Morgan Hill USD Failed to Assess Severely Disabled Student for Over a Year, Denied FAPE

A severely disabled 18-year-old student with cerebral palsy, traumatic brain injury, and seizure disorder went without required assessments, related services, or a current IEP for over a year while Morgan Hill Unified School District failed to coordinate its own assessment process. The ALJ found the District denied the student a FAPE by failing to timely complete assessments in PT, AT/augmentative communication, and orientation and mobility, and by never convening an IEP meeting. The District was ordered to provide hundreds of hours of compensatory education services and reimburse the family for an assistive technology switch.

What Happened

The student is an 18-year-old young woman with glycogen storage disease whose feeding pump failed during sleep when she was three-and-a-half years old, causing a traumatic brain injury, cerebral palsy, and seizure disorder. She communicated only through limited vocalizations and a gesture with her right hand, received nutrition through a feeding tube, and could not sit upright independently. She was placed on home instruction receiving five hours per week from a general education teacher with no special education training, who read novels aloud and could not reliably confirm whether the student understood the material or was even responding to yes/no questions. The only signed IEP in existence was dated January 22, 2002 — more than six years before the relevant period — and contained no goals, no present levels of performance, and no specific offer of services.

In October 2008, the family settled a prior due process complaint, and the District agreed to complete assessments in assistive technology, augmentative communication, speech-language, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and orientation and mobility, and to convene an IEP by October 31, 2008. The District held one meeting on that date but then did nothing meaningful to advance the assessment process for the next several months. The school psychologist assigned to coordinate assessments sent emails to Mother asking her to find out the status of the District's own assessments. Assessors hired through the center for speech and OT did not even know they were conducting District assessments for IEP purposes. The physical therapist was not contacted until July 2009 — six months late — and the assistive technology assessment was not completed until December 2009, a full year after the assessment plan was signed. No IEP meeting was ever noticed or held during this period. The family filed two due process complaints, which were consolidated and heard in March 2010.

What the District Did Wrong

Failed to timely complete assessments. The District signed an assessment plan in November 2008 but took no meaningful steps to execute it. The OT and speech assessments were not completed until June 2009, the PT assessment not until November 2009, and the AT/augmentative communication assessment not until December 2009 — all far beyond the 60-day legal deadline. The District improperly delegated coordination to a school psychologist who then expected the parent to chase down assessors.
Conducted fatally flawed assessments. The OT and speech therapists from the contracted clinic did not know they were performing District assessments for IEP purposes. Both assessors prepared incomplete reports unsuitable for IEP development. Requiring the parent to provide a videotape to complete the assessments — rather than arranging home observations — was the District's responsibility, not the parent's.
Never convened an IEP meeting. Despite having no current IEP (the last one was from 2002), the District failed to notice or hold any IEP team meeting during the entire relevant period. The student had no annual goals, no present levels of performance, and no offer of placement or services for the 2009–2010 school year.
Failed to provide required related services. Without completed assessments or an IEP, the student received no physical therapy, no assistive technology or augmentative communication services, and no orientation and mobility or vision services — all of which credible expert assessors confirmed she needed throughout the relevant period.
Failed to supply AT equipment. The District never provided the student with even basic assistive technology equipment such as switches and communication supports, despite an earlier District-funded assessment from August 2008 having already recommended these tools.
Improperly blamed the parent for its own delays. The ALJ explicitly rejected the District's argument that the mother's occasional unavailability by phone excused its failures. The District had an affirmative, non-delegable duty to assess and offer FAPE regardless of the parent's cooperation level.

What Was Ordered

$109.00 reimbursement for an assistive technology switch the mother purchased in December 2008, which an earlier District assessment had already recommended.
102 hours of compensatory AT/augmentative communication services (calculated as 2.5 hours per week for 41 school weeks), to be provided by a California non-public agency in the student's home.
82 hours of consultation and/or direct instruction from a teacher of the visually impaired, to be provided in the home by a non-public agency.
82 hours of direct orientation and mobility services, to be provided in the home by a non-public agency.
82 physical therapy sessions of 45 minutes each (two sessions per week for 41 weeks), to be provided in the home by a non-public agency.
All compensatory hours must be used before the student ages out of special education eligibility. Unused hours are forfeited upon exit from special education or permanent move outside District boundaries.
Denied: Reimbursement for private PT provider (unqualified, unproven, no invoices), "Vital Stim" therapy (deemed medical, not educational), horse therapy, wheelchair maintenance (medical equipment), neurofeedback supplies, computer monitor, books, and index cards. Compensatory OT and speech therapy sessions were also denied because student did not establish what those needs were or what services would have been appropriate.

