District Court Reversed on IDEA Standard

als with disabilities education act's primary goal is "to in early september 2004, the district sent parents a third in eighth grade, the district modified k.l.'s individualized with the court of appeals for the first circuit that there is no they were unilaterally enrolling k.l. in landmark school for and tenth grades. see id. at *4 ("parents are correct that the in algebra, but she also participated in athletics and enjoyed work limited to three hours per night. the district expressly following new free appropriate public education standard tionary" theories by their very nature are foreclosed by the error, even when the district court based those findings on an ing," and reverse the district court. uitous free appropriate public education standard set forth in for publication 614(a)(5). definition of "transition services," or elsewhere, that a dis- a ninth grade individualized educational program with lofty disabilities and the families of such children access to a free that "the implementation of this act has been impeded by low not the same student" after she returned and that she was less for the reasons discussed, we conclude that the district tive procedures and remedies, exhaustion of those remedies is 971j. l. v. mercer island school district per week of specially designed instruction in reading, writing, reading objectives and any of her writing objectives. never- ming "is aimed at attending a community or technical college."3 methodology and lack of specified minutes of instruction. we with accommodations. the district court's analysis was clearly infected by j. l.; m. l.; k. l., their minor tion of k.l.'s sporadic lack of motivation and propensity to was not cognizant of the 1990 amendment was its footnote bursement for tuition and related expenses for tenth and elev- get frustrated on tests and simply give up. k.l's individual- ics and study skills. k.l.'s accommodations basically stayed ized educational program team met shortly thereafter to dis- absence. trict's proposal to evaluate. parents stated that they wanted to we first examine the district court's reliance on congress' change the free appropriate public education standard. to tive tests. parents put the district on notice that they had an fied instructions, alternate exam methods, reduced assign- the district's june 2003 reevaluation primarily because of study, an "a-" in general education science, a "pass" in gen- diagnosed with learning disabilities in first grade.2 states satisfy the individuals with disabilities education ommended keeping most of k.l.'s ninth grade individualized ate.' we give `due weight' to the state administrative proceed- vidualized educational program provided for 1215 minutes administrative record." douglas county, 552 f.3d at 793. "a educational program and provided 750 minutes per week of make sure each evaluation was necessary and avoid duplica- "educational benefit" standard set forth in rowley and reiter- receive educational benefits?" id. (footnotes omitted). "if access meaningful," confer at least "some educational benefit" on disabled individualized educational program. the doctors agreed with act's procedures reasonably calculated to enable the child to instance the alj's determination that the district provided a average, "you were the odd one out" and "didn't fit in." ment), continuing and adult education, adult k.l. is a student of average intelligence that the district again in 2004. see pub. l. no. 108-446, 118 stat. 2647 (2004) (codified k.l.'s special education at the district had been inadequate for us to conclude that congress sought to supersede the ubiq- program objectives, however, she did not meet two of her of the child . . . that focuses on the child's courses of study 1202, 1207 (9th cir. 2008) (quoting ojai unified sch. dist. k.l. with specially designed instruction in reading, writing 957j. l. v. mercer island school district classmates. in response, k.l.'s language arts teacher changed public education standard, the most logical way to do so the individuals with disabilities education act "evolved" would have been to amend the free appropriate public educa- landmark school was appropriate. the alj awarded reim- district failed to provide k.l. with a free appropriate public education, change." (internal quotation marks omitted)). these vague school because "my resource room teacher does not let me form for children's hospital to evaluate k.l. parents did not cuss the district's reevaluation. a few days later, k.l.'s received a written description of the evaluation procedures to 961j. l. v. mercer island school district � 10, 97 stat. at 1367. congress did not require states to sup- age 14 or younger) . . . ." id. � 101(e)(1), 104 stat. at 1104. ing for states "to assist in the transitional process to postse- ents and dr. hill. at the actual individualized educational writing, mathematics, study skills and transitions. k.l.'s read- standardized test results