District Wins: Deaf/Hard of Hearing Kindergartner's Private School Tuition Claim Denied

Parents of a six-year-old deaf and hard of hearing kindergartner sought reimbursement for private school tuition at Echo Horizon School in Culver City, arguing San Diego Unified's IEP offer was inadequate. The ALJ found that San Diego's March 2022 IEP offer — placing the student at a specialized DHH-friendly campus with three hours per day of in-class DHH support — was reasonably calculated to provide a FAPE. All six of the parents' claims were denied.

What Happened

A six-year-old boy with mild-to-moderate hearing loss in one ear and moderate-to-severe loss in the other was eligible for special education under the categories of Deaf/Hard of Hearing and Language or Speech Disorder. After attending San Diego Unified briefly as a toddler, he had been privately placed since age three and, by the time of the hearing, attended Echo Horizon School — a non-public school in Culver City. His parents rented a Los Angeles apartment so one of them could stay with him near the school each week. In fall 2021, the parents expressed willingness to return him to a San Diego school if the IEP contained services they considered essential, including a full-time DHH-credentialed co-teacher in his general education classroom at all times.

San Diego conducted a thorough triennial assessment — sending a team to observe and test the student at Echo Horizon — and held a three-session IEP team meeting from December 2021 through March 2022. The final IEP offer, dated March 25, 2022, proposed placement at Lafayette Elementary School, a campus with a 30-year history of serving deaf and hard of hearing students where nearly one-third of the 199 enrolled students were DHH. The offer included three hours per day of in-class DHH support during a 60-day transition period, speech-language therapy, audiological services, and extensive classroom accommodations. Parents rejected the offer because it did not include a full-time DHH co-teacher, and the student remained at Echo Horizon. Parents then filed for due process seeking reimbursement of private school tuition and related costs.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled in favor of San Diego on all six issues, finding that the district's March 25, 2022 IEP offer was reasonably calculated to provide the student a FAPE.

DHH Services Were Sufficient. The most contested issue was parents' demand for a full-time DHH co-teacher in the general education classroom. Multiple credentialed DHH specialists — including the lead DHH teacher who is herself deaf, a 30-year DHH veteran, and a school psychologist with a deaf son — testified credibly that three hours per day of in-class DHH support was adequate and that a full-time aide risked creating learned helplessness. Crucially, the San Diego observers who spent two days at Echo Horizon never witnessed the DHH teacher there intervene specifically with this student for misunderstanding — undermining the claim that constant DHH monitoring was essential.
Parents' Expert Testimony Was Discounted. The parents' audiologist expert was found unpersuasive because she had no classroom teaching credentials, had never observed the student in a classroom, was unfamiliar with Lafayette's program, and — critically — had assumed the student would receive only one hour of DHH support per day when the final offer actually provided three. Her opinions were also new at hearing and had never been shared with the IEP team, limiting their consideration under the "snapshot rule."
The Private School's "Full-Time DHH Support" Was Not What It Appeared. Evidence showed that the DHH teacher at Echo Horizon was not credentialed in DHH, did not spend her full classroom time monitoring this student, and also assisted other students. The ALJ found the actual difference in DHH support between Lafayette and Echo Horizon to be minor.
Placement Was the Least Restrictive Environment. The student would have been in general education 97% of the time on a campus purpose-built for DHH inclusion. No evidence was introduced to challenge this.
Specialized Academic Instruction Was Offered. The DHH specialist's in-class push-in support for math and reading constituted legally sufficient specialized academic instruction — exceeding the 90 minutes per week parents had requested.
The Offer Was Clear Enough. An earlier draft IEP contained confusing references to two schools due to a software limitation, but the final March 25, 2022 offer clearly identified Lafayette. Parents understood the final offer and rejected it based on its services, not its location.

What Was Ordered

All of the student's requests for relief were denied.
The request for reimbursement of private school tuition and related costs at Echo Horizon was denied because the district was found to have offered a FAPE.

