LAUSD Wins Most Claims, But Must Provide 220 Hours of Tutoring After Botched IEP Meeting

A 20-year-old student with a specific learning disability filed due process against Los Angeles Unified School District, raising claims about his 2007 IEP, a failed speech and language assessment, class scheduling, and a 2009 IEP meeting that lasted only ten minutes before being abruptly ended. The district won most issues, including claims about the 2007 IEP (barred by a prior settlement agreement) and the speech-language assessment. However, the ALJ found that the district violated the family's procedural rights by unilaterally terminating the April 2009 IEP meeting and ordered 220 hours of compensatory tutoring to help the student prepare to pass the high school exit exam and pursue community college.

What Happened

Student was a 20-year-old young man with a specific learning disability attending Crenshaw High School in Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). He also had asthma, hypertension, and allergies that caused frequent absences. Student had ongoing struggles with reading, writing, and math, and had repeatedly failed the English/Language Arts portion of the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), which he needed to pass to earn his diploma. Parent had previously filed a due process complaint against the district in 2008, which was resolved through a settlement agreement in October 2008. That agreement required the district to conduct a new speech and language assessment, convene an IEP meeting within 60 days, and provide one hour per week of speech and language services through a certified provider. The district never conducted the assessment.

In April 2009, the district scheduled an IEP meeting for Student's three-year review. When Parent arrived and raised concerns about the district's failure to complete the promised speech and language assessment, the IEP coordinator said she knew nothing about the settlement agreement or its requirements — and ended the meeting after just ten minutes. No IEP was developed, no educational program was offered, and the meeting was never rescheduled. Student eventually stopped attending school, and Parent began homeschooling him. Parent filed a new due process complaint in May 2009, raising multiple issues including the adequacy of the 2007 IEP, the missing speech-language assessment, class scheduling problems, and the disastrous April 2009 IEP meeting.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled in the district's favor on most claims. Claims about the April 2007 IEP — including whether it offered an appropriate placement and speech-language services — were thrown out because Parent had already settled those exact claims in the October 2008 settlement agreement, which included a full release of all claims through that date. The ALJ applied basic contract law: the clear language of the settlement agreement meant those claims were gone.

On the speech-language assessment issue, the ALJ found that while the district did breach the settlement agreement by never conducting the assessment, Student failed to prove that the breach actually caused educational harm. Student's teachers testified that his speech was easy to understand and that he communicated fine with peers. The district's 2007 assessment had found that while Student's receptive language was below average, it did not prevent him from accessing the curriculum. Student presented no expert testimony or other evidence showing he actually needed speech-language services. The ALJ also noted that the district had offered speech-language services in the settlement agreement, but Student never attended a single session.

However, on the April 2009 IEP meeting, the ALJ found clearly in Student's favor. The IEP coordinator's decision to end the meeting after ten minutes — simply because she didn't know about the settlement agreement — was a serious procedural violation. It deprived Parent of any meaningful opportunity to participate in IEP development and left Student without any updated educational program for nearly ten months. This was a denial of FAPE.

What Was Ordered

Within 45 days of the decision, the district must contract with Sylvan Learning Center (or a comparable provider of Student's choice) to provide 220 hours of intensive academic instruction as compensatory education.
The initial academic assessment by the tutoring provider shall not exceed $300.
The tutoring rate shall not exceed $60 per hour.
Student must complete all 220 hours within one year of the decision date, or the services are forfeited.
All other requested remedies — including an independent educational evaluation for auditory and vision concerns, occupational and physical therapy, homeschooling support, a one-to-one aide, a chalkboard, and a laptop — were denied because Student presented no evidence establishing a need for them.

Why This Matters for Parents

Settlement agreements are binding — and they cut both ways. When Parent settled the 2008 case, the agreement released all claims through that date, including claims about the 2007 IEP. Parents should read settlement agreements extremely carefully before signing, and understand that a broad release means giving up the right to revisit those issues later, even if new concerns emerge.
Proving a violation isn't enough — you must also prove it caused harm. The district clearly broke its promise to conduct a speech-language assessment. But because Student couldn't show that the missing assessment would have changed anything — or that he actually needed speech-language services — the ALJ ruled for the district on that issue. When raising assessment claims, parents should be prepared to present expert testimony showing what the assessment would have found and how it would have changed Student's program.
IEP meetings cannot be unilaterally ended by the district. When the IEP coordinator ended the April 2009 meeting after ten minutes because she was unfamiliar with the settlement agreement, that was a serious violation of Parent's right to participate in the IEP process. Districts are legally required to hold meaningful IEP meetings — not just show up and walk out. If a district ends a meeting early without completing the IEP, document it immediately in writing and demand it be rescheduled.
Compensatory education is calculated based on what the student actually lost. Because Student went without any educational program from April 2009 forward, the ALJ calculated 22 weeks of lost instruction at two hours per day and ordered 220 hours of make-up tutoring. The remedy was tied specifically to helping Student pass the CAHSEE and prepare for community college — his stated transition goals. This shows that compensatory education awards are individualized and connected to the student's real needs.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

Within 45 days of the decision, the district must contract with Sylvan Learning Center (or a comparable provider of Student's choice) to provide 220 hours of intensive academic instruction as compensatory education.
The initial academic assessment by the tutoring provider shall not exceed $300.
The tutoring rate shall not exceed $60 per hour.
Student must complete all 220 hours within one year of the decision date, or the services are forfeited.
All other requested remedies — including an independent educational evaluation for auditory and vision concerns, occupational and physical therapy, homeschooling support, a one-to-one aide, a chalkboard, and a laptop — were denied because Student presented no evidence establishing a need for them.

Why This Matters for Parents

Settlement agreements are binding — and they cut both ways. When Parent settled the 2008 case, the agreement released all claims through that date, including claims about the 2007 IEP. Parents should read settlement agreements extremely carefully before signing, and understand that a broad release means giving up the right to revisit those issues later, even if new concerns emerge.
Proving a violation isn't enough — you must also prove it caused harm. The district clearly broke its promise to conduct a speech-language assessment. But because Student couldn't show that the missing assessment would have changed anything — or that he actually needed speech-language services — the ALJ ruled for the district on that issue. When raising assessment claims, parents should be prepared to present expert testimony showing what the assessment would have found and how it would have changed Student's program.
IEP meetings cannot be unilaterally ended by the district. When the IEP coordinator ended the April 2009 meeting after ten minutes because she was unfamiliar with the settlement agreement, that was a serious violation of Parent's right to participate in the IEP process. Districts are legally required to hold meaningful IEP meetings — not just show up and walk out. If a district ends a meeting early without completing the IEP, document it immediately in writing and demand it be rescheduled.
Compensatory education is calculated based on what the student actually lost. Because Student went without any educational program from April 2009 forward, the ALJ calculated 22 weeks of lost instruction at two hours per day and ordered 220 hours of make-up tutoring. The remedy was tied specifically to helping Student pass the CAHSEE and prepare for community college — his stated transition goals. This shows that compensatory education awards are individualized and connected to the student's real needs.