District Wins Most Claims for Autistic Student, But Must Provide Behavior Support for Transition to New Placement

An eight-year-old girl with autism attended Tehachapi Unified School District and her parents challenged multiple IEP goals, the district's behavior supports, a proposed placement at a school 80 minutes away, and the adequacy of three district assessments. The ALJ ruled largely in the district's favor, finding most IEP goals and the Stockdale placement appropriate, but found the district failed to offer a functional behavior assessment at the March 2014 IEP. As a remedy, the district was ordered to provide a behaviorally trained one-to-one aide on Student's van and during her classroom transition, and to develop a transition plan with a board-certified behavior analyst.

What Happened

Student is an eight-year-old girl with autism who lives in a remote area outside Tehachapi, California. Her autism severely affected her speech, language, and behavior. She attended a mild/moderate special day class at her neighborhood school from kindergarten through second grade, where she struggled with eloping, aggression, attention, and transitions. Her behaviors worsened significantly after a classmate choked her in August 2013. By second grade, several incidents occurred at school — including a sunburn, a fall, and Student's accidental exposure to another child's seizure medication — that deepened Parents' concerns about safety and supervision. Parents filed for due process in March 2015, challenging multiple IEP goals, the sufficiency of behavior supports, the district's failure to provide assistive technology for communication, whether district staff impeded parental participation by failing to document incidents properly, and the district's proposed placement of Student at Stockdale Elementary in Bakersfield — an 80-minute drive each way from home. Parents also contested three district assessments (occupational therapy, speech-language, and adapted physical education), requesting independent evaluations at district expense. The district filed its own due process complaint to defend those assessments.

The district proposed moving Student to the Stockdale program, operated by the Kern County Office of the Superintendent of Schools, which specialized in educating students with autism in a structured, small, homogeneous classroom with behavioral and academic supports. Parents objected to the distance, the travel time, and the placement itself, arguing Student should remain closer to home or be placed in a general education setting.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled in the district's favor on the vast majority of issues. IEP goals from 2013, 2014, and 2014–2015 were found to be clear, measurable, and based on Student's actual present levels of performance — even when they referenced kindergarten-level standards, because those standards matched what Student needed to learn. The ALJ found no evidence that assistive technology such as an iPad was necessary for Student to communicate or make progress, noting that Student was already making her needs known through speech and that an iPad had not been useful in the classroom setting.

On parental participation, the ALJ found that while the various incident reports differed on some details, the basic facts were consistently communicated to Parents, and the discrepancies were not significant enough to constitute a denial of FAPE. The ALJ rejected claims of predetermination regarding the Stockdale placement, finding that the IEP team genuinely considered the full continuum of options before recommending Stockdale. The 80-minute bus ride was found reasonable given Student's individual needs — she tolerated car travel, including long trips to UCLA for dental care — and the district offered a private van with an aide to minimize travel time and maximize safety. A general education placement was found inappropriate given Student's academic and behavioral profile.

The one area where Student prevailed was narrow but significant: the district failed to offer a functional behavior analysis assessment at the March 2014 IEP, even though Student's behaviors had clearly deteriorated since the beginning of first grade. That assessment — which the district was legally required to consider under California law given the severity of Student's behaviors — would likely have led to additional behavioral supports much sooner. Instead, those supports were not put in place until November 2014. All three district assessments (occupational therapy, speech-language, and adapted physical education) were found legally sufficient, so no independent evaluations were owed.

