Districts Win Child Find Fight: Private School Family Gets No Tuition Reimbursement

What Happened

Student is a teenager with ADHD who has never attended public school. In early 2008, when Student was in fourth grade, Parents asked Glendale USD to assess him after his private school teachers raised concerns about reading, focus, and completing work. Glendale USD assessed Student and held an IEP meeting in March 2008, concluding he was not eligible for special education. Around the same time, a private neuropsychologist Parents hired also assessed Student and diagnosed him with ADHD Predominantly Inattentive Type — but explicitly did not make a special education eligibility recommendation. After the district found Student ineligible, Parents enrolled him at Westmark School, a private school specializing in students with language-based learning differences. They did not tell Glendale USD where Student was going, and had no further contact with the district for more than two and a half years.

In January 2011, Parents — through an attorney — filed a due process complaint against Glendale USD, for the first time challenging the 2008 eligibility decision. Glendale USD responded by referring Parents to LAUSD, the district where Westmark is located, for an assessment. Parents waited about a month before contacting LAUSD, which then assessed Student and found him eligible for special education under the category of autism. Glendale USD subsequently held its own IEP and found Student eligible under Other Health Impaired. Parents did not consent to either IEP and Student continued at Westmark. Parents then filed the current complaint seeking reimbursement of approximately $44,000 in tuition and transportation costs for the 2009–2010 and 2010–2011 school years, alleging both districts had violated their "child find" obligations.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled entirely in favor of both districts, finding that neither Glendale USD nor LAUSD failed to meet their child find obligations.

As to Glendale USD: The ALJ found that Glendale USD had already "found" this Student back in 2008 when Parents first requested an assessment. After the March 2008 IEP meeting, Glendale USD had no information that would trigger any reason to suspect Student had a disability requiring special education — Parents never told the district where Student was enrolled, never reported any academic concerns, and no one at Westmark ever recommended referring Student for a public school assessment. The ADHD diagnosis alone did not create an ongoing duty to follow up, because ADHD by itself does not automatically qualify a child for special education. The ALJ also found that Glendale USD's response to the January 2011 complaint — directing Parents to seek assessment from LAUSD, the district where Westmark was located — was legally correct under both federal law and a regional coordination agreement between local school districts. Even if this referral were treated as a procedural error, the ALJ noted it caused no real harm because LAUSD promptly assessed Student when Parents asked.

As to LAUSD: The ALJ found that LAUSD carried out robust child find activities during both school years, including mailing brochures to hundreds of institutions, posting information at every school site, holding community resource fairs, conducting private school outreach meetings, and maintaining a website with child find information. Witnesses from private schools testified they never saw LAUSD's child find materials, but the ALJ was not persuaded — the law only requires a district to make materials available, not to guarantee they are seen. The ALJ also noted that LAUSD had successfully assessed multiple students from Westmark during the same period, demonstrating its efforts were working.

What Was Ordered

1. All of the relief sought by Student in the Complaint was denied.
2. Student was not awarded reimbursement for Westmark tuition ($17,000 in 2009–2010; $20,200 in 2010–2011).
3. Student was not awarded reimbursement for transportation costs ($3,500 in 2009–2010; $4,254 in 2010–2011).
4. No compensatory education or other services were ordered.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Silence can cost you your legal rights. This family had no contact with Glendale USD for over two and a half years. Courts and ALJs expect parents who are concerned about their child's disability to stay engaged with their school district. If you place your child in private school and never inform the district, it is very hard to later claim the district failed to find your child.

2. An ADHD diagnosis alone does not require a school district to follow up. The ALJ found that knowing a child has ADHD — without more — does not trigger a district's ongoing obligation to reassess or monitor that child. To activate child find duties, a district must have reason to suspect both a disability and a need for special education services.

3. Child find obligations are met through systemic outreach, not individual notice. Neither district was required to contact this family directly. Distributing brochures, posting information at schools, holding community meetings, and maintaining websites was legally sufficient — even if this particular family never saw any of it.

4. If you are placing your child in a private school located in a different district, contact that district. Under federal law and California practice, it is the district where the private school is physically located — not your home district — that is responsible for identifying and assessing privately placed students. Had Parents known this and contacted LAUSD earlier, the outcome could have been different.

5. A late-filed due process complaint challenging an old eligibility decision faces serious obstacles. The original 2008 eligibility determination was not directly challenged until January 2011 — nearly three years later — and that complaint was ultimately dismissed. If you believe your child was wrongly found ineligible for special education, act quickly; waiting years significantly weakens your case.