Nonpublic School Used Illegal Physical Holds on Autistic Student Without Telling Parents

What Happened

Student is a teenage male with severe autism, speech and language impairment, and intellectual disability who functioned cognitively at roughly the level of a preschool child. He had very limited verbal language, significant sensory needs, a seizure disorder, and a range of challenging behaviors including elopement, hitting, spitting, and toileting accidents. Beginning in the 2013-2014 school year, Hermosa Beach City School District placed Student at Switzer Learning Center, a nonpublic school, in a special day class for severely disabled students. He remained there for two and a half years through the middle of eighth grade.

During that time, Switzer staff repeatedly used a physical technique called a "CPI transport hold" — a two-person physical hold by the wrists and underarms used to move Student from one location to another — during behavioral emergencies. Switzer never told Parent or the District that these holds were being used. In fact, when Parent directly asked at a January 2016 IEP meeting whether physical interventions were being used, the teacher stated they were not. Student eventually developed such severe anxiety about school that Parent stopped sending him in February 2016. Four months later, Parent obtained Student's educational records and discovered the emergency behavior reports documenting the holds. Parent filed for due process in May 2017 alleging the district denied Student a free appropriate public education (FAPE) through improper behavior interventions, inadequate toileting support, and inappropriate placement.

What the District Did Wrong

The ALJ found that Switzer — and therefore the District, which is legally responsible for its contracted nonpublic school's conduct — violated multiple sections of California Education Code governing emergency behavior interventions. Specifically, Switzer failed to notify parents within one school day when transport holds were used, failed to provide copies of the required behavior emergency reports to parents, and used physical holds on a student whose disruptive behaviors (eloping, spitting, slapping walls) were predictable and recurring — not the kind of sudden, dangerous emergencies that legally justify physical intervention. California law only permits emergency physical interventions when behavior poses a "clear and present danger of serious physical harm" that cannot be addressed by less restrictive means.

The ALJ also found that Switzer improperly used transport holds as a substitute for a revised, systematic behavior plan — which is explicitly prohibited under California law. Because Student's behaviors were consistent and predictable, Switzer should have developed updated behavioral strategies to address them rather than repeatedly treating them as emergencies. Moreover, Switzer concealed this from the IEP team, which meant the Behavior Plan was never meaningfully revised across two and a half years even as Student's behaviors worsened. The District was found to have denied Student a FAPE for the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 school years by continuing to place him at Switzer once it should have recognized the program was not meeting his behavioral needs.

The ALJ ruled in the District's favor on several other issues: the toileting goals in the 2014 and 2015 IEPs were found appropriate; the evidence did not support a finding that Switzer failed to take Student to the bathroom regularly; there was no June 9, 2015 Behavior Plan to implement; and Student did not prove the physical holds caused emotional trauma or blocked access to speech services.

What Was Ordered

1. District must arrange 286.5 hours of compensatory specialized academic instruction through a certified nonpublic agency, within 45 days of the order.
2. District must arrange 191 hours of behavioral aide services from a trained behavioral aide, plus 19.1 hours of BCBA supervision, through Behavior Learning Network or a comparable certified nonpublic agency specializing in ABA services, within 45 days.
3. District must provide a list of qualifying nonpublic agencies within 15 days so Parent can select a provider.
4. All compensatory services must be used within three years from the date of the order or they are forfeited.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Your district is legally responsible for what a nonpublic school does. If your child is placed at a nonpublic school by the district, the district cannot escape responsibility by saying "that was the NPS's decision." Everything the NPS does — including concealing information from you — is legally treated as if the district did it.

2. California law requires schools to notify you within one school day if any physical emergency intervention is used on your child. If your child's school uses holds, escorts, or any physical technique during a behavioral crisis, you have a legal right to know immediately. If you are not being told, request all behavior emergency reports and incident reports in your child's file.

3. Recurring, predictable behaviors cannot be treated as emergencies indefinitely. Schools are prohibited from using emergency physical interventions as a substitute for a real behavior plan. If your child has consistent, repeated behaviors that staff keep calling "emergencies," demand that the IEP team revise the Behavior Intervention Plan to actually address those behaviors with positive strategies.

4. Ask directly at IEP meetings whether physical interventions are being used — and get the answer in writing. In this case, staff denied using holds even when directly asked. If you have concerns, request documentation of all behavioral incidents and compare them against what staff tell you. Discrepancies can be legally significant.

5. Statute of limitations rules have exceptions when a school conceals information from you. If you later discover that the school withheld or misrepresented information about what was happening to your child, your right to file a complaint may still be active even if the events happened more than two years ago. Consult a special education advocate or attorney as soon as you discover new information.