What Was Ordered

Within 30 days, the district must develop a transition plan to help Student adjust to the Stockdale placement, including daily transition activities with a behaviorally trained aide after arriving from the van. The plan must be developed with a board-certified behavior analyst.
The district must provide a behaviorally trained one-to-one aide on Student's round-trip van ride to and from Stockdale, replacing the aide already offered in the IEP. This service continues until Student's next annual IEP and is designated as stay-put.
A behaviorally trained aide must assist Student in transitioning from the van into the classroom each day, continuing through the 2015–2016 school year as stay-put.
For the first 60 school days at Stockdale, the district must provide a full-time behaviorally trained one-to-one aide throughout Student's school day. After 60 days, an IEP meeting must be held within five school days to determine whether this level of support should continue.
All behaviorally trained aides must receive training on Student's specific behavioral needs from a board-certified behavior analyst before beginning services.
The district is not required to fund independent evaluations in occupational therapy, speech-language, or adapted physical education.
All other relief requested by Student is denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

Behavior assessments cannot wait if a child's behaviors are clearly getting worse. Under California law, when a student with autism shows escalating problem behaviors — including aggression and elopement — the IEP team must at minimum offer to conduct a functional behavior assessment. If the district skips this step, it may be violating FAPE even if everything else in the IEP looks reasonable on paper.
Long bus rides alone do not automatically equal a denial of FAPE. There is no California law or federal rule setting a maximum bus ride length. Whether a long commute denies FAPE depends on the individual student's specific needs and ability to tolerate travel. Parents who believe a bus ride is harmful need evidence — medical, behavioral, or sensory — tied specifically to their child.
Incident reports with conflicting details are not automatically a procedural violation. The ALJ found that minor factual discrepancies across staff accounts of the same incident did not rise to the level of impeding parental participation. Parents who believe they were misled about school incidents should document how the confusion actually affected their ability to make educational decisions.
Districts can place students at programs run by county offices, even far from home, if no appropriate program exists locally. The law encourages multi-district cooperation for special education, especially in rural areas. Parents should request detailed information about what the proposed program actually offers before assuming it is inappropriate — in this case, the parents' own experts had incomplete and inaccurate information about Stockdale.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

Within 30 days, the district must develop a transition plan to help Student adjust to the Stockdale placement, including daily transition activities with a behaviorally trained aide after arriving from the van. The plan must be developed with a board-certified behavior analyst.
The district must provide a behaviorally trained one-to-one aide on Student's round-trip van ride to and from Stockdale, replacing the aide already offered in the IEP. This service continues until Student's next annual IEP and is designated as stay-put.
A behaviorally trained aide must assist Student in transitioning from the van into the classroom each day, continuing through the 2015–2016 school year as stay-put.
For the first 60 school days at Stockdale, the district must provide a full-time behaviorally trained one-to-one aide throughout Student's school day. After 60 days, an IEP meeting must be held within five school days to determine whether this level of support should continue.
All behaviorally trained aides must receive training on Student's specific behavioral needs from a board-certified behavior analyst before beginning services.
The district is not required to fund independent evaluations in occupational therapy, speech-language, or adapted physical education.
All other relief requested by Student is denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

Behavior assessments cannot wait if a child's behaviors are clearly getting worse. Under California law, when a student with autism shows escalating problem behaviors — including aggression and elopement — the IEP team must at minimum offer to conduct a functional behavior assessment. If the district skips this step, it may be violating FAPE even if everything else in the IEP looks reasonable on paper.
Long bus rides alone do not automatically equal a denial of FAPE. There is no California law or federal rule setting a maximum bus ride length. Whether a long commute denies FAPE depends on the individual student's specific needs and ability to tolerate travel. Parents who believe a bus ride is harmful need evidence — medical, behavioral, or sensory — tied specifically to their child.
Incident reports with conflicting details are not automatically a procedural violation. The ALJ found that minor factual discrepancies across staff accounts of the same incident did not rise to the level of impeding parental participation. Parents who believe they were misled about school incidents should document how the confusion actually affected their ability to make educational decisions.
Districts can place students at programs run by county offices, even far from home, if no appropriate program exists locally. The law encourages multi-district cooperation for special education, especially in rural areas. Parents should request detailed information about what the proposed program actually offers before assuming it is inappropriate — in this case, the parents' own experts had incomplete and inaccurate information about Stockdale.