San Marino Autism Student Wins Speech Therapy Reimbursement and Private School Tuition

A student with autism and a newly-identified specific learning disability won partial relief against San Marino Unified School District after the ALJ found the district failed to offer adequate individual speech and language services in its March 2016 IEP, failed to hold a required annual IEP meeting in March 2017, and left the student with no educational program for the 2017-2018 school year. The district was ordered to reimburse parents $6,180 for private speech and language therapy in 2016-2017, cover private school tuition up to $3,380 per month for 2017-2018, and convene an IEP meeting by February 1, 2018. The district prevailed on several other claims, including failure to conduct a functional behavior assessment, failure to provide a one-on-one aide, and failure to meaningfully include parents in the March 2016 IEP meetings.

What Happened

Student was a 12-year-old fifth-grader eligible for special education under the primary category of autism and a secondary category of speech and language impairment. Student generally performed in the average to above-average range on academic tests but had significant weaknesses in reading comprehension, spontaneous writing, and social communication. In preparation for Student's triennial IEP in March 2016, the district conducted a comprehensive assessment and found a new specific learning disability tied to deficits in reading comprehension, written expression, and auditory and cognitive processing. The district's March 2016 IEP offered Student general education placement with specialized academic instruction pull-out time and group-only speech and language therapy. Parents rejected the IEP and privately placed Student at Frostig, a certified non-public school, while also funding private speech and language therapy. Parents filed for due process in April 2017, raising numerous claims about the March 2016 IEP and the district's complete failure to hold any IEP meeting for the 2017-2018 school year.

The case was heard over four days in August and September 2017 by ALJ Robert G. Martin. The outcome was mixed: Student won on the speech and language services issue, the extended school year counseling issue, and the district's failure to hold a March 2017 annual IEP meeting. The district prevailed on claims regarding the functional behavior assessment, learning environment, research-based intervention, behavior support plan, social skills support, one-on-one aide, and parental participation at the March 2016 meetings.

What the District Did Wrong

Inadequate speech and language services (Issue 2c). The district's March 2016 IEP offered only group speech and language therapy. Student had a newly-identified specific learning disability affecting reading comprehension, written expression, and language processing. Student's private speech and language providers testified credibly that Student needed individual therapy to make meaningful progress on his language goals. The ALJ found that the district's focus on pragmatics as a reason for group-only therapy was unpersuasive given Student's broader language needs, and that the failure to offer any individual speech and language services denied Student a FAPE.

Failure to offer extended school year counseling (Issue 2g). The March 2016 IEP offered Student group counseling during the regular school year but inexplicably omitted counseling from the extended school year services offer, in violation of California regulations requiring that ESY services address all areas included in the regular-year IEP. This omission, standing alone, denied Student a FAPE.

Failure to hold a March 2017 annual IEP meeting and make any offer of educational placement (Issues 3 and 4a). This was the most significant finding. The district was required to hold an annual IEP meeting in March 2017 and make a formal, written offer of placement and services for the 2017-2018 school year. It did not. The district attempted to blame scheduling conflicts and argued that Student's private placement made an IEP unnecessary. The ALJ rejected both arguments. Parents responded reasonably to every scheduling attempt and never revoked Student's right to special education in writing. Under settled law, a district cannot escape its duty to develop a formal IEP offer simply because parents have placed their child privately or because parents appear unlikely to accept the offer. The complete absence of any IEP offer left Student with no educational program for an entire school year — a clear denial of FAPE.

What Was Ordered

District must reimburse Parents $6,180 within 60 days for private speech and language consultative services and language/educational therapy provided during the 2016-2017 school year.
For the 2017-2018 school year, District must reimburse Parents within 60 days of proof of payment for: (i) tuition at Frostig non-public school, up to $3,380 per month; (ii) speech and language services up to $790 total for the year; (iii) language/educational therapy up to one hour per week at $140 per hour; and (iv) group or individual counseling up to 30 minutes per week at no more than $87.50 per session.
District must convene an IEP team meeting no later than February 1, 2018 to develop a full IEP for the 2018-2019 school year and review Student's eligibility for 2018 extended school year services.
All other requests for relief were denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

A district cannot skip an annual IEP meeting just because you've placed your child privately. The law requires a formal, written IEP offer every year regardless of where your child is currently enrolled. If the district misses that deadline without a written revocation of consent from you, it has violated the IDEA — and you may be entitled to reimbursement for private school costs.
Group-only speech therapy may not be enough when a student has newly-identified language-based learning disabilities. If your child's IEP team identifies new academic deficits tied to language processing, make sure the IEP explains specifically why the type and intensity of speech services offered will allow your child to make progress on those new goals. Private provider opinions about what is needed can be persuasive evidence.
ESY services must mirror the services offered during the regular school year. If your child receives counseling, speech therapy, or other services during the school year, the district must explain why those services are or are not included in the extended school year offer. A silent omission — with no explanation — can be a denial of FAPE on its own.
Document every attempt to schedule an IEP meeting in writing. This case turned partly on the fact that Parents responded reasonably and in writing to every scheduling attempt. When a district gives you only two days' notice for an IEP meeting, you are entitled to request a more reasonable date. Keep records of every email, letter, and response so that the district cannot later claim you were the obstacle to scheduling.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

What Was Ordered

District must reimburse Parents $6,180 within 60 days for private speech and language consultative services and language/educational therapy provided during the 2016-2017 school year.
For the 2017-2018 school year, District must reimburse Parents within 60 days of proof of payment for: (i) tuition at Frostig non-public school, up to $3,380 per month; (ii) speech and language services up to $790 total for the year; (iii) language/educational therapy up to one hour per week at $140 per hour; and (iv) group or individual counseling up to 30 minutes per week at no more than $87.50 per session.
District must convene an IEP team meeting no later than February 1, 2018 to develop a full IEP for the 2018-2019 school year and review Student's eligibility for 2018 extended school year services.
All other requests for relief were denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

A district cannot skip an annual IEP meeting just because you've placed your child privately. The law requires a formal, written IEP offer every year regardless of where your child is currently enrolled. If the district misses that deadline without a written revocation of consent from you, it has violated the IDEA — and you may be entitled to reimbursement for private school costs.
Group-only speech therapy may not be enough when a student has newly-identified language-based learning disabilities. If your child's IEP team identifies new academic deficits tied to language processing, make sure the IEP explains specifically why the type and intensity of speech services offered will allow your child to make progress on those new goals. Private provider opinions about what is needed can be persuasive evidence.
ESY services must mirror the services offered during the regular school year. If your child receives counseling, speech therapy, or other services during the school year, the district must explain why those services are or are not included in the extended school year offer. A silent omission — with no explanation — can be a denial of FAPE on its own.
Document every attempt to schedule an IEP meeting in writing. This case turned partly on the fact that Parents responded reasonably and in writing to every scheduling attempt. When a district gives you only two days' notice for an IEP meeting, you are entitled to request a more reasonable date. Keep records of every email, letter, and response so that the district cannot later claim you were the obstacle to scheduling.