LAUSD Wins Most Claims, But Owes Compensatory Services for Missed Therapy During COVID

What Happened

The student is a 16-year-old girl with Down Syndrome who qualifies for special education under the category of Intellectual Disability. She attended Foshay Learning Center within Los Angeles Unified School District. Her mother, who represented her throughout the proceeding, had serious and longstanding concerns about the quality of her daughter's education — concerns she raised not only in this due process hearing but also in public comments before the LAUSD School Board. In June 2021, Parent filed a due process complaint raising nine issues: that LAUSD failed to conduct four required triennial assessments, that two IEPs (from September 2020 and April 2021) contained inadequate academic goals, that the district failed to deliver behavior intervention services, and that Speech and Language and Occupational Therapy services were not provided during COVID-19 school closures.

The hearing stretched across nine days in October and November 2021. At the heart of many issues was a difficult dynamic between Parent and the district. While Parent had genuine concerns about her daughter's education, she also refused to sign assessment consent forms, declined group therapy services, and stopped sending her daughter to school after April 2021. These actions significantly weakened her legal claims, even where the district's performance fell short.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled in favor of the district on seven of nine issues and denied all requests for relief. Here is what was found on each major cluster of issues:

Triennial Assessments (Issues 1–4): LAUSD provided Parent with an assessment plan in February 2020 covering Functional Behavior, Occupational Therapy, Speech and Language, and Adapted Physical Education. Parent refused to sign it, objecting to how a checkbox was filled out on the form — a reason the ALJ found legally insufficient. The law requires parental consent for assessments, and Parent's repeated refusal blocked the district from completing them. Parent presented no evidence at hearing on these issues, failing to meet her burden of proof.

IEP Goals (Issues 5–6): Parent challenged the academic goals in the September 2020 and April 2021 IEPs, claiming they were inadequate across reading, writing, and math. The ALJ found the goals were appropriate and based on the student's assessed performance levels using the Unique Learning System. The classroom teacher who developed the goals testified credibly about their appropriateness. Parent presented no contrary evidence and did not address these issues in her closing brief.

Behavior Intervention Services (Issue 7): The student's one-to-one paraprofessional (BII) attended every virtual class session, logged in daily, and actively supported the student during distance learning. The ALJ found LAUSD fully implemented BII services as required by both IEPs.

Speech and Language Services (Issue 8 — Student Prevailed): The evidence clearly established that LAUSD failed to provide all required Speech and Language services after the March 2020 school closures. Foshay had no Speech Pathologist for August and most of September 2020. The IEP teams themselves acknowledged this, documenting that the student was owed 745 minutes (in the September 2020 IEP) and an additional 835 minutes (in the April 2021 IEP) — a total of 1,580 missed minutes.

Occupational Therapy Services (Issue 9 — Student Prevailed): The student missed approximately 129 minutes of Occupational Therapy, largely due to absences. The OT had tried to make up missed time but was unable to because the student stopped attending school after April 2021.

What Was Ordered

Despite finding that LAUSD violated FAPE by failing to deliver Speech and Language and Occupational Therapy services, the ALJ denied all requests for relief:

1. No additional compensatory education was ordered. LAUSD had already offered full minute-for-minute make-up services in the student's IEPs of September 2020 and April 2021 — 1,580 minutes of Speech and Language and 129 minutes of Occupational Therapy — for all missed time regardless of cause.
2. The district's compensatory offer was found sufficient. The ALJ determined this offer was "generous" and adequate to place the student where she would have been educationally if services had been delivered on time.
3. Parent's actions were found to be the reason the compensatory services were not used. Because Parent stopped sending the student to school after April 2021, LAUSD could not deliver the make-up services it had already committed to providing.
4. All nine of Student's requests for relief were denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Refusing to consent to assessments can sink your case. Even if you have concerns about who will conduct an assessment or how the form is worded, refusing to sign an assessment consent plan blocks the district from doing its job — and courts and ALJs will hold that refusal against you. If you have concerns about assessors, raise them in writing but do not withhold consent entirely. Request an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) instead if you disagree with results after they are completed.

2. You must present evidence at hearing — concerns alone are not enough. The parent in this case had real, deeply-held concerns about her daughter's education. But on several issues, no witnesses, documents, or expert opinions were offered to support those claims. The ALJ had no basis to rule in the student's favor. If you file for due process, work with an advocate or attorney to gather assessments, expert testimony, and records that directly support each issue you raise.

3. Districts can protect themselves from compensatory education claims by proactively offering make-up services in the IEP. LAUSD escaped a remedy order partly because it had already acknowledged the missed services and offered compensation within the IEP itself. As a parent, you should review IEP documents carefully for these acknowledgments — and make sure you understand what compensatory services are being offered and insist on a written plan for how and when they will be delivered.

4. Not sending your child to school during a dispute can hurt your legal position. The ALJ noted that the student had not attended school since April 2021 and that this was the reason LAUSD could not deliver the compensatory services it had promised. Keeping your child home during a dispute may feel protective, but it can become a factor that limits the remedies available to you in a hearing.

5. Parents cannot choose who conducts district assessments, but they can request an IEE. The parent wanted different assessors and raised concerns about conflicts of interest. The ALJ confirmed that the law does not permit parents to select the district's assessors. If you believe the district's assessment was inadequate or biased after it is completed, you have the right to request that the district fund an Independent Educational Evaluation at public expense — that is the proper legal pathway.