Bakersfield City Fails Autistic Student: Bad Assessments, No FAPE, No Child Find

What Happened

Student was a kindergartner who attended Casa Loma Elementary in Bakersfield City School District during the 2019–2020 school year. Before Student even started kindergarten, Parent had taken him to Kaiser Permanente for an autism evaluation because of severe behavioral problems during his two years at a preschool located on the Casa Loma campus. Kaiser diagnosed Student with ADHD and noted the behaviors did not meet the full criteria for autism at that time, but recommended further evaluation. Parent brought this report to the school before Student's first day of kindergarten. Despite this, the district waited weeks before creating an assessment plan and never notified Parent of its decision in writing as required by law. From his very first day, Student had extreme behavioral outbursts — throwing objects, hitting staff, and leaving the classroom without permission.

The district eventually assessed Student and found him eligible for special education under the category of "other health impairment" due to ADHD. However, the school psychologist — who had personally been called to manage Student's behavioral crises since day one — also conducted the functional behavior assessment (FBA) and concluded that Student's behavior was essentially willful and calculated, not a product of his disability. The resulting behavior intervention plan placed almost all responsibility for change on the student himself, without addressing his disability-related triggers. Parent filed for due process, arguing the assessments were flawed, the district missed its child find obligations, and the behavior plan failed Student entirely.

What the District Did Wrong

Inappropriate assessments (psychoeducational and FBA): The school psychologist's psychoeducational report omitted critical background information — including Student's two years of severe behavioral problems at the preschool on the same campus, his birth complications, his father's history of mental illness and ADHD, and his ongoing ADHD medication. The report also failed entirely to assess Student for autism, even though Parent had explicitly raised this concern and the district's own assessment plan had checked the box for "social/adaptive behavior" — the category that covers autism spectrum disorders. The ALJ found that relying solely on Kaiser's brief autism screening without conducting the district's own autism-related evaluation violated the IDEA's requirement that assessments be sufficiently comprehensive. The FBA suffered the same defects, and was additionally compromised because the school psychologist had an ongoing personal relationship with Student, making a natural, unbiased behavioral observation impossible.

Child find failure: When Parent handed the district the Kaiser report — which diagnosed ADHD and flagged autism concerns — before kindergarten even started, the district's obligation to either issue an assessment plan or provide written notice of its refusal to assess was triggered within 15 calendar days. The district did not meet that deadline. The ALJ found this was a clear failure of the district's "child find" duty to actively identify and evaluate children who may need special education.

Inappropriate behavior intervention plan: Because the FBA was flawed, the behavior plan built on it was also flawed. The plan assumed Student's behavior was a choice, not a disability symptom, and required Student to manage his own outbursts through willpower — requesting breaks, doing breathing exercises — without addressing what triggered his behavior or how staff should respond afterward. According to Parent's expert, this approach would reinforce rather than reduce Student's challenging behaviors.

FAPE denied: Because the IEP was built on faulty assessments, the district could not show it offered Student an appropriate education. An IEP designed without reliable information about a student can only accidentally provide a free appropriate public education.

What Was Ordered

1. Bakersfield City must fund independent educational evaluations in psychoeducational functioning and functional behavior — or pay Parent's existing experts directly (Dr. Gilbertson $5,500 for his psychoeducational report; Dr. Santos $3,208 for her FBA report) within 30 days of the decision.
2. Bakersfield City must provide Student with 90 hours of academic tutoring or support, delivered at Student's home or a local public space, by a provider of the district's choosing. Hours must be used by December 31, 2021.
3. Bakersfield City must fund 50 hours of therapy or counseling (up to $125/hour) by a credentialed provider of Parent's choosing. Hours must be used by December 31, 2021.
4. Bakersfield City must fund Student's participation in a socialization or social skills program for children with ADHD or autism, chosen by Parent, up to $10,000, to be used by December 31, 2021.
5. The district was not required to fund independent evaluations in the area of educationally-related mental health services — that assessment was found to be appropriate.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. A district cannot delegate its assessment duty to an outside agency. Even when a hospital or clinic has already evaluated your child, the school district has its own legal obligation to assess in all areas of suspected disability using IDEA-compliant methods. The district here relied on Kaiser's autism screening as the final word — that was a violation. If your child has been assessed privately, the district must still conduct its own evaluation, not simply adopt outside conclusions.

2. Child find is triggered by knowledge, not enrollment. The district's legal clock started when Parent handed over the Kaiser report — before kindergarten even began. If you share a medical diagnosis or evaluation with your school district and they do nothing for weeks, that delay may itself be a legal violation. Demand a response in writing within 15 calendar days.

3. A school psychologist who is personally involved in managing a student's behavior cannot objectively conduct that student's functional behavior assessment. If the same person who has been breaking up your child's meltdowns is also writing the FBA, that is a conflict the district must address. Ask that a different, uninvolved evaluator conduct the FBA.

4. An IEP built on a flawed assessment cannot provide FAPE. If the evaluations that underpin your child's IEP are incomplete — missing background history, ignoring suspected disabilities, or misidentifying the function of behavior — the entire program built on those evaluations is legally compromised. Challenge the assessments, and the IEP will follow.

5. You can request that the district pay for experts who have already done the work. Rather than starting fresh with new independent evaluations, the ALJ gave the district the option to simply pay Parent's existing experts for their reports. If you have already hired qualified professionals to evaluate your child, that work may be compensable even if it was done in preparation for a due process hearing — though this case shows the rules around that are complex and fact-specific.