District Denied FAPE During COVID Distance Learning for Student with Autism

A 10-year-old student with autism and intellectual disability could not access distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, and Encinitas Union Elementary School District failed to offer adequate supports during the 2020 extended school year and the first weeks of the 2020-2021 school year. The ALJ found the district denied FAPE for those periods but ruled in the district's favor for later hybrid learning and COVID quarantine periods. The district was ordered to provide 50 hours of compensatory in-person services across specialized academic instruction, speech, occupational therapy, and adaptive PE.

What Happened

Student was a 10-year-old fifth grader with autism and intellectual disability who attended a specialized self-contained classroom called the TIDE program, which had an almost one-to-one adult-to-student ratio and used applied behavior analysis strategies. When COVID-19 closed schools in March 2020, the district switched to distance learning. Student almost immediately fell apart in the virtual setting — Parent described constant tantrums, Student hitting the computer screen, screaming, wandering around the house, and being unable to sit for more than 30 seconds. Student could not watch TV or Zoom with family members, let alone attend online school. Parent notified the district in April 2020, and Student's advocate sent a formal letter requesting in-home or in-person support. The district denied the request, citing government COVID-19 closure orders.

Parent filed a due process complaint in June 2022, arguing that the district failed to offer adequate distance learning supports during the 2020 extended school year, the start of the 2020-2021 school year, and during COVID quarantine periods in January and February 2022. The district argued it was excused from providing in-person services due to the Governor's stay-at-home orders, and that it was Parent's responsibility to help Student access online learning.

What the District Did Wrong

The ALJ found that the district failed to offer Student a free appropriate public education (FAPE) during two specific time periods. First, during the summer 2020 extended school year (June 29 to July 24, 2020), Student attended almost no services — only four of the scheduled synchronous lessons, and zero speech therapy sessions. The district knew Student could not access distance learning without constant in-person adult support, yet it did not amend Student's IEP to provide that support. The ALJ rejected the district's argument that the pandemic excused it from its FAPE obligations. The U.S. Department of Education explicitly declined to waive IDEA requirements during COVID-19, meaning districts remained responsible for ensuring students with disabilities received appropriate education — even if the remedy would have to come later as compensatory services.

Second, during the first four weeks of the 2020-2021 school year (August 17 to September 18, 2020), the district arranged two hours per day of in-home aide support through a private agency, but this was never formally written into Student's IEP, making it legally unenforceable. The aide also was not provided on 45% of instructional days. Student continued to struggle on days without aide support.

The ALJ ruled in the district's favor for the hybrid learning period (September 21, 2020 to April 12, 2021), finding Student made progress when attending school in person four days a week. The ALJ also dismissed claims about the January and February 2022 quarantine periods, finding Student did not present evidence of educational regression during those 10 combined days out of school.

What Was Ordered

Encinitas shall provide Student with 26 hours of in-person compensatory specialized academic instruction, to be delivered by district staff outside of the regular school day and in addition to IEP services.
Encinitas shall provide Student with 8 hours of in-person compensatory occupational therapy.
Encinitas shall provide Student with 8 hours of in-person compensatory speech and language services.
Encinitas shall provide Student with 8 hours of in-person compensatory adaptive physical education.
All compensatory services must be completed by the end of the 2023-2024 school year. The district must work with Parent to find a mutually agreeable schedule.
Parent's request for reimbursement for a private caregiver hired during distance learning was denied, because the caregiver was not shown to provide educationally related services.
Parent's request for reimbursement for tuition and travel to a rehabilitation clinic in Ukraine was denied, as it had no direct connection to the distance learning FAPE denial.

Why This Matters for Parents

COVID-19 did not erase your child's right to FAPE. Federal law was never waived during the pandemic, and this decision confirms that districts remained legally responsible for providing appropriate education — even if they couldn't provide it in person at the time. If your child couldn't access distance learning due to disability-related needs, that gap may still be compensable today through compensatory services.
Document your child's struggles with distance learning in writing, immediately. Parent's April 2020 emails and the advocate's letter were critical evidence in this case. The more specific your written communications to the district about what your child cannot do and why, the stronger your legal record becomes.
Verbal agreements and informal arrangements are not enforceable IEP amendments. The district arranged in-home aide support by phone — but because it was never written into the IEP, it had no legal force. Any change to your child's services must be put in writing and signed. If the district offers something informally, ask them to amend the IEP in writing.
Reimbursement claims require a clear educational connection. Parent's request for caregiver costs was denied because the caregiver was not shown to provide services tied to educational goals. If you hire private support during a FAPE denial, keep detailed records showing how those services addressed your child's IEP goals — and ideally use providers with relevant credentials.
Statute of limitations matters: file within two years of when you first knew there was a problem. Parent knew Student couldn't access distance learning as early as April 2020, which is why the ALJ cut off the claim period at June 22, 2020 (two years before the complaint was filed). A district saying it will "look into something" does not pause the clock. If you believe your child is being denied FAPE, consult an advocate or attorney promptly.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

What Was Ordered

Encinitas shall provide Student with 26 hours of in-person compensatory specialized academic instruction, to be delivered by district staff outside of the regular school day and in addition to IEP services.
Encinitas shall provide Student with 8 hours of in-person compensatory occupational therapy.
Encinitas shall provide Student with 8 hours of in-person compensatory speech and language services.
Encinitas shall provide Student with 8 hours of in-person compensatory adaptive physical education.
All compensatory services must be completed by the end of the 2023-2024 school year. The district must work with Parent to find a mutually agreeable schedule.
Parent's request for reimbursement for a private caregiver hired during distance learning was denied, because the caregiver was not shown to provide educationally related services.
Parent's request for reimbursement for tuition and travel to a rehabilitation clinic in Ukraine was denied, as it had no direct connection to the distance learning FAPE denial.

Why This Matters for Parents

COVID-19 did not erase your child's right to FAPE. Federal law was never waived during the pandemic, and this decision confirms that districts remained legally responsible for providing appropriate education — even if they couldn't provide it in person at the time. If your child couldn't access distance learning due to disability-related needs, that gap may still be compensable today through compensatory services.
Document your child's struggles with distance learning in writing, immediately. Parent's April 2020 emails and the advocate's letter were critical evidence in this case. The more specific your written communications to the district about what your child cannot do and why, the stronger your legal record becomes.
Verbal agreements and informal arrangements are not enforceable IEP amendments. The district arranged in-home aide support by phone — but because it was never written into the IEP, it had no legal force. Any change to your child's services must be put in writing and signed. If the district offers something informally, ask them to amend the IEP in writing.
Reimbursement claims require a clear educational connection. Parent's request for caregiver costs was denied because the caregiver was not shown to provide services tied to educational goals. If you hire private support during a FAPE denial, keep detailed records showing how those services addressed your child's IEP goals — and ideally use providers with relevant credentials.
Statute of limitations matters: file within two years of when you first knew there was a problem. Parent knew Student couldn't access distance learning as early as April 2020, which is why the ALJ cut off the claim period at June 22, 2020 (two years before the complaint was filed). A district saying it will "look into something" does not pause the clock. If you believe your child is being denied FAPE, consult an advocate or attorney promptly.