showed. this was due to a combina- 11 k.l.'s total expenses were $46,479.90 for tenth conferred a "meaningful educational benefit" in light sion construing the act and the scope of a free appropriate islative scheme that any citation to pre-1997 case howard c. powers, seattle, washington, for the plaintiffs- porting the proposition that we should consider the legislative the earliest time the meeting could be scheduled due to the not receive a free appropriate public education in those minor and whether the programs developed for her received a "b" in special education language arts, a "b+" in 965j. l. v. mercer island school district results in the denial of a free appropriate public education. a because the district court's awards of reimbursement, related construction, and evolutionary arguments are by no means committed procedural violations of the individuals with dis- � 1400(d)(1)(a). "[a] state must comply both procedurally accommodations to which she has been given access. here, the same. halfway through eighth grade, in january 2003, simply articulates the importance of teacher training, baisch, dionne & rorick, seattle, washington, for the definition of a free appropriate public education, see id. � 672, in late august, parents denied consent to the independent vided previous accommodations as well as access to teacher ferent judge on remand. k.l. with educational benefit as required by rowley. parents told the district that they were displeased with k.l.'s in the interest of preserving the family's privacy because k.l. was a [6] in re-enacting the free appropriate public education def- 1048 (9th cir. 2002); see also 20 u.s.c. � 1415(i)(2)(a). first instance, we need not remand the procedural compliance objectives such as exploring career options, meeting success- 199, 97 stat. 1357 (1983). congress did not alter the defini- private residential school in massachusetts exclusively for problem-solving skills. the individualized educational pro- keep rowley intact. first, congress did not change the defini- tion of a free appropriate public education in any material support its newly-extrapolated free appropriate public educa- k.l.'s ninth grade homework, sometimes even in k.l.'s [5] we conclude that the district court misinterpreted con- 1992)). assistant. been high and though at times she is frustrated or afraid, she to adopt that interpretation when it re-enacts a statute without the individualized educational program team convened for the western district of washington 962 j. l. v. mercer island school district with the district to fund landmark school. in fact, plaintiffs had not even federal standards [under the idea] are also enforceable in amendment. this explains the district court's reliance on what james j. dionne, lisa m. worthington-brown, lynette m. 111 stat. at 84. trict court's newfound standard. pensatory education). both parties sought district court review the district's email but chose not to respond. sometime there- such as access to books on tape, access to a peer note taker at 20 u.s.c. �� 1400-1491). plaintiffs' claims are governed by the 1997 the program based on the recommendations of parents and dr. request, her individualized educational program team returned son, the alj did not address transition services. nevertheless, services was appropriate to the specific services provided. claim, and reverse the district court. records, teacher reports and guidance team reviews. parents [8] the district argues that plaintiffs failed to exhaust their meet the standards of the state educational agency, that the education for all handicapped children act was because k.l. needed an intensive approach to remedy her dis- mark school.6 individualized educational program that she followed in sixth later in march to discuss the district's proposed program for 967j. l. v. mercer island school district "b+" in general education biology and an "a" in general edu- free appropriate public education as required by rowley. based upon the individual student's needs, taking supreme court. see arlington cent. sch. dist. bd. of educ. v. that k.l. had made an average of at least one year's progress �� 1400-1491.1 lishing substantive requirements." id. at 206. the court con- ualized education program required under section district did not commit a procedural violation of the individu- even if the district did commit a procedural violation by review. nevertheless, complete de novo review `is inappropri- home visiting her family on vacation. the independent educa- cial education and related services . . . ." see 20 u.s.c. k.l.'s individualized educational program lists her supple- has managed to tackle the projects with support." unbe- ings." douglas county, 552 f.3d at 793 (citations omitted). request pursuant to 20 u.s.c. � 1415(f), seeking reimburse- inition of a free appropriate public education, see id. � 101, program meeting, the district presented a proposal with sev- in 959j. l. v. mercer island school district 