behavior goals for a student with significant behavioral challenges is legally deficient.
A one-on-one aide must be trained for the job. The district in this case assigned an untrained aide who lasted only a few weeks. The ALJ specifically ordered that any aide provided must have documented training in behavior analysis and positive behavioral interventions. If your child is assigned an aide, you have the right to ask about that person's training and qualifications.
You can request that the district look beyond the obvious diagnosis. When a child's behaviors are extreme and not fully explained by a single diagnosis like ADHD, parents can push the district to assess for co-occurring conditions. In this case, the ALJ ordered a neuropsychological assessment at district expense because ADHD alone did not account for Student's behavior — and untreated co-morbid conditions were preventing effective intervention.