Why This Matters for Parents

The District's duty to assess cannot be delegated to you. Even if you are hard to reach by phone, the District is legally required to complete assessments within 60 days of your signed consent. If it fails to do so, that is the District's violation — not yours. Keep records of every contact attempt and every delay.
An old IEP is not a valid IEP. A 2002 IEP cannot serve as the basis for a 2009 school year. If your child's IEP is more than a year old without a renewal meeting, the District is already out of compliance. You can demand an IEP meeting in writing at any time.
Assessors must know they are doing a District assessment for IEP purposes. If the District contracts with an outside clinic for evaluations, those evaluators must understand that the purpose is to inform your child's IEP. An assessment conducted without that awareness — and without home observation when appropriate — may be legally inadequate and cannot be used to deny services.
Compensatory education is calculated based on what should have been provided. When a district fails to provide related services like PT, AT, or orientation and mobility for an extended period, parents can seek compensatory hours equal to what should have been delivered. Document what services the IEP should have contained, and get expert opinions on recommended frequency and duration.
To win reimbursement for private services, you need receipts, credentials, and expert support. The family lost its claim for thousands of dollars in private PT reimbursement largely because there were no invoices, no proof of payment, and no evidence that the private therapist was licensed in California. If you are privately funding services you intend to seek reimbursement for, keep detailed records, verify provider credentials, and obtain a professional opinion that the services are educationally necessary.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

Failed to timely complete assessments. The District signed an assessment plan in November 2008 but took no meaningful steps to execute it. The OT and speech assessments were not completed until June 2009, the PT assessment not until November 2009, and the AT/augmentative communication assessment not until December 2009 — all far beyond the 60-day legal deadline. The District improperly delegated coordination to a school psychologist who then expected the parent to chase down assessors.
Conducted fatally flawed assessments. The OT and speech therapists from the contracted clinic did not know they were performing District assessments for IEP purposes. Both assessors prepared incomplete reports unsuitable for IEP development. Requiring the parent to provide a videotape to complete the assessments — rather than arranging home observations — was the District's responsibility, not the parent's.
Never convened an IEP meeting. Despite having no current IEP (the last one was from 2002), the District failed to notice or hold any IEP team meeting during the entire relevant period. The student had no annual goals, no present levels of performance, and no offer of placement or services for the 2009–2010 school year.
Failed to provide required related services. Without completed assessments or an IEP, the student received no physical therapy, no assistive technology or augmentative communication services, and no orientation and mobility or vision services — all of which credible expert assessors confirmed she needed throughout the relevant period.
Failed to supply AT equipment. The District never provided the student with even basic assistive technology equipment such as switches and communication supports, despite an earlier District-funded assessment from August 2008 having already recommended these tools.
Improperly blamed the parent for its own delays. The ALJ explicitly rejected the District's argument that the mother's occasional unavailability by phone excused its failures. The District had an affirmative, non-delegable duty to assess and offer FAPE regardless of the parent's cooperation level.

What Was Ordered

$109.00 reimbursement for an assistive technology switch the mother purchased in December 2008, which an earlier District assessment had already recommended.
102 hours of compensatory AT/augmentative communication services (calculated as 2.5 hours per week for 41 school weeks), to be provided by a California non-public agency in the student's home.
82 hours of consultation and/or direct instruction from a teacher of the visually impaired, to be provided in the home by a non-public agency.
82 hours of direct orientation and mobility services, to be provided in the home by a non-public agency.
82 physical therapy sessions of 45 minutes each (two sessions per week for 41 weeks), to be provided in the home by a non-public agency.
All compensatory hours must be used before the student ages out of special education eligibility. Unused hours are forfeited upon exit from special education or permanent move outside District boundaries.
Denied: Reimbursement for private PT provider (unqualified, unproven, no invoices), "Vital Stim" therapy (deemed medical, not educational), horse therapy, wheelchair maintenance (medical equipment), neurofeedback supplies, computer monitor, books, and index cards. Compensatory OT and speech therapy sessions were also denied because student did not establish what those needs were or what services would have been appropriate.

Why This Matters for Parents

The District's duty to assess cannot be delegated to you. Even if you are hard to reach by phone, the District is legally required to complete assessments within 60 days of your signed consent. If it fails to do so, that is the District's violation — not yours. Keep records of every contact attempt and every delay.
An old IEP is not a valid IEP. A 2002 IEP cannot serve as the basis for a 2009 school year. If your child's IEP is more than a year old without a renewal meeting, the District is already out of compliance. You can demand an IEP meeting in writing at any time.
Assessors must know they are doing a District assessment for IEP purposes. If the District contracts with an outside clinic for evaluations, those evaluators must understand that the purpose is to inform your child's IEP. An assessment conducted without that awareness — and without home observation when appropriate — may be legally inadequate and cannot be used to deny services.
Compensatory education is calculated based on what should have been provided. When a district fails to provide related services like PT, AT, or orientation and mobility for an extended period, parents can seek compensatory hours equal to what should have been delivered. Document what services the IEP should have contained, and get expert opinions on recommended frequency and duration.
To win reimbursement for private services, you need receipts, credentials, and expert support. The family lost its claim for thousands of dollars in private PT reimbursement largely because there were no invoices, no proof of payment, and no evidence that the private therapist was licensed in California. If you are privately funding services you intend to seek reimbursement for, keep detailed records, verify provider credentials, and obtain a professional opinion that the services are educationally necessary.