District Wins Across the Board: Autism/Speech Preschooler, COVID Distance Learning, Behavior Supports

What Happened

Student was a five-year-old kindergartener eligible for special education under the category of autism. He had significant speech and language delays and displayed aggressive and elopement behaviors in the classroom setting. San Juan Unified first evaluated Student in early 2020, when he was nearly three, and offered an initial IEP on February 26, 2020, identifying him as eligible under speech and language impairment and offering 400 minutes per week of services in a preschool communication class. However, Parents did not sign the IEP or provide written consent to begin services. Student did not enroll in San Juan Unified until May 24, 2021 — near the end of the 2020-2021 school year — and did not attend school for the remaining days of that year.

Parents filed a due process complaint in August 2022, raising more than ten claims covering the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 school years. They alleged the district failed to provide in-person speech and academic instruction during COVID distance learning, failed to conduct functional behavior and speech assessments, failed to offer appropriate behavior and speech goals, failed to provide assistive technology, failed to offer a one-to-one aide, failed to provide extended school year services, failed to offer ABA therapy, failed to place Student with neurotypical peers, failed to train Parents in special education eligibility, and ignored Parents' concerns. The district denied all claims.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled in the district's favor on every issue. On the COVID-era claims (Issues 1–3), the ALJ found that Parents never provided written consent to the February 26, 2020 IEP — neither parent signed it, and neither could recall doing so. Without written parental consent, the district had no legal obligation to implement that IEP or provide services. In addition, Student simply was not enrolled in the district for most of the 2020-2021 school year. The ALJ also noted that the Governor's COVID-19 stay-at-home orders made distance learning lawful, and no legal authority required the district to assess a student before switching to distance learning.

On the substantive program claims (Issues 4–10), the ALJ found that Student's behavior goals, or the absence of them, were appropriate at each stage. When Student first enrolled in June 2021, no concerning behaviors had been reported at school. By the 2021-2022 school year, Student did show aggression and elopement in the preschool communication class, but the district's informal data collection — conducted with support from a behaviorist — successfully identified the triggers and reduced the behaviors over time without a formal functional behavior assessment or a written behavior goal. The ALJ found the district's speech and language services were appropriate, Student made measurable progress on his goals, ESY was actually offered (contradicting the parent's claim), placement in the preschool communication class was the least restrictive environment given that it was located next to a general education preschool with recess interaction, and Parents meaningfully participated in all three IEP team meetings. Student's expert witness, an occupational therapist, was given little weight because she had met Student only once, by videoconference, the day before testifying, and had not reviewed key records or interviewed district staff.

What Was Ordered

1. All of Student's requested relief was denied.
2. San Juan Unified was found to have prevailed on all ten issues heard at the hearing.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Written consent to the initial IEP is legally required before the district can provide any services — verbal agreement or meeting attendance is not enough. The IEP meeting notes here said Parents agreed, but no signatures were on the document and no written consent letter followed. As a result, the district had zero obligation to serve Student for over a year. Always sign the IEP (or submit a written consent letter) if you want services to begin, and keep a copy for your records.

2. Enrollment in the district is a prerequisite to receiving services — if your child is not officially enrolled, the district has no duty to act. Student's family moved and missed a district enrollment notice. Because Student was not enrolled, the district bore no responsibility for the entire 2020-2021 school year. If you move or change districts, enroll your child as quickly as possible to preserve service timelines.

3. A district does not need to conduct a formal functional behavior assessment if its informal data collection and behavioral supports are working. The ALJ found that the district's teacher-led data collection, with behaviorist support, adequately identified the function of Student's behaviors and led to effective interventions. If you believe a formal FBA is needed, request one in writing — Parents here never made that request, which hurt their case.

4. Expert witnesses must have substantial, current knowledge of the specific student to be persuasive. Parents' occupational therapy expert met Student once, by video, for one hour, the day before testifying, and had not reviewed the district's psychological evaluation or spoken with any district staff. The ALJ gave her testimony little weight. If you retain an expert, make sure they have thoroughly reviewed all records and have direct, meaningful contact with your child well before the hearing.