District Wins Right to Move Aggressive 1st Grader to Intensive Intervention Program

What Happened

Student was a seven-year-old first grader eligible for special education under the categories of emotional disability and other health impairment (ADHD). He attended Foothill Elementary School under an intradistrict transfer, placed in a general education classroom with a full-time behavior aide (a Registered Behavior Technician) and a behavior intervention plan. From the very first weeks of the 2024–2025 school year, Student engaged in escalating and violent behaviors: hitting, kicking, scratching, biting, throwing furniture, threatening to shoot staff, and eloping from class. By the time of the hearing, he had received 18 days of suspension. Staff members, including the school principal, suffered documented physical injuries — one resulting in a three-inch scar, another in a facial laceration.

Corona-Norco convened multiple manifestation determination meetings throughout the fall semester and repeatedly revised Student's behavior intervention plan, adding transition warnings, coping strategies, token economies, and reduced demands. Despite these efforts and the presence of a behavior aide and school psychologist, the behaviors continued to escalate. In November 2024, the district's IEP team offered a change of placement to the intensive intervention program at Sierra Vista Elementary School — a specialized special day class with a small student-to-adult ratio, embedded counseling, and staff trained in crisis prevention and behavioral intervention. Parents refused consent, preferring a special day class at Foothill Elementary. The district filed for an expedited due process hearing in December 2024 to authorize the placement change.

What the ALJ Found

Because the district prevailed on both issues, this section explains the ALJ's key findings in favor of the district.

The ALJ found that maintaining Student's placement at Foothill Elementary was substantially likely to result in injury to Student or others. The evidence showed a pattern of unpredictable, violent aggression — including throwing chairs over his head, stabbing his behavior aide with a pencil, attacking the principal and assistant principal, punching a peer in the head, and attempting to hit staff with a wooden rod. Crucially, actual injury had already occurred — the principal sustained a bleeding facial wound and a permanent scar — and no injury is actually required under the law; the "substantial likelihood" standard only requires evidence of significant risk. Parents did not dispute that the behaviors occurred, only that staff were not properly trained to handle them. The ALJ found this insufficient to rebut the district's evidence.

On the second issue, the ALJ found that the intensive intervention program at Sierra Vista was an appropriate interim alternative educational setting. The program featured a maximum of ten students per classroom (grades 1–3), four trained paraprofessionals plus a credentialed special education teacher, individual and group counseling, an on-site psychologist, a dedicated calming room with sensory tools, and staff certified by the Crisis Prevention Institute. The program uses grade-level curriculum, meaning Student could continue to access the general education curriculum and work toward his IEP goals. The ALJ found no evidence that a special day class at Foothill Elementary could meet Student's behavioral needs, as that class was designed for students functioning below grade level — not for students with serious behavioral challenges.

What Was Ordered

1. Corona-Norco is authorized to place Student in the intensive intervention program at Sierra Vista Elementary School as an interim alternative educational setting for not more than 45 school days from the date of the order (January 28, 2025).

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Districts can initiate due process hearings too — not just parents. Most parents think of due process as something they file against a district. But under the IDEA, a district can also file an expedited hearing to move a student with disabilities to a different placement when it believes keeping the student in the current placement poses a substantial risk of injury. Parents should understand that if their child has serious behavioral incidents, the district may seek legal authority to change placement even without parental consent.

2. You don't have to agree with a placement change, but you need strong counter-evidence. Parents in this case preferred a special day class at their child's current school, but the ALJ found that preference was not supported by evidence that it would address Student's behavioral needs. If you oppose a district's proposed placement, be prepared to present specific, concrete reasons why the alternative you prefer is better suited to your child's needs — not just a general preference.

3. Manifestation determinations don't prevent a placement change for safety reasons. Even though every disciplinary incident was found to be a manifestation of Student's disability (meaning the district could not expel him), the district was still legally permitted to seek an interim alternative placement based on the risk of injury. A finding that behavior is disability-related does not automatically mean the student must remain in the current placement.

4. An interim alternative placement must still provide FAPE. The law requires that even a temporary emergency placement allow the student to access the general education curriculum and make progress toward IEP goals. Parents can — and should — scrutinize whether a proposed interim placement actually has qualified staff, appropriate services, and the ability to implement the child's IEP before agreeing or consenting to any such change.