Menifee District Wins Most Claims But Must Fix Missed Instruction and Skipped APE Assessment

An 8-year-old girl with multiple disabilities, including severe orthopedic impairment and communication challenges, received home hospital instruction and relied on an eye-gaze communication device. Her parent filed a due process complaint against Menifee Union School District alleging denied FAPE across nine issues. The district prevailed on most claims, but was found to have failed to deliver specialized academic instruction for nearly four months and missed three speech therapy sessions — and had never followed through on an agreed adaptive physical education assessment.

What Happened

Student was an 8-year-old girl with multiple disabilities — including severe orthopedic impairment, intellectual disabilities, and speech and language impairment — who received all of her education at home through home hospital instruction. She was non-verbal and communicated using an eye-gaze augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) device, a screen that tracked her eye movements to select words and phrases. Her IEP called for 375 minutes per week of specialized academic instruction and 60 minutes per week of speech and language therapy, both delivered in the home.

Parent filed a due process complaint against Menifee Union School District in June 2017, raising nine separate issues. These included allegations that the district failed to provide instruction and therapy required by the IEP, blocked Parent from meaningfully participating in IEP meetings, failed to ensure the new speech therapist was trained on the AAC device before starting services, issued a defective prior written notice, maintained inaccurate records, and never conducted an adaptive physical education (APE) assessment that had been agreed to nearly a year earlier. The hearing took place over two days in August 2017.

What the ALJ Found

The district prevailed on the majority of issues. ALJ Cruz found that Parent was a welcomed and active participant in the June 2017 IEP meeting — she had the floor for most of the meeting, raised all her concerns, and received respectful responses from district staff. The audio recording of the meeting confirmed no hostility or intimidation occurred. The district's IEP notes were found to be an accurate summary of the meeting, and the district's offer to attach Parent's requested corrections rather than rewrite the notes was appropriate. The new speech therapist was found to be fully qualified with 20 years of experience and prior familiarity with eye-gaze devices, and the IEP did not require any service provider to complete formal AAC training before beginning work with Student. The ALJ also found no predetermination: district staff genuinely considered Parent's request to add a training requirement and provided written notice explaining why they declined. Student's request for reimbursement was denied because no evidence of expenditures was presented at hearing.

However, the district did lose on three issues. First, it failed to deliver specialized academic instruction for 36 school days between February 14 and June 4, 2017 — a gap of 2,700 minutes — while it struggled to find a replacement home hospital instructor. This was a material failure to implement the IEP. Second, the district failed to provide speech therapy on April 19, April 26, and May 3, 2017, after the transition between therapists. Although the district labeled May 3 as a "parent refusal," the ALJ found that label unfair: Parent and Student were at a dentist appointment and had received no notice that therapy was resuming that day after a three-week gap. Those 180 minutes of missed therapy were the district's fault. Third, the district agreed in October 2016 to conduct an APE assessment and then simply never did it — a procedural violation that deprived Parent of important information about Student's needs.

What Was Ordered

District must provide 2,700 minutes of compensatory specialized academic instruction, to be used by the end of the 2018–2019 extended school year.
District must provide 180 minutes of compensatory speech and language therapy, to be used by the end of the 2018–2019 extended school year.
District must provide Parent with an APE assessment plan within 10 days of the order, schedule the assessment within 15 days of receiving Parent's consent, and convene an IEP team meeting within 45 days of consent.
Student's requests for a non-public agency to deliver compensatory services were denied — the district had qualified staff available.
Student's request for reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses was denied — no evidence of those expenses was submitted.

Why This Matters for Parents

A parent's refusal can count against the student. The ALJ found that once Parent had clear confirmation of the new therapist's commitment and qualifications, continuing to block access to the home constituted parental refusal. Only the three sessions before that point were charged to the district. Parents have every right to ask questions and raise concerns — but withholding access to services based on requirements not in the IEP can result in losing those services entirely.
If it's not in the IEP, the district doesn't have to do it. Parent wanted all service providers formally trained on Student's AAC device before starting work. That was a reasonable and understandable request — but because it wasn't written into the IEP, the district was not legally required to honor it. If a particular practice or requirement is important to your child's education, advocate to have it written explicitly into the IEP document itself.
Agreements made at IEP meetings must be followed up in writing — and followed through. The district verbally agreed to conduct an APE assessment in October 2016 and then never did it. Eleven months passed. Parents should confirm any district agreement in writing immediately after a meeting and set a follow-up date in writing. If an agreed assessment doesn't happen, file a complaint promptly.
Service gaps caused by staffing transitions are the district's responsibility. The district's difficulty finding a replacement home hospital instructor and the breakdown in communication around the new speech therapist's schedule were both internal district problems — and the district was held accountable for the lost services that resulted. Districts cannot use staffing challenges to excuse material failures to deliver IEP services.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

District must provide 2,700 minutes of compensatory specialized academic instruction, to be used by the end of the 2018–2019 extended school year.
District must provide 180 minutes of compensatory speech and language therapy, to be used by the end of the 2018–2019 extended school year.
District must provide Parent with an APE assessment plan within 10 days of the order, schedule the assessment within 15 days of receiving Parent's consent, and convene an IEP team meeting within 45 days of consent.
Student's requests for a non-public agency to deliver compensatory services were denied — the district had qualified staff available.
Student's request for reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses was denied — no evidence of those expenses was submitted.

Why This Matters for Parents

A parent's refusal can count against the student. The ALJ found that once Parent had clear confirmation of the new therapist's commitment and qualifications, continuing to block access to the home constituted parental refusal. Only the three sessions before that point were charged to the district. Parents have every right to ask questions and raise concerns — but withholding access to services based on requirements not in the IEP can result in losing those services entirely.
If it's not in the IEP, the district doesn't have to do it. Parent wanted all service providers formally trained on Student's AAC device before starting work. That was a reasonable and understandable request — but because it wasn't written into the IEP, the district was not legally required to honor it. If a particular practice or requirement is important to your child's education, advocate to have it written explicitly into the IEP document itself.
Agreements made at IEP meetings must be followed up in writing — and followed through. The district verbally agreed to conduct an APE assessment in October 2016 and then never did it. Eleven months passed. Parents should confirm any district agreement in writing immediately after a meeting and set a follow-up date in writing. If an agreed assessment doesn't happen, file a complaint promptly.
Service gaps caused by staffing transitions are the district's responsibility. The district's difficulty finding a replacement home hospital instructor and the breakdown in communication around the new speech therapist's schedule were both internal district problems — and the district was held accountable for the lost services that resulted. Districts cannot use staffing challenges to excuse material failures to deliver IEP services.