LAUSD Must Deliver Home Services Outside District Boundaries When IEP Requires It

What Happened

Student was a 19-year-old young woman with serious medical conditions including a suppressed immune system, osteoporosis, partial blindness, and traumatic brain injury. Because of her health needs, she could not receive educational services in the morning hours and required a supervising adult present at all times during instruction. She lived with her father, whose home was within LAUSD boundaries, but spent her afternoons at her mother's home — located just 3.4 miles outside the district — where her mother was available to supervise her during instruction. LAUSD had been delivering home-based special education services at the mother's home continuously since at least 2005, including under the student's June 2010 IEP, which called for 1,260 minutes per week (about 4.2 hours per school day) of home-based instruction.

In the summer of 2010, a Carlson Home/Hospital School principal reviewed the student's IEPs and concluded — without seeking legal guidance or convening an IEP meeting — that the district was not authorized to deliver services outside its geographic boundaries. Over the following months, he informally proposed alternatives to the family: the father's home, a public library, or the father's bicycle shop. None of these options were workable. The father worked afternoons and could not supervise Student; the mother could not travel to the father's home due to her own childcare responsibilities; and public locations were unsafe for a student with a compromised immune system who needed private bathroom access and a sanitary environment. On January 28, 2011, the district sent a letter announcing it would stop services at the mother's home effective February 7, 2011. No IEP meeting was ever held. Student received no educational services after that date.

What the District Did Wrong

1. Unilaterally stopped services required by the IEP. The June 2010 IEP called for instruction at a "home setting," and the entire IEP team — including district staff — knew that "home setting" meant the mother's home, because that was the only location where services had ever been delivered. The district implemented the IEP at the mother's home for months before abruptly halting. Stopping services without changing the IEP first was a direct violation of the IDEA.

2. Delivered no FAPE after February 7, 2011. Once the district stopped sending the teacher to the mother's home, it offered only locations that were clearly inappropriate for Student's medical and educational needs. A public library or retail shop cannot substitute for a supervised, sanitary, quiet home environment for a student with these complex needs. By failing to offer any genuinely appropriate alternative, the district left Student with zero educational services — a complete denial of FAPE.

3. Changed Student's placement without an IEP meeting or parental consent. Deciding to change where a student receives services is a change in educational placement under the IDEA. That decision belongs to the IEP team — not a single school administrator. The principal knew the family disagreed with his decision, yet he never convened an IEP team meeting. Informal phone calls and a letter are not a substitute for the IEP process. This procedural violation significantly impeded the father's right to meaningfully participate in decisions about his daughter's education.

What Was Ordered

1. LAUSD must resume delivering educational services to Student at the mother's home on every scheduled school day for the remainder of the 2010–11 school year, consistent with the June 2010 IEP.
2. The mother's home is designated as "stay put" — meaning it remains the required service location in the event of any future dispute, until a new IEP supersedes the current one.
3. LAUSD must provide compensatory education consisting of 4.2 hours per school day for every school day services were not delivered, beginning February 7, 2011 through the date services resume.
4. Student may use the compensatory education hours at any time mutually convenient to Student and the district, up to and including her 23rd birthday.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Where services are delivered is part of the IEP, and the district cannot change it unilaterally. If your child's IEP has historically been implemented at a specific location — even one outside the district's boundaries — the district cannot simply decide to move services without convening an IEP meeting and getting your consent. Past practice matters and can define what the IEP actually requires.

2. Districts cannot use geography as an excuse to cut services. The IDEA does not prohibit a district from delivering services outside its boundaries when the student's needs require it. Courts have repeatedly ordered districts to fund placements in other locations, including out-of-district schools and residential facilities. A student's unique needs can legally require services wherever those needs are best met.

3. An IEP meeting is required before a placement change — not after. The district's failure to hold an IEP meeting before stopping services was itself a violation of the IDEA, regardless of whether the underlying decision might have been discussable. If a school administrator tells you services are moving or stopping, immediately request an IEP meeting in writing before any change takes effect.

4. If a district offers alternatives, those alternatives must actually work for your child. The district's obligation is not simply to offer something — it must offer something appropriate given your child's specific needs. Alternatives that ignore medical requirements, safety concerns, or supervision needs do not satisfy the FAPE standard.

5. Compensatory education can cover every day of missed services. When a district completely fails to provide any educational services, the student is entitled to make-up instruction for each missed day. If your child is being denied services right now, document every missed day — those hours can be recovered through a due process hearing.