District Wins on All Claims: Autism Eligibility, Placement, and Services Dispute

Parents filed a due process complaint against Turlock Unified School District on behalf of their seven-year-old son with autism and a specific learning disability, challenging the district's delay in assessing him, the services offered in his IEP, and his placement in an autism special day class. The ALJ found that the district acted appropriately on all eight issues, concluding that chronic absences — not district inaction — caused the delay in assessment, and that the special day class was the least restrictive appropriate placement. All relief sought by the family was denied.

What Happened

Student was a seven-year-old second grader diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and a specific learning disability, attending Medeiros Elementary School in Turlock Unified School District. During kindergarten, school was fully virtual due to COVID-19. In first grade, Student returned to in-person learning but missed nearly one-third of the school year — similar to his attendance in kindergarten. His teacher observed significant delays in reading, writing, and math, and moved him through three tiers of general education intervention. Despite these supports, Student made minimal academic progress.

Parent claimed she requested a special education assessment as early as October 7, 2021, at a meeting held for Student's sibling. The district disputed this. The ALJ found Parent's testimony not credible and determined the first formal assessment request came on January 14, 2022. From there, the district developed an assessment plan the same day, but Parent did not sign it for two months. After Parent consented, the district completed a full multidisciplinary evaluation and held an IEP meeting on May 23, 2022. At that meeting, Student was found eligible for special education under autism and specific learning disability. The district offered placement in a Generalized Autism Special Day Class with two general education inclusion periods daily. Parent rejected the placement and sought a general education setting instead. Parent also rejected an offered occupational therapy assessment and sought home ABA therapy, a one-to-one aide, behavior intervention services, and parent training — all of which the district declined to include in the IEP.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled in the district's favor on all eight issues. On the assessment timeline, the ALJ found that Student's chronic absences gave the district reasonable grounds to attribute his delays to lack of instruction rather than a disability, and that using four months of tiered interventions before referring him for special education was legally appropriate. Once Parent formally requested an assessment, the district responded the same day and completed the evaluation within all legal timelines.

On services, the ALJ found no evidence that Student had maladaptive behaviors requiring a behavior intervention plan, one-to-one aide, or home ABA therapy. Every teacher, specialist, and assessor — including Student's own expert — agreed Student did not exhibit behaviors that impeded his learning or the learning of others. On parent training, the district provided Parent with community resources, and Student's own expert testified that parent training was not required in this case.

On occupational therapy, the ALJ found it would have been inappropriate to offer OT services without first completing an OT assessment. The district did offer such an assessment at the May 23, 2022 IEP meeting, but Parent refused to sign it. The ALJ found Parent could not simultaneously refuse the assessment and claim the district failed to offer the service.

On placement, the ALJ applied the Ninth Circuit's four-factor test and found that Student had not received meaningful educational benefit in the general education setting despite two years of intervention. The Generalized Autism Special Day Class — with a low student-to-staff ratio, embedded supports, evidence-based practices, and daily inclusion in general education — was found to be the least restrictive appropriate environment. The district was also found not to have predetermined placement, as the IEP team discussed multiple options at the meeting and Parent and her advocate participated fully.

What Was Ordered

The student's requests for relief were denied in their entirety.
No compensatory education, placement change, additional services, or reimbursement was awarded.

Why This Matters for Parents

Attendance matters in eligibility timelines. When a student misses large amounts of school, districts may legally attribute learning delays to chronic absences rather than disability. This can delay the point at which a district is required to refer a child for special education assessment. If your child has significant absences, document the reasons carefully and continue to push for evaluation if you believe a disability is present.
You cannot refuse an assessment and then claim the district failed to provide the resulting service. In this case, Parent declined to sign an occupational therapy assessment plan — then argued the district should have offered OT services. The ALJ rejected this reasoning. If you believe your child needs a service, sign the assessment plan so the district can gather the data needed to justify it.
Your expert's credibility depends on direct knowledge of your child and the proposed program. Student's expert witness had not observed Student in school, had not assessed him, and was unfamiliar with the specific special day class the district offered. The ALJ gave her opinion little weight as a result. When hiring an expert, make sure they review all records, observe your child, and visit the program being proposed before testifying.
A district may develop a draft IEP before the meeting without it being considered predetermination — as long as parents have a real opportunity to participate. Bringing a draft to an IEP meeting is not automatically a procedural violation. What matters is whether the district was open to parent input and whether the final offer reflected genuine team discussion. Document your participation and any changes made based on your input.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

The student's requests for relief were denied in their entirety.
No compensatory education, placement change, additional services, or reimbursement was awarded.

Why This Matters for Parents

Attendance matters in eligibility timelines. When a student misses large amounts of school, districts may legally attribute learning delays to chronic absences rather than disability. This can delay the point at which a district is required to refer a child for special education assessment. If your child has significant absences, document the reasons carefully and continue to push for evaluation if you believe a disability is present.
You cannot refuse an assessment and then claim the district failed to provide the resulting service. In this case, Parent declined to sign an occupational therapy assessment plan — then argued the district should have offered OT services. The ALJ rejected this reasoning. If you believe your child needs a service, sign the assessment plan so the district can gather the data needed to justify it.
Your expert's credibility depends on direct knowledge of your child and the proposed program. Student's expert witness had not observed Student in school, had not assessed him, and was unfamiliar with the specific special day class the district offered. The ALJ gave her opinion little weight as a result. When hiring an expert, make sure they review all records, observe your child, and visit the program being proposed before testifying.
A district may develop a draft IEP before the meeting without it being considered predetermination — as long as parents have a real opportunity to participate. Bringing a draft to an IEP meeting is not automatically a procedural violation. What matters is whether the district was open to parent input and whether the final offer reflected genuine team discussion. Document your participation and any changes made based on your input.