SF Unified Held Discipline Meeting Without Parent, Blocked Student from Returning to School

A high school senior with emotional disturbance was suspended after his paraprofessional called him 'worthless' and failed to follow his behavior plan, escalating a classroom incident. San Francisco Unified held a required disciplinary meeting without the student or parent, then blocked him from returning to his school using staff restraining orders as justification — even though those orders were written to allow his return. The ALJ ruled for the student on all issues, ordering his return to school, staff training, and an independent behavior assessment.

What Happened

Student was an 18-year-old high school senior with emotional disturbance and specific learning disability, enrolled in a specialized program called SOAR at George Washington High School. He had a 3.1 GPA and needed only five Spanish 2 credits to graduate with a regular diploma in May 2017. On March 20, 2017, a classroom confrontation escalated after Student's paraprofessional — rather than following Student's behavior intervention plan — called Student "worthless," said he was "acting like a punk," and asked "why do you even come to school?" Student, who appeared to dissociate during the incident, made threatening statements and was arrested. He was charged with a felony, held in custody, and suspended. Three school staff members obtained restraining orders against him.

The district was required to hold a manifestation determination review meeting — a legally required process to determine whether Student's behavior was caused by his disability — within 10 school days. San Francisco scheduled the meeting for March 23, 2017, despite Parent telling the principal the day before that she could not attend on that date. San Francisco held the meeting anyway, without Parent or Student, while Student was still in custody. The meeting also failed to address whether the district's own failure to implement Student's behavior plan contributed to the incident. After the meeting, instead of returning Student to George Washington as the law required, the district transferred him to other school sites without any IEP team meeting, prior written notice, or parental consent — ultimately preventing him from graduating with his class.

What the District Did Wrong

1. Holding the disciplinary meeting without the parent. San Francisco scheduled the manifestation determination meeting on a date it knew Parent could not attend, then held it anyway without her or Student. Both the principal and school psychologist knew Student was in custody at the time of the meeting. The district also miscalculated the 10-day deadline — spring break days do not count as school days, meaning there was time to reschedule.

2. Failing to implement Student's behavior intervention plan. Student's paraprofessional admitted his statements to Student during the incident were "in no way shape or form" part of the behavior plan. Rather than using a calm, neutral voice and de-escalating, he called Student worthless in front of the class, provoking the very crisis the plan was designed to prevent. The ALJ found this failure directly caused Student's behavior to escalate to the point that he was arrested.

3. Illegally changing Student's placement. After finding that Student's conduct was a manifestation of his disability, the law required the district to return Student to George Washington — not transfer him elsewhere. The district claimed the restraining orders made that impossible, but the court-issued restraining orders themselves included specific exceptions allowing Student to attend George Washington. The ALJ found San Francisco's "impossibility" argument unreasonable and a "blatant disregard" for Student's rights.

4. Denying Parent any role in placement decisions. San Francisco made multiple placement offers — Mission High School, Thurgood Marshall High School, a counseling center, a civic center — all without ever convening an IEP meeting, providing required written notice, or giving Parent and Student a meaningful opportunity to participate. This violated both federal and California law.

What Was Ordered

San Francisco must return Student to George Washington High School to complete his Spanish 2 credits and earn his diploma, with supports consistent with the civil harassment orders against him.
San Francisco must modify Student's behavior intervention plan, with input from Student and Parent.
If Student returns to school, San Francisco must fund an independent functional behavior assessment by a nonpublic agency of Student's choice, including development of a new behavior plan and 10 hours of staff training on its implementation — all within 20 days of return.
If Student completes graduation requirements, San Francisco must fund an independent assessment (up to $7,000) to determine what supports Student needs to pursue employment or higher education.
San Francisco must provide a three-hour district-wide training for all special education staff on IDEA requirements and positive behavior interventions for students with emotional disturbance, conducted by outside attorneys or professionals not affiliated with the district, by October 31, 2017.

Why This Matters for Parents

Districts cannot hold manifestation determination meetings without you. If the district schedules a disciplinary meeting and you tell them you cannot attend, they must reschedule — not proceed without you. Spring break and holidays do not count toward the 10-day deadline, so there is often more time than districts claim.
Staff must actually follow your child's behavior intervention plan — and failure to do so is a FAPE violation. If a staff member's own conduct escalates a crisis instead of preventing it, and that conduct violates the written behavior plan, the district can be held responsible for what follows. Document every incident and ask for written records of what staff did in response.
After a manifestation finding, the district must return your child to their original placement — not move them somewhere else. The law is clear: if the team finds the behavior was caused by the disability, the student goes back. The district cannot unilaterally transfer your child to a different school without an IEP meeting, written notice, and your meaningful participation.
Restraining orders are not a blank check to remove a student from their placement. In this case, the judge who issued the restraining orders specifically designed them to allow Student to return to school. Parents should request and read the actual text of any protective orders — courts often build in exceptions for educational settings.
A student's proximity to graduation makes procedural violations more urgent, not less. The ALJ here repeatedly emphasized that Student was five credits from a diploma with a 3.1 GPA. When your child is near a milestone like graduation, placement disruptions caused by district misconduct deserve immediate legal attention.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

What Was Ordered

San Francisco must return Student to George Washington High School to complete his Spanish 2 credits and earn his diploma, with supports consistent with the civil harassment orders against him.
San Francisco must modify Student's behavior intervention plan, with input from Student and Parent.
If Student returns to school, San Francisco must fund an independent functional behavior assessment by a nonpublic agency of Student's choice, including development of a new behavior plan and 10 hours of staff training on its implementation — all within 20 days of return.
If Student completes graduation requirements, San Francisco must fund an independent assessment (up to $7,000) to determine what supports Student needs to pursue employment or higher education.
San Francisco must provide a three-hour district-wide training for all special education staff on IDEA requirements and positive behavior interventions for students with emotional disturbance, conducted by outside attorneys or professionals not affiliated with the district, by October 31, 2017.

Why This Matters for Parents

Districts cannot hold manifestation determination meetings without you. If the district schedules a disciplinary meeting and you tell them you cannot attend, they must reschedule — not proceed without you. Spring break and holidays do not count toward the 10-day deadline, so there is often more time than districts claim.
Staff must actually follow your child's behavior intervention plan — and failure to do so is a FAPE violation. If a staff member's own conduct escalates a crisis instead of preventing it, and that conduct violates the written behavior plan, the district can be held responsible for what follows. Document every incident and ask for written records of what staff did in response.
After a manifestation finding, the district must return your child to their original placement — not move them somewhere else. The law is clear: if the team finds the behavior was caused by the disability, the student goes back. The district cannot unilaterally transfer your child to a different school without an IEP meeting, written notice, and your meaningful participation.
Restraining orders are not a blank check to remove a student from their placement. In this case, the judge who issued the restraining orders specifically designed them to allow Student to return to school. Parents should request and read the actual text of any protective orders — courts often build in exceptions for educational settings.
A student's proximity to graduation makes procedural violations more urgent, not less. The ALJ here repeatedly emphasized that Student was five credits from a diploma with a 3.1 GPA. When your child is near a milestone like graduation, placement disruptions caused by district misconduct deserve immediate legal attention.