Centralia Denied FAPE Over Missing Behavior Aide During Distance Learning, But Private School Reimbursement Denied

A third-grade student with Other Health Impairment and Specific Learning Disability attended Centralia Elementary School District, where parents alleged the district denied FAPE through inadequate IEP services, failure to implement behavior aide support during COVID distance learning, and inappropriate placement. The ALJ found the district did deny FAPE by failing to provide a behavior aide during remote learning and by offering inadequate counseling and aide hours in the December 2020 IEP, but ruled that the private non-public school parents chose was not an appropriate placement. As a result, parents were denied tuition reimbursement, and the student was instead awarded 262 hours of compensatory academic tutoring from district staff.

What Happened

A nine-year-old third grader, eligible for special education since December 2019 under the categories of Other Health Impairment and Specific Learning Disability, attended school in the Centralia Elementary School District. The student had significant behavioral challenges — including impulsive aggression, difficulty accepting consequences, and trouble staying on task — alongside deficits in reading, phonics, and comprehension. From the start of his special education eligibility, his IEP included a full-time one-to-one behavior aide, a behavior intervention plan supported by a SELPA behavior analyst, weekly counseling with the school psychologist, and reading intervention using the Reading Mastery program. Parents and their advocate repeatedly pushed for Orton Gillingham or Lindamood Bell reading programs instead, and raised concerns about the adequacy of behavior services throughout the two-year period at issue.

When the COVID-19 pandemic forced schools to distance learning in March 2020, the district failed to provide the student's behavior aide in any form — online or in person — for extended periods. This left the student without the daily behavioral support and data collection his IEP required. Parents also contested the December 2020 IEP, which reduced counseling to a minimal monthly check-in and offered only partial aide hours even after the district knew online aide support was not working. After the district and parents reached an impasse, parents unilaterally placed the student at The Children's School, a certified non-public school, in July 2021, and sought reimbursement for tuition and related costs. The hearing stretched across seven days in spring 2022.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ issued a mixed ruling. The district prevailed on most issues but was found to have denied FAPE in specific, significant ways:

IEP goals were measurable — District prevailed. The student argued that goal baselines should mirror the measurement method used in the goal itself. The ALJ rejected this, finding each goal described a clear mathematical means of tracking progress (percent accuracy, number of trials, teacher observation, work samples), which satisfies the law. There is no requirement that baselines be expressed in the same metric as the goal.

Initial 2019 IEP services were appropriate — District prevailed. The reading intervention (Reading Mastery), behavior aide, behavior plan, SELPA behavior analyst, and weekly counseling offered in the December 2019 IEP were all found adequate. Parent's preferred programs (Orton Gillingham, Lindamood Bell) are not legally required when the district's chosen method is reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit. The parent's advocate was not a credentialed teacher or reading specialist, and the expert witness had only a passing familiarity with Reading Mastery, so their objections were given little weight.

December 2020 IEP failed to offer full-time behavior aide — Student prevailed. All IEP team members agreed the student still needed a full-time behavior aide, yet the December 2020 IEP only offered approximately two hours of aide services per day — the equivalent of two half-days rather than a full school day. Even as student's attendance expanded and all students returned to full-time in-person instruction in April 2021, the June 2021 amended IEP still did not correct this error. This omission was not reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit and constituted a FAPE denial.

December 2020 IEP counseling offer was inadequate — Student prevailed. The prior IEP had offered 30 minutes of weekly individual counseling with the school psychologist, which the student valued and from which he clearly benefited. The December 2020 IEP slashed this to "at least one individual session per month" with the rest of the hour used for staff consultation. The district's explanation — that the student was improving and receiving private outside counseling — was rejected. Districts cannot rely on private counseling to offset services a student needs to access their education. The reduced counseling was not reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit.

Failure to implement behavior aide during distance learning — Student prevailed. The student received no behavior aide support whatsoever for 44 school days (March 16–May 21, 2020) and another 35 school days (August 13–October 2, 2020). Even after the hybrid schedule began, aide services delivered online were known to be inadequate, yet the district continued providing only online support for extended periods. The total days without required in-person aide support came to 131 school days. This was a material failure to implement the IEP and denied FAPE.

No new functional behavior assessment required — District prevailed. The student argued the district should have conducted a second functional behavior assessment after behavior spikes in early 2021. The ALJ found the fundamental nature of the student's behaviors had not changed, no parent or teacher formally requested a new assessment, and the behavior plan was in fact being updated. Behavior fluctuations caused by COVID schedule disruptions and medication trials did not require a new assessment.

The Children's School was not an appropriate placement — District prevailed on reimbursement. This was the most consequential finding for the family. To receive tuition reimbursement, parents must prove both that the public school denied FAPE and that the private school was appropriate. Here, the evidence showed the student regressed — behaviorally, academically in reading, and academically in math — after enrolling at The Children's School. For the first six weeks he could not attend classes at all due to extreme behavior. Reading scores dropped from the 26th to the 18th percentile; math scores dropped from the 60th to the 34th percentile. The school's progress reports lacked credible supporting data, and every witness — including the parent and the student's own expert — acknowledged the reading instruction did not meet his needs. Reimbursement was denied.

What Was Ordered

262 hours of compensatory one-to-one academic tutoring awarded to compensate for the 131 school days during which the student was denied required behavior aide services (calculated as two hours per lost aide day). This tutoring must be provided by Centralia staff holding special education certifications and reading specialist training, on a one-to-one basis, outside of regular school hours. Parents may use these hours at their election through June 30, 2025.
Mandatory three-hour IEP training for all Raymond Temple school staff involved in creating IEPs. The training must cover: (a) developing IEPs that document why specific services were chosen; (b) requirements for complete and accurate IEP documents under California and IDEA standards; and (c) identifying the need for one-to-one support and the obligation to implement it when students receive instruction in alternate formats or locations. Training must be provided by an outside party — not Centralia staff — and completed by March 31, 2023.
All other remedy requests denied, including tuition reimbursement for The Children's School, reimbursement of mileage and fees, and continued private school placement.

Why This Matters for Parents

Document everything about your child's distance learning struggles in real time. The district was found liable precisely because parents sent emails describing the student's distance learning difficulties — those emails proved the district knew online aide support wasn't working. If your child's IEP requires in-person support, put your concerns in writing immediately when that support goes online-only or disappears entirely.
If you pull your child from public school, the private placement must show educational benefit — not just be different. The family lost tuition reimbursement entirely because The Children's School produced regression, not progress. Before making a unilateral private placement, document the public school's failures carefully, research the private school's track record with similar students, and ensure the private school can actually demonstrate measurable educational benefit.
IEP documents must match reality — especially for aide services. The district intended to provide full-time aide services but wrote the IEP to reflect only partial hours, and this error was never corrected across multiple IEP meetings. Always read the specific minutes and hours written into the IEP and demand corrections before signing or even before the meeting ends. What the IEP says on paper is what the district is legally obligated to provide.
Reducing related services like counseling requires solid justification — not reliance on private services. The district cannot point to your child's outside therapy or private tutoring as a reason to reduce school-based services. Your child is legally entitled to whatever services they need to access their public education, at public expense. If the district proposes a reduction in counseling or other related services, ask in writing what data supports that reduction and confirm it is not because you are supplementing privately.
Preferred reading programs are not legally required, but districts must explain their choice. The ALJ deferred to the district's choice of Reading Mastery and later RAVE-O over Orton Gillingham and Lindamood Bell. Courts give districts flexibility in choosing educational methodology. However, if you believe a specific program is necessary, bring in a credentialed expert who has directly reviewed both your child's needs and the district's proposed program — not just a general advocate or someone with only passing familiarity with the programs at issue. Vague expert opinions carry little weight.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ issued a mixed ruling. The district prevailed on most issues but was found to have denied FAPE in specific, significant ways:

What Was Ordered

262 hours of compensatory one-to-one academic tutoring awarded to compensate for the 131 school days during which the student was denied required behavior aide services (calculated as two hours per lost aide day). This tutoring must be provided by Centralia staff holding special education certifications and reading specialist training, on a one-to-one basis, outside of regular school hours. Parents may use these hours at their election through June 30, 2025.
Mandatory three-hour IEP training for all Raymond Temple school staff involved in creating IEPs. The training must cover: (a) developing IEPs that document why specific services were chosen; (b) requirements for complete and accurate IEP documents under California and IDEA standards; and (c) identifying the need for one-to-one support and the obligation to implement it when students receive instruction in alternate formats or locations. Training must be provided by an outside party — not Centralia staff — and completed by March 31, 2023.
All other remedy requests denied, including tuition reimbursement for The Children's School, reimbursement of mileage and fees, and continued private school placement.

Why This Matters for Parents

Document everything about your child's distance learning struggles in real time. The district was found liable precisely because parents sent emails describing the student's distance learning difficulties — those emails proved the district knew online aide support wasn't working. If your child's IEP requires in-person support, put your concerns in writing immediately when that support goes online-only or disappears entirely.
If you pull your child from public school, the private placement must show educational benefit — not just be different. The family lost tuition reimbursement entirely because The Children's School produced regression, not progress. Before making a unilateral private placement, document the public school's failures carefully, research the private school's track record with similar students, and ensure the private school can actually demonstrate measurable educational benefit.
IEP documents must match reality — especially for aide services. The district intended to provide full-time aide services but wrote the IEP to reflect only partial hours, and this error was never corrected across multiple IEP meetings. Always read the specific minutes and hours written into the IEP and demand corrections before signing or even before the meeting ends. What the IEP says on paper is what the district is legally obligated to provide.
Reducing related services like counseling requires solid justification — not reliance on private services. The district cannot point to your child's outside therapy or private tutoring as a reason to reduce school-based services. Your child is legally entitled to whatever services they need to access their public education, at public expense. If the district proposes a reduction in counseling or other related services, ask in writing what data supports that reduction and confirm it is not because you are supplementing privately.
Preferred reading programs are not legally required, but districts must explain their choice. The ALJ deferred to the district's choice of Reading Mastery and later RAVE-O over Orton Gillingham and Lindamood Bell. Courts give districts flexibility in choosing educational methodology. However, if you believe a specific program is necessary, bring in a credentialed expert who has directly reviewed both your child's needs and the district's proposed program — not just a general advocate or someone with only passing familiarity with the programs at issue. Vague expert opinions carry little weight.