Hemet USD Failed Student with Learning Disabilities for Years, Denied Real Services

A high school student with severe learning disabilities in reading, writing, and math received no meaningful special education services from Hemet Unified School District for years despite documented regression. The district's IEPs contained no real instruction, its 2014 triennial assessment was deeply flawed, and behavior problems went unaddressed. The ALJ found FAPE denials across the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 school years and ordered 180 hours of Lindamood-Bell instruction, 120 hours of private counseling, and mandatory staff training.

What Happened

Student was an 18-year-old young man eligible for special education under the category of specific learning disability, with documented deficits in reading, writing, math, auditory processing, visual processing, phonological processing, and sensory processing. District testing as far back as 2005 had identified these serious delays — by 9th grade, Student was reading at a 2nd-to-4th grade level and up to seven years behind his peers in some areas. Despite these findings, from 2011 onward the district provided Student an IEP consisting only of general education classes plus accommodations like extra time. No specialized academic instruction, no reading intervention, and no behavior services were ever meaningfully offered.

Parent filed for due process in September 2015, challenging the district's IEPs for the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 school years. Student's grades looked passable on paper, but the ALJ found that teachers had so thoroughly modified his coursework — allowing him to copy corrected answers and resubmit work, or retake tests after being given the answers — that his grades bore almost no relationship to his actual academic abilities. Meanwhile, Student was suspended 13 days during his junior and senior years, faced expulsion after a physical altercation with a campus supervisor, and was repeatedly referred by school staff for mental health and anger management services that never materialized into IEP-based supports.

What the District Did Wrong

1. The 2014 triennial assessment was legally inadequate. The district's school psychologist, Mr. Weiss, did not observe Student, did not meet with his parent, did not contact teachers from the school Student had just transferred from, and relied on a single brief academic test administered by an unidentified staff member. He failed to assess Student in auditory processing, visual processing, phonological processing, sensory processing, behavior, or emotional functioning — all areas where prior testing or staff referrals had identified suspected deficits. Mr. Weiss also incorrectly believed that his sole job was to confirm IEP eligibility, not to identify what services Student needed. The ALJ found this a clear violation of federal and state law requiring comprehensive, multi-measure assessments.

2. IEPs offered no real special education services. Every IEP from October 2013 through April 2015 listed a "specialized academic instruction" service that amounted to a school counselor briefly reminding Student about his accommodations once a week or month. No teacher provided direct instruction. No one worked on IEP goals with Student. The ALJ found this did not constitute instruction, special education, or a related service in any meaningful sense.

3. Behavior needs were ignored despite overwhelming evidence. Student's own IEPs noted that his behavior impeded learning. Staff referred him for mental health services and anger management twice. A school principal personally arranged for a therapist to evaluate him. Yet the district never conducted a behavior assessment, never developed a positive behavior support plan (despite promising one in the manifestation determination IEP), and never offered IEP-based counseling. The district's director of special education even persuaded Parent to withdraw her request for an emotional disorder assessment — conduct the ALJ found contrary to the district's legal obligations.

4. IEP goals were insufficient or missing entirely. The October 2013 IEP had no goals for reading or math — areas where Student was years behind grade level. The October 2014 IEP offered a single reading goal written at a 12th-grade level for a student testing at below a 3rd-grade level. No one was designated responsible for helping Student meet any goal, and no services supported the goals that did exist.

What Was Ordered

District must pay $450.00 to Student's expert witness, Dr. Jerry L. Turner, within 30 days.
District must contract with Lindamood-Bell (or a parent-selected nonpublic agency) to provide 180 hours of instructional services in reading, writing, and math, including all associated assessments and materials. Student has three years to use these services.
District must contract with a parent-selected nonpublic agency to provide 120 hours of counseling services to Student. Student has three years to use these services.
District must contract with a nonpublic agency to provide at least six hours of training to special education staff who serve as assessors and IEP team designees, covering requirements and best practices for students with specific learning disabilities. Training must be completed by October 1, 2016.
Student's remaining requests for relief were denied, including claims related to extended school year services.

Why This Matters for Parents

Passing grades do not prove your child is receiving FAPE. The ALJ made clear that a student who is eligible for special education is entitled to services that address their disability — even if they are passing classes. If your child's grades are based on heavily modified work (corrected answers, retaken tests, copied corrections), those grades are not evidence of real learning or appropriate programming.
The district cannot wait for you to ask for services. One of the most important holdings in this case is that the district has an affirmative duty to offer appropriate assessments and services. It cannot blame parents or students for not requesting help. If your child is regressing or has known deficits, the district must act — even without a formal parental request.
A school counselor checking in is not a special education service. If your child's IEP lists a "specialized academic instruction" service, make sure it actually involves a qualified professional providing direct instruction tied to IEP goals. A brief weekly reminder about accommodations does not count.
Behavior problems are an IEP issue, not just a discipline issue. If your child is being suspended, removed from classes, or referred for anger management, those are signals that the IEP team must address behavior through assessment, goals, and services — not just punishment or general education counseling programs.
Staff training can be part of the remedy. When the ALJ found that district violations stemmed from a systemic misunderstanding of special education law, he ordered the district to train its own staff. This is a reminder that individual cases can have broader impact, and that asking for systemic remedies is appropriate when the problem goes beyond a single IEP.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

What Was Ordered

District must pay $450.00 to Student's expert witness, Dr. Jerry L. Turner, within 30 days.
District must contract with Lindamood-Bell (or a parent-selected nonpublic agency) to provide 180 hours of instructional services in reading, writing, and math, including all associated assessments and materials. Student has three years to use these services.
District must contract with a parent-selected nonpublic agency to provide 120 hours of counseling services to Student. Student has three years to use these services.
District must contract with a nonpublic agency to provide at least six hours of training to special education staff who serve as assessors and IEP team designees, covering requirements and best practices for students with specific learning disabilities. Training must be completed by October 1, 2016.
Student's remaining requests for relief were denied, including claims related to extended school year services.

Why This Matters for Parents

Passing grades do not prove your child is receiving FAPE. The ALJ made clear that a student who is eligible for special education is entitled to services that address their disability — even if they are passing classes. If your child's grades are based on heavily modified work (corrected answers, retaken tests, copied corrections), those grades are not evidence of real learning or appropriate programming.
The district cannot wait for you to ask for services. One of the most important holdings in this case is that the district has an affirmative duty to offer appropriate assessments and services. It cannot blame parents or students for not requesting help. If your child is regressing or has known deficits, the district must act — even without a formal parental request.
A school counselor checking in is not a special education service. If your child's IEP lists a "specialized academic instruction" service, make sure it actually involves a qualified professional providing direct instruction tied to IEP goals. A brief weekly reminder about accommodations does not count.
Behavior problems are an IEP issue, not just a discipline issue. If your child is being suspended, removed from classes, or referred for anger management, those are signals that the IEP team must address behavior through assessment, goals, and services — not just punishment or general education counseling programs.
Staff training can be part of the remedy. When the ALJ found that district violations stemmed from a systemic misunderstanding of special education law, he ordered the district to train its own staff. This is a reminder that individual cases can have broader impact, and that asking for systemic remedies is appropriate when the problem goes beyond a single IEP.