District Ordered to Reimburse $8,314 After Failing to Implement Student's IEP

What Happened

This case has a long history. Parents filed a due process complaint in March 2015 against Manhattan Beach Unified School District on behalf of their child, who had been placed at a residential treatment center called True to Life Counseling (TLC Journey) in Sonoma County and was attending Journey nonpublic school. The original dispute was over whether Manhattan Beach was even responsible for providing the student with special education services. OAH originally ruled that Manhattan Beach was not responsible — but the California Court of Appeal reversed that ruling in May 2019, finding that Manhattan Beach was in fact required to implement the student's November 10, 2014 IEP and had failed to do so.

The Court of Appeal sent the case back to OAH to determine what additional relief — beyond $2,288.89 in travel expenses already ordered — the family was owed. By the time of the remand hearing in February 2020, the student was 21 years old and had long since left the residential program. The remand hearing focused on two additional claims: reimbursement for a short period of nonpublic school tuition at Vista (November 10–21, 2014), and reimbursement for all the travel expenses parents had incurred visiting their child at TLC Journey — costs that had mounted over more than a year of visits that the district had denied responsibility for.

What the District Did Wrong

Manhattan Beach failed to implement its own November 10, 2014 IEP. At that IEP meeting, the district offered the student a residential treatment center placement and, according to uncontested testimony from a parent, specifically agreed to cover the student's tuition at Vista nonpublic school until he could begin at TLC Journey. The district then never paid that tuition — leaving parents to cover $955.52 out of pocket.

The district also refused to reimburse parents for the full cost of traveling between their home and TLC Journey in Sonoma County, even though the visits were approved and encouraged by the treatment center. The district argued that the visits needed to be formally recommended by the IEP team — but the ALJ found this argument disingenuous, noting that Manhattan Beach had denied responsibility for the student's placement in the first place and therefore could not credibly demand IEP team sign-off on visits to a program it refused to acknowledge.

The district further argued that once Sonoma County Office of Education created its own IEP for the student in November 2015, Manhattan Beach's responsibility ended. The ALJ rejected this, finding that the Court of Appeal had specifically held Manhattan Beach responsible for the November 10, 2014 IEP, and that Sonoma County's later IEP did not relieve Manhattan Beach of that obligation — especially since Sonoma County never reimbursed the family either.

What Was Ordered

1. Manhattan Beach was ordered to reimburse parents $955.52 for the student's nonpublic school tuition at Vista for the period of November 10–21, 2014.
2. Manhattan Beach was ordered to pay the $2,288.89 in travel-related expenses already ordered by the Court of Appeal.
3. Manhattan Beach was ordered to pay an additional $5,070.48 in travel expenses for parent and student trips between home and TLC Journey through December 2015, minus $333 in unexplained airfare costs the family could not account for.
4. The total reimbursement ordered was $8,314.89, due within 45 days of the decision.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Keep records of every expense you pay out of pocket. This family was ultimately reimbursed for years of travel costs — but only because they had documentation of each trip. Save receipts, credit card statements, and any written approval from treatment providers for visits or services.

2. A district cannot escape responsibility by refusing to participate. Manhattan Beach argued it shouldn't have to reimburse travel costs because the IEP team hadn't formally recommended the visits. The ALJ rejected this — you can't demand procedural compliance from a process you refused to engage in honestly.

3. Court of Appeal reversals can reopen the door to relief you thought was lost. The family had actually dropped the Vista tuition claim before the first hearing. But because the Court of Appeal remanded the case broadly for "any additional relief," the ALJ was able to revisit it. If your case is appealed, the scope of a remand matters enormously.

4. A later IEP from a different district does not automatically end the first district's responsibility. Manhattan Beach tried to use Sonoma County's 2015 IEP to cut off its own liability. The ALJ refused, finding that the original district remains responsible for its own IEP failures unless and until another agency actually steps in and provides relief.