San Diego Unified Wins Every Issue After Parents Privately Placed Student Without Requesting an IEP

Parents privately placed their 10th-grade son, who had emotional disturbance and a history of suicidal ideation, at wilderness therapy and therapeutic boarding school programs from September 2020 through December 2021. They filed a due process complaint alleging San Diego Unified denied Student a FAPE across multiple IEPs and time periods. The ALJ ruled entirely in the district's favor, finding that once parents voluntarily enroll a child in private school without requesting a public IEP, the school district has no obligation to develop one or offer a FAPE.

What Happened

Student was a teenager eligible for special education under the category of emotional disturbance, with a significant history of mental health crises including suicidal ideation and multiple hospitalizations. San Diego Unified held an initial IEP in December 2019, offering Student placement at Riley Alternative School — a small, therapeutic separate school — along with specialized academic instruction and mental health behavior services. After a prior complaint was settled, Parents consented to this IEP in May 2020.

When the 2020-2021 school year began, Student attended Riley via distance learning under COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. On September 29, 2020, Parents notified San Diego they were privately placing Student at a wilderness therapy program in North Carolina, starting the very next day. They did not express disagreement with Student's IEP, did not request reimbursement, and did not ask San Diego to develop a new IEP. Student then moved to a therapeutic boarding school in South Carolina, where he remained until the end of December 2021. Parents filed this complaint alleging San Diego denied Student a FAPE across many different IEPs and time periods covering the entire duration of the private placement.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ denied every single one of Student's claims. The central legal principle driving most of the decision was straightforward: once parents voluntarily enroll a child in a private school, that child no longer has an individual right to a FAPE from the school district — unless the parents specifically ask the district to develop an IEP. Because Parents never made that request while Student was privately placed from September 30, 2020 through December 2021, San Diego had no legal obligation to hold IEP meetings, revise the IEP, offer a placement, or do much of anything else during that entire period. This applied to nearly all of the issues Parents raised regarding the October 2020, November 2020, April 2021, August 2021, and October 2021 IEP meetings.

For the narrow window before the private placement began — August 31 through September 29, 2020, just 22 school days — the ALJ found San Diego had materially implemented Student's IEP through distance learning. The ALJ held that COVID-19 emergency orders from the Governor lawfully modified districts' IEP obligations to allow distance learning, and that San Diego's delivery of synchronous and asynchronous instruction with small classes and embedded mental health services was sufficient. Student's missed advisory periods and three counseling sessions were attributed to Student not logging on, not to San Diego failing to make services available.

On the assessment question, San Diego had conducted a behavior assessment less than a year earlier. No new assessment was triggered because neither parents nor school staff reported behavioral concerns at school warranting a reassessment. On the 60-day assessment timeline issue, the ALJ found that Parents' insistence that San Diego send assessors 2,341 miles to South Carolina — where the private boarding school also imposed COVID quarantine restrictions — constituted conditions on consent that eliminated San Diego's timeline obligation. The assessments were ultimately completed and reviewed at a December 2, 2021 IEP meeting, which Parents fully consented to, causing no demonstrated harm.

What Was Ordered

All of Student's claims for relief were denied.
San Diego Unified School District prevailed on every issue and sub-issue presented at hearing.

Why This Matters for Parents

Privately placing your child without asking for a public IEP eliminates most of your FAPE rights. Under federal law confirmed by the Ninth Circuit in Capistrano, a parentally placed private school student has no individual entitlement to special education services from the district — even if you disagree with the IEP or have filed a complaint. If you want the district's obligations to continue, you must explicitly request that the district develop or maintain an IEP.
Simply emailing the district about your child does not constitute a formal IEP meeting request. The ALJ rejected Parents' argument that a March 2021 email asking the district to reconsider funding their private placement was a request for an IEP meeting. If you want an IEP meeting, say so clearly and in writing — courts and ALJs will look at the plain language of your communications.
COVID-19 distance learning orders were found to lawfully override in-person IEP requirements. Parents argued that Student's disability required in-person services despite the Governor's orders. The ALJ disagreed, finding that statewide school closure orders applied to all students and lawfully modified IEP implementation obligations. This precedent may matter in future emergency situations.
Placing conditions on how or where assessments happen can eliminate the district's 60-day timeline obligation. Parents required San Diego to travel across the country to assess Student at his out-of-state private placement. The ALJ found this was an improper condition that relieved the district of its duty to assess within the normal timeline. If you want timely assessments, you generally need to make your child reasonably available.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

All of Student's claims for relief were denied.
San Diego Unified School District prevailed on every issue and sub-issue presented at hearing.

Why This Matters for Parents

Privately placing your child without asking for a public IEP eliminates most of your FAPE rights. Under federal law confirmed by the Ninth Circuit in Capistrano, a parentally placed private school student has no individual entitlement to special education services from the district — even if you disagree with the IEP or have filed a complaint. If you want the district's obligations to continue, you must explicitly request that the district develop or maintain an IEP.
Simply emailing the district about your child does not constitute a formal IEP meeting request. The ALJ rejected Parents' argument that a March 2021 email asking the district to reconsider funding their private placement was a request for an IEP meeting. If you want an IEP meeting, say so clearly and in writing — courts and ALJs will look at the plain language of your communications.
COVID-19 distance learning orders were found to lawfully override in-person IEP requirements. Parents argued that Student's disability required in-person services despite the Governor's orders. The ALJ disagreed, finding that statewide school closure orders applied to all students and lawfully modified IEP implementation obligations. This precedent may matter in future emergency situations.
Placing conditions on how or where assessments happen can eliminate the district's 60-day timeline obligation. Parents required San Diego to travel across the country to assess Student at his out-of-state private placement. The ALJ found this was an improper condition that relieved the district of its duty to assess within the normal timeline. If you want timely assessments, you generally need to make your child reasonably available.