Chaffey High School Student With Autism Wins IEEs for APE and AT After Assessment Failures

A 17-year-old student with autism attending Chaffey Joint Union High School District won a partial victory after the district failed to conduct proper adapted physical education and assistive technology assessments for years, despite Parent's repeated written consent. The ALJ ordered the district to fund independent educational evaluations in both areas and to maintain the student's speech and language services at two hours per week. The district prevailed on the majority of remaining issues, including occupational therapy methodology, grade reporting, and prior written notice.

What Happened

Student is a 17-year-old with autism who transitioned into Chaffey Joint Union High School District at the start of ninth grade in 2017. Despite functioning at an elementary school academic level and requiring a full-time one-to-one aide in every class, Student earned A and B grades throughout high school. Parent was a highly involved advocate who attended every IEP meeting, submitted detailed written comments, and worked with educational consultants and attorneys throughout. Parent raised concerns across many areas of Student's program, including whether the district was properly assessing Student's needs in adapted physical education (APE) and assistive technology (AT), whether speech and language services were sufficient, and whether the district's occupational therapy model met Student's sensory needs.

Parent signed an APE assessment plan in July 2017, but the district never conducted a proper assessment. An APE teacher did conduct an informal observation in December 2017, but she acknowledged at hearing that it was not a formal assessment, used no standardized tools, and could not serve as a basis for goals. Parent re-signed the assessment plan again in October 2018 after the district could not locate the original — and still no assessment was conducted. Similarly, Student had not received an assistive technology assessment since 2016, and the district failed to include AT as part of its 2018 triennial review, leaving devices and services undocumented in IEPs for years.

What the District Did Wrong

Failing to conduct an APE assessment despite repeated parental consent. Parent signed APE assessment plans in both July 2017 and October 2018. The district was legally required to complete the assessment within 60 days of each consent. It never did. The informal observation conducted in December 2017 did not use standardized tools, could not generate appropriate goals, and did not meet IDEA requirements. APE goals carried forward across IEPs were based solely on informal observation and were developed without any proper foundation.

Failing to assess assistive technology needs as part of the triennial review. Student's last AT assessment was in 2016. By the time the district conducted its 2018 triennial review, three years had passed and a new assessment was legally required. The district did not include AT in its triennial assessment plan. AT devices and services were referenced in IEP notes but never formally offered on the accommodations pages until May 2019 — and even then, no assessment had been done. The district argued Parent waived the assessment at a May 2019 IEP meeting, but the ALJ found the evidence of waiver ambiguous and insufficient, noting the district bore the burden of proving waiver and failed to document it.

Failing to offer appropriate speech and language services after a 2019 independent evaluation. An independent speech-language evaluator (Susan Hollar) conducted an IEE funded by the district and found Student needed more robust services. The district's May 2019 IEP did not adopt those recommendations and reduced services without adequate justification. The ALJ found the district's own assessor less persuasive than Hollar's independent findings and ruled that Student was entitled to two weekly hours of speech therapy — one individual and one group — following the May 2019 IEP.

What Was Ordered

Chaffey must fund independent educational evaluations in adapted physical education and assistive technology, using assessors of Student's choosing who meet SELPA guidelines.
Following those assessments, Chaffey must convene an IEP team meeting to develop appropriate APE goals and services and appropriate AT accommodations, and must fund the assessors' attendance at that meeting.
Student's speech and language services must remain at two hours per week (one individual, one group) unless and until a properly convened IEP team revises them based on new assessments.

No compensatory education was awarded for the APE or AT failures because Parent did not submit evidence about the amount or type of compensatory services needed, and services were being provided throughout the relevant period.

Why This Matters for Parents

Signed consent to assess means the clock is ticking — follow up. Once you sign an assessment plan, the district has 60 days to complete the assessment. If you don't receive results, ask in writing. This case shows that a signed plan can get "lost," and the district may move forward without ever conducting the assessment. Keep your own copy of every signed document.
Informal observations are not the same as formal assessments. A teacher watching your child in class is not a legally compliant assessment. It cannot generate proper baselines or goals. If a district proposes to use observation alone as an "assessment," that likely does not meet IDEA requirements.
Triennial reviews must cover all recognized areas of need. Every three years, the district is legally required to reassess your child in all areas of suspected disability — including assistive technology if it is a known need. If the district's triennial assessment plan omits an area your child needs, object in writing and request it be added.
Waiver of your rights must be clearly documented. If a district claims you agreed to skip an assessment, that agreement should be explicitly documented. Initialing meeting notes may not be enough. The ALJ in this case found the district's waiver argument failed because the evidence was ambiguous and the district had not documented the waiver properly.
Independent evaluators can shift the outcome — but they must be credible. The district's reduction of speech services was reversed because the independent evaluator's report was more persuasive than the district's own assessment. However, other IEE assessors in this case lost credibility because they relied on outdated testing norms, borrowed findings from prior reports, or lacked school-based observations. A strong IEE includes current, school-relevant data.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

What Was Ordered

Chaffey must fund independent educational evaluations in adapted physical education and assistive technology, using assessors of Student's choosing who meet SELPA guidelines.
Following those assessments, Chaffey must convene an IEP team meeting to develop appropriate APE goals and services and appropriate AT accommodations, and must fund the assessors' attendance at that meeting.
Student's speech and language services must remain at two hours per week (one individual, one group) unless and until a properly convened IEP team revises them based on new assessments.

Why This Matters for Parents

Signed consent to assess means the clock is ticking — follow up. Once you sign an assessment plan, the district has 60 days to complete the assessment. If you don't receive results, ask in writing. This case shows that a signed plan can get "lost," and the district may move forward without ever conducting the assessment. Keep your own copy of every signed document.
Informal observations are not the same as formal assessments. A teacher watching your child in class is not a legally compliant assessment. It cannot generate proper baselines or goals. If a district proposes to use observation alone as an "assessment," that likely does not meet IDEA requirements.
Triennial reviews must cover all recognized areas of need. Every three years, the district is legally required to reassess your child in all areas of suspected disability — including assistive technology if it is a known need. If the district's triennial assessment plan omits an area your child needs, object in writing and request it be added.
Waiver of your rights must be clearly documented. If a district claims you agreed to skip an assessment, that agreement should be explicitly documented. Initialing meeting notes may not be enough. The ALJ in this case found the district's waiver argument failed because the evidence was ambiguous and the district had not documented the waiver properly.
Independent evaluators can shift the outcome — but they must be credible. The district's reduction of speech services was reversed because the independent evaluator's report was more persuasive than the district's own assessment. However, other IEE assessors in this case lost credibility because they relied on outdated testing norms, borrowed findings from prior reports, or lacked school-based observations. A strong IEE includes current, school-relevant data.