Los Alamitos Failed to Prove FAPE: Flawed OT Assessments and Excluded Parents

What Happened

Student was a 16-year-old with intellectual disability and autism who had been attending Del Sol, a non-public school, since 2014. He was nonverbal and communicated primarily through an iPad with heavy prompting. He had received 90 minutes per week of individual occupational therapy, extensive behavior intervention services, and speech therapy under prior IEPs. As part of a triennial review, Los Alamitos conducted new assessments in early 2018 and developed a new IEP dated March 13, 2018. That IEP proposed a dramatic reduction in occupational therapy — from 90 minutes per week of individual services to just 45 minutes per month of consultation-only services. Parents refused to consent to the IEP, and the district filed for due process seeking to implement the IEP without their agreement.

Parents, who were divorced and shared joint legal and educational rights, had been active participants in Student's IEP process for years. Despite this, the district held a July 2018 IEP meeting to "finalize" the IEP without either parent present, and later held an August 2018 meeting without providing written notice to Mother. When Father attended the August meeting and asked basic questions about why occupational therapy was being cut, the district could not answer because no occupational therapist was in the room. Two days later, without ever answering his questions or reconvening the IEP team, the district filed this due process complaint.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled that the district failed to prove its March 2018 IEP offered Student a FAPE, and identified multiple serious violations.

Cognitive assessment was inadequate. The school psychologist attempted one cognitive test, discontinued it when Student could not follow the directions, and then simply referenced assessment scores from 2005 and 2008 — when Student was six years old or younger — rather than trying alternative measures. The district's own program specialist admitted that when a student cannot complete one test, the assessor should look for other ways to measure that skill. Relying on decade-old scores from a young child was not an acceptable substitute for a current assessment.

Both occupational therapy assessments were legally deficient. Two occupational therapists conducted OT evaluations, and neither one obtained any input from either parent — which is explicitly required by law. One therapist admitted she simply did not think it was necessary. Both reports were also found to be cursory and incomplete: they failed to state whether Student actually needed OT services, failed to explain the significance of "significantly low" scores in relation to his need for services, and omitted the therapists' own recommendations and reasoning entirely. One therapist also failed to assess sensory processing — a recognized area of need — and was found to have been evasive and not credible when asked to explain why.

The district held IEP meetings without parents. The July 2018 meeting was held without either parent despite the fact that Mother had asked to reschedule to the fall and Father believed the meeting had been cancelled. The district never responded to Mother's email or tried to contact Father before proceeding. At the August 2018 meeting, Mother received no written notice at all, even though the district knew both parents were active participants with joint custody.

The district predetermined its offer. Despite Father's unresolved questions at the August 2018 meeting — and the Special Education Director's own admitted confusion about the OT services — the district filed this lawsuit two days later without answering those questions or reconvening the team. The ALJ found this showed the district had already decided on its offer and was unwilling to consider other options, which is predetermination.

What Was Ordered

1. Los Alamitos Unified School District may not implement the IEP dated March 13, 2018, without parental consent.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Assessors are legally required to seek your input — and you have the right to insist on it. Federal law requires that assessments use information from parents. If an occupational therapist, psychologist, or other evaluator completes an assessment without ever asking for your perspective, that assessment may be legally invalid. Keep records of whether you were contacted, and if not, raise it in writing before the IEP meeting.

2. A school cannot rely on old test scores as a substitute for current assessment. Using cognitive scores from when your child was a toddler to justify current IEP decisions is not legally sufficient, especially if the school never tried alternative testing approaches. If your child has difficulty completing standardized tests, the district has an obligation to find other ways to measure their abilities — not simply give up.

3. IEP meetings cannot be held without you, even if scheduling is difficult. The district must make reasonable efforts to reschedule rather than proceed without parents. If you notify the district that you cannot attend and ask to reschedule, document that request in writing. The district cannot meet without you simply because it is inconvenient or because it wants to meet a timeline.

4. If your questions cannot be answered at an IEP meeting, the district must reconvene — not file for due process. When the person responsible for a key service recommendation is not at the IEP meeting and your questions go unanswered, the district must follow up with another meeting. Filing a lawsuit two days after agreeing to get more information — before that information was provided — was found to be a denial of FAPE in this case.