1990 individuals with disabilities education act amendment. any such claims she may have asserted that are not deter- education act existed before 1997. vacation of that determination also vacates those awards. dren's hospital. the individualized educational program pro- an appropriate placement and to fashion relief. employment, continuing education, or adult services." id. 111 stat. at 38-42, congress did not indicate disapproval with son central school district v. rowley, 458 u.s. 176 (1982). education act amendment and held that k.l. was denied a public education based on the district's failure to supply congress amended the individuals with disabilities education act ized educational program meeting to address parents' peers. at the conclusion of the meeting, parents informed the with disabilities education act requires school districts to provide dis- congress found that "[i]mproving educational results for chil- [11] in a similar vein, the district argues that the district is such a significant departure from the previous leg- plied with the procedures set forth in the act? and second, is bursement by the cost of seven months of enrollment at land- year. see jg v. douglas county sch. dist., 552 f.3d 786, 795 enacted the education for all handicapped children act, 3628033, at *6 (w.d. wash. dec. 8, 2006). the district court 3 and concluded that the district provided a free appropriate as overruling rowley. this court has continued to and third grades, the district educated k.l. in several general ers needed flexibility in teaching methodologies because there tion). plaintiffs sought review from the united states district sufficiency (i.e., independent living) and her desired goal of some confusion exists in this circuit regarding whether the individuals education act so that the court can consider the matter in the was to increase written expression skills in a more indepen- program proposal and discuss the recommendations of par- remanded. will be discussed at a later meeting"). not only did parents although the district court's order is ambiguous, the dis- education standard. see forest grove sch. dist. v. t.a., 129 smith, 15 f.3d at 1526. under the circumstances of this case, 966 j. l. v. mercer island school district congress amended the individuals with disabilities educa- cluded that the program was effective. at the end of seventh indicating "[a] 1995 (pre-idea) case." mercer island, 2006 which contained the following definition of a "free appropri- everyone involved in the individualized educational team-- court in rowley.10 cir. 2005)). "state standards that are not inconsistent with public education in board of education of the hendrick hud- pub. l. no. 98-199, 97 stat. 1357. congress introduced the into account the student's preferences and interests, 2004. there is no evidence supporting the district court's 974 j. l. v. mercer island school district mark school after finding that parents unreasonably delayed judicial inquiry is complete, except in rare and exceptional eral education classes because the district continued to dr. hill evaluated k.l. in early july 2004. dr. hill found inappropriate recommendations for instructional strategies iv to-one or one-to-two teacher to student ratio, although k.l.'s [special education] services." 20 u.s.c. � 1414(d)(1)(a)(vi) test to determine whether a state has provided a free appropri- amendments, congress presumably was aware of rowley and educational program meeting for mid-september, which was educational program is written before the provision of any be conducted, the purpose of any testing and each evaluation ing that congress sought to supersede rowley or otherwise v 960 j. l. v. mercer island school district rejected parents' request to include the landmark school cur- district court's omission of any discussion of the nexus pub. l. no. 94-142, � 4, 89 stat. 773, 775 (1975) (codified as court erred in concluding that the district committed a proce- changing the free appropriate public education standard: "equality of opportunity, full participation, indepen- marsha j. pechman, district judge, presiding and writing difficulties. uals with disabilities." id. � 101(c)(1), 111 stat. at 38. j.l. v. mercer island sch. dist., no. c06-494p, 2006 wl this appeal stems from plaintiffs' allegation that defendant and scheduling, and use of a calculator and literacy software. 8 it thought was a new definition of "transition services" in school in massachusetts. ously infringes the parents' opportunity to participate in the in addition to the "transition services" definition, the dis- 972 j. l. v. mercer island school district (9th cir. 2008) (discussing equitable reductions). the alj 973j. l. v. mercer island school district (such as participation in advanced-placement courses or a which was not "about ten years ago." see pub. l. no. 101- k.l. with a free appropriate public education as required by with her language arts class. k.l. considered her language did not like being singled out to give an answer in front of her with disabilities education act by failing to specifying min- tional policy and teaching method is most effective for learning-disabled k.l.'s claims, we remand this case to allow k.l. to pursue ized educational program did not list the amount of services, drafted a reevaluation report dated march 2005. the reevalua- mathematics, an "a-" in special education structured study, a out federal funding conditions "unambiguously" so that states continues to set the free appropriate public education stan- in early august 2004, parents informed the district that united states court of appeals concluding that the district committed a procedural violation 958 j. l. v. mercer island school district to develop a proposal or response to a parent proposal that ninth grades. see parents of student w v. puyallup sch. dist., thereafter. to an illness. one of k.l.'s teachers believed that k.l. "was including more intensive reading instruction. no representa- ratory meeting. see 34 c.f.r. 300.501(b)(3) (stating that an two reading objectives, one mathematics objective and one district committed procedural violations of the individuals education" based on the district court's holding that k.l. did receive a free appropriate public education in eighth, ninth law on special education is suspect. twelfth grade. [4] regardless of the district court's reasoning, we agree lyzed plaintiffs' claims using the free appropriate public edu- 963j. l. v. mercer island school district k.l.'s intelligence quotient ("iq") revealed that she was in hospital. parents declined the district's offer. administrative complaint or due process hearing. for this rea- tive action, we do not employ a highly deferential standard of the idea is not simply about "access;" it is cluded that the district provided a free appropriate public condary education, vocational training, competitive *4 (emphasis added). of course, the education for all handi- rowley, see generally pub. l. no. 105-17, 111 stat. 37. con- congressional findings added in the 1997 individuals with a few days later, the district sent parents another consent tional benefits. hellgate, 541 f.3d at 1208 (quoting amanda changed the free appropriate public education standard. first, dered on the quintessential "battle of the experts" concerning what educa- "evolution" of a statute when determining congress' intent. (1998). "the amount of time to be committed to each of the however, they admit that k.l. never communicated this aspiration to any- and that is for good reason. the rowley standard with disabilities education act that resulted in the denial of mercer island school district ("district") failed to provide repeals by implication are not favored" (citations and internal of the above accommodations. because the individualized these requirements are met, the state has complied with the of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and eco- gress enacted the same definition of a free appropriate public the "educational benefit" standard set forth by the supreme expense to be performed by dr. deborah hill. see 20 u.s.c. relax" and "i don't like the pressure to be an a student." k.l. for k.l. for various reasons, most notably because the land- show that the parents' ability to participate in the individual- is a "formal, written offer [that] creates a clear record that will ("children's hospital"). see 20 u.s.c. � 1414(a)(2). parents (quoting m.l. v. fed. way sch. dist., 394 f.3d 634, 644 (9th that we reverse the district court's conclusion that the district ninth grade education and were "looking at other options." specific service, and (2) stated in a manner that is clear to all one at the district. education english foundations, an "a-" in special education plausible way to read the definition of "transition services" as and completely segregated her from her typically-developing students. the district is entitled to deference in deciding what program- plaintiffs-appellees, d.c. no. provided k.l. with accommodations. the district also pro- tion definition itself. second, congress did not indicate in its i gress sought to supersede the "educational benefit" standard and special education services. the district first rejected dr. vided most of the same accommodations as k.l.'s ninth grade id. � 101(d), 104 stat. at 1103-04. phrases refer to the same standard. school districts must, to "make such a teaching methodology for some students, for other students focused on "transition services, . . . an outcome- act's substantive requirements by providing a disabled child school's teaching methodology. education mathematics, an "a" in special education structured court for the western district of washington. see 20 u.s.c. tenth grade. they requested tuition reimbursement from the mentary aids, services and program modifications. these do much to eliminate troublesome factual disputes." union law are reviewed de novo, unless the mixed question is pri- with a free appropriate public education. in 1975, congress skills on grade-level materials. k.l.'s written language goal appropriate public education. we remand to the district court appeal from the united states district court isfaction with k.l.'s education. cation "educational benefit" standard interpreted by the on remand, the alj concluded that k.l.'s placement at district. has been superseded, and accordingly, vacate its orders.11 much as possible. one doctor even opined that there was no was not a single methodology that would always be effective. tion of the education for all handicapped children act of evaluation consent form at the end of september. in early vided k.l. with specially designed instruction (i.e., "special cally" and that if a student did not receive a 4.0 grade point administrative findings." id. the district court exercised federal question jurisdiction finding of fact is clearly erroneous when the evidence in the district's failure to specify the amount of services she was to have been provided at public expense, under public tial changes regarding transition services. first, congress case manager personally believed that this environment would objectives. based on k.l.'s great progress in eighth grade second, congress amended the definition of "transition ser- here, plaintiffs fail to show how k.l. was prejudiced by the daughter, no. 07-35716 individuals with disabilities education act because they filed their due disclosed their interest in landmark school to the district at that point in in seventh grade, k.l. continued with largely the same oriented process, which promotes movement from argued and submitted required." robb v. bethel sch. dist. # 403, 308 f.3d 1047, disabilities education act amendment and the definition of indeed, the record suggests that even though the individual- individualized educational program with the addition of reports, the district conducted its own reevaluation and engineered by an expert in reading who works at children's trict court also relied on three new congressional findings to generally pub. l. no. 99-457, 100 stat. 1145. congress for second k.l. with a free appropriate public education pursuant to the 192. phrased another way, states must "confer some educa- shortly after ninth grade concluded, in june 2004, the dis- determined that she was still eligible for special education. appellees. 1 a free appropriate public education. the parties' arguments throughout this litigation have routinely bor- specifying teaching methodologies in k.l.'s individualized get range sch. dist. no. 23, 960 f.2d 1479, 1483 (9th cir. ment for k.l.'s landmark school tuition and expenses. the knownst to anyone at the district, mother completed much of court erred in holding that the definition of a free appropriate obligations imposed by congress and the courts can require however, because of the equivocal nature of the district that they could not provide knowledgeable consent until they marily factual." id. modifications. presumably, k.l. had unlimited access to each scheme was the education for [sic] handicapped children act program objectives, she failed to meet all writing objectives, on the application form, parents indicated that they were negotiating ment from school to post-school activities, including disputed legal standards. the district court held that the dis- see id. � 602, 111 stat. to review the alj's determination that the district provided we conclude that the amount of time to be devoted to k.l's procedural violation denies a free appropriate public educa- appropriate phonological awareness skills. the doctors found cated that they would only allow the district to review k.l.'s primary problem was with the teaching style utilized school. semi-colons and updated the internal section reference. see id. � 602, 111 978 j. l. v. mercer island school district her 2005 individualized educational program states that she icy and charged emotions, the court established a two-part 2493-94. on remand, the district court must review in the first cation absent the attainment of transition goals. third, and mathematics. the district provided k.l. with accommo- 10 977j. l. v. mercer island school district discuss each contention in turn. (c) include an appropriate preschool, elementary, or 969j. l. v. mercer island school district plain meaning interpretation is a "cardinal canon" of statutory individualized educational program, a school district must gram provided the same accommodations as k.l.'s ninth education classes upon determining that she would benefit including k.l.'s parents--knew of the amounts. gram. we further hold that any procedural violation that may trict's determination and the alj's finding that k.l.'s teach- grade, $50,681.24 for eleventh grade and $54,838.54 for her to special education mathematics and provided her with ming is appropriate as a matter of educational policy. see rowley, 458 nology for spelling. the individualized educational program an active (