Why This Matters for Parents

The final IEP offer is what gets evaluated — not earlier drafts. If a district fixes errors or increases services in a final offer, courts and ALJs will judge the final version. Keep pushing for a better offer in writing before you reject it, and document every change.
Your experts must know the district's actual final offer. A key reason the parents' audiologist was discounted was that she assumed the district was offering one hour of DHH support when the final IEP actually offered three. Always make sure your experts have reviewed the most current IEP document before they testify or write reports.
Expert opinions formed after the IEP meeting may carry limited weight. Under the "snapshot rule," IEPs are judged based on what the team knew at the time. If your expert never attended or submitted written input to the IEP meeting, their hearing testimony may be given less weight. Get expert input into the IEP process early and in writing.
Anecdotal claims about what a student "needs" must be backed by specific evidence. The parents' witnesses testified generally that the student sometimes misunderstood things, but could not give a single specific example — and San Diego's team observed the student for two full days without seeing any such instance. Document specific, concrete examples of your child's struggles to support claims about the level of support needed.
A district does not have to replicate a private school's program — only offer a FAPE. The legal standard is not whether the district's program is as good as the private school; it is whether the district's offer is reasonably calculated to allow the child to make meaningful educational progress. Parents who want reimbursement must show the district's offer falls below that threshold, not just that the private school is better.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled in favor of San Diego on all six issues, finding that the district's March 25, 2022 IEP offer was reasonably calculated to provide the student a FAPE.

DHH Services Were Sufficient. The most contested issue was parents' demand for a full-time DHH co-teacher in the general education classroom. Multiple credentialed DHH specialists — including the lead DHH teacher who is herself deaf, a 30-year DHH veteran, and a school psychologist with a deaf son — testified credibly that three hours per day of in-class DHH support was adequate and that a full-time aide risked creating learned helplessness. Crucially, the San Diego observers who spent two days at Echo Horizon never witnessed the DHH teacher there intervene specifically with this student for misunderstanding — undermining the claim that constant DHH monitoring was essential.
Parents' Expert Testimony Was Discounted. The parents' audiologist expert was found unpersuasive because she had no classroom teaching credentials, had never observed the student in a classroom, was unfamiliar with Lafayette's program, and — critically — had assumed the student would receive only one hour of DHH support per day when the final offer actually provided three. Her opinions were also new at hearing and had never been shared with the IEP team, limiting their consideration under the "snapshot rule."
The Private School's "Full-Time DHH Support" Was Not What It Appeared. Evidence showed that the DHH teacher at Echo Horizon was not credentialed in DHH, did not spend her full classroom time monitoring this student, and also assisted other students. The ALJ found the actual difference in DHH support between Lafayette and Echo Horizon to be minor.
Placement Was the Least Restrictive Environment. The student would have been in general education 97% of the time on a campus purpose-built for DHH inclusion. No evidence was introduced to challenge this.
Specialized Academic Instruction Was Offered. The DHH specialist's in-class push-in support for math and reading constituted legally sufficient specialized academic instruction — exceeding the 90 minutes per week parents had requested.
The Offer Was Clear Enough. An earlier draft IEP contained confusing references to two schools due to a software limitation, but the final March 25, 2022 offer clearly identified Lafayette. Parents understood the final offer and rejected it based on its services, not its location.

What Was Ordered

All of the student's requests for relief were denied.
The request for reimbursement of private school tuition and related costs at Echo Horizon was denied because the district was found to have offered a FAPE.

Why This Matters for Parents

The final IEP offer is what gets evaluated — not earlier drafts. If a district fixes errors or increases services in a final offer, courts and ALJs will judge the final version. Keep pushing for a better offer in writing before you reject it, and document every change.
Your experts must know the district's actual final offer. A key reason the parents' audiologist was discounted was that she assumed the district was offering one hour of DHH support when the final IEP actually offered three. Always make sure your experts have reviewed the most current IEP document before they testify or write reports.
Expert opinions formed after the IEP meeting may carry limited weight. Under the "snapshot rule," IEPs are judged based on what the team knew at the time. If your expert never attended or submitted written input to the IEP meeting, their hearing testimony may be given less weight. Get expert input into the IEP process early and in writing.
Anecdotal claims about what a student "needs" must be backed by specific evidence. The parents' witnesses testified generally that the student sometimes misunderstood things, but could not give a single specific example — and San Diego's team observed the student for two full days without seeing any such instance. Document specific, concrete examples of your child's struggles to support claims about the level of support needed.
A district does not have to replicate a private school's program — only offer a FAPE. The legal standard is not whether the district's program is as good as the private school; it is whether the district's offer is reasonably calculated to allow the child to make meaningful educational progress. Parents who want reimbursement must show the district's offer falls below that threshold, not just that the private school is better.