District Wins Right to Move Nonverbal Student with Cerebral Palsy to Functional Skills Program

Riverbank Unified School District filed for due process after Parent refused to consent to moving their 16-year-old son with cerebral palsy and quadriplegia from a general education setting to a moderate-to-severe special day class at a neighboring high school. The ALJ found that the district's May 2022 IEP offered a free appropriate public education and that the proposed placement at Waterford High School was the least restrictive environment appropriate for Student's needs. The district was authorized to implement the IEP without parental consent.

What Happened

Student is a 16-year-old with cerebral palsy resulting in muscle spasticity and quadriplegia. He is wheelchair-bound, fed through a tube, and communicates nonverbally — using facial expressions, head movements, and a Tobii eye-gaze device that allows him to type and produce speech output. Despite Student's significant disabilities, Parent believed he should remain at Riverbank High School in a general education setting, feeling that academic stimulation was valuable even if he could not keep up with the curriculum.

Riverbank Unified School District disagreed. After conducting comprehensive triennial assessments in spring 2022, the district convened an IEP meeting on May 17, 2022. The assessments showed that Student scored below the first percentile on cognitive testing, performed in the very low range across all academic areas, and was unable to keep pace even in a mild-to-moderate special day class — completing as little as one of four warm-up problems per week and turning in no other assignments in some classes. Riverbank High School was also moving to a full-inclusion model that eliminated separate special education classrooms entirely. The district proposed moving Student to a moderate-to-severe special day class at Waterford High School, a nearby general education campus, where he could receive functional skills instruction, community-based learning, and more individualized support. Parent agreed with virtually all of the IEP except the change in placement, so Riverbank filed for due process to seek authorization to implement the IEP without parental consent.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled entirely in favor of Riverbank, finding that the May 17, 2022 IEP offered Student a FAPE and that the placement at Waterford was appropriate and the least restrictive environment for Student's needs.

The ALJ found that extensive assessment data consistently showed Student could not benefit from general education or even a mild-to-moderate special day class. He completed minimal work, could not keep pace with instruction, and showed no mastery of the limited material he did complete. His grades reflected effort, not academic understanding, and teachers had reduced his workload by 75 percent compared to peers with similar disabilities. In general education, his aide often had to guide him through answers or write responses that Student then copied. The inclusion environment did not provide Student meaningful academic or social benefit.

On the question of least restrictive environment, the ALJ applied the four-factor test from Sacramento City Unified School District v. Rachel H. and found that the first two factors — educational benefit and non-academic (social) benefit — weighed heavily in favor of the Waterford placement. At Waterford, Student had already attended extended school year (summer 2022) and thrived: he worked at an appropriate pace, participated in class using his Tobii, and engaged in community-based outings to practice real-world skills like shopping and budgeting. The ALJ also noted that no credentialed educator or licensed service provider — from either side — recommended delaying functional skills instruction until after Student finished high school. Parent's preference that Student receive academic stimulation in general education, however well-intentioned, was not supported by the evidence.

What Was Ordered

Riverbank's request for relief was granted in full.
Riverbank is authorized to implement Student's May 17, 2022 IEP without Parent's consent, provided Student continues to receive special education services.

Why This Matters for Parents

Districts can file for due process too — not just parents. Most parents think of due process as a tool they use against districts. But when a parent refuses to consent to a placement change, a district can file for a hearing to override that refusal. If the district proves its IEP is appropriate, it can implement the IEP without your signature.
Agreeing with assessment results but disagreeing with placement can weaken your case. Parent in this case agreed with all of the evaluation reports and even most of the IEP — only objecting to the placement. The ALJ repeatedly noted this agreement when finding that the proposed placement logically followed from the assessment data. If you believe a placement is wrong, it is important to carefully review whether the underlying assessments support your position or the district's.
General education is not always the least restrictive environment. The law requires placement in the "least restrictive environment appropriate," not the least restrictive environment possible. When a student cannot access meaningful academic or social benefit in a general education setting — even with significant supports — a more specialized placement can be legally appropriate, and may actually better serve the student's needs.
Functional skills and real-world learning count as education. The Waterford program's focus on cooking, budgeting, shopping, and daily living was viewed by the ALJ as educationally appropriate and necessary — not a step backward. For students whose long-term needs center on independence and community participation, a curriculum focused on generalizing practical skills may be more appropriate than one aligned to grade-level academic standards the student cannot access.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

Riverbank's request for relief was granted in full.
Riverbank is authorized to implement Student's May 17, 2022 IEP without Parent's consent, provided Student continues to receive special education services.

Why This Matters for Parents

Districts can file for due process too — not just parents. Most parents think of due process as a tool they use against districts. But when a parent refuses to consent to a placement change, a district can file for a hearing to override that refusal. If the district proves its IEP is appropriate, it can implement the IEP without your signature.
Agreeing with assessment results but disagreeing with placement can weaken your case. Parent in this case agreed with all of the evaluation reports and even most of the IEP — only objecting to the placement. The ALJ repeatedly noted this agreement when finding that the proposed placement logically followed from the assessment data. If you believe a placement is wrong, it is important to carefully review whether the underlying assessments support your position or the district's.
General education is not always the least restrictive environment. The law requires placement in the "least restrictive environment appropriate," not the least restrictive environment possible. When a student cannot access meaningful academic or social benefit in a general education setting — even with significant supports — a more specialized placement can be legally appropriate, and may actually better serve the student's needs.
Functional skills and real-world learning count as education. The Waterford program's focus on cooking, budgeting, shopping, and daily living was viewed by the ALJ as educationally appropriate and necessary — not a step backward. For students whose long-term needs center on independence and community participation, a curriculum focused on generalizing practical skills may be more appropriate than one aligned to grade-level academic standards the student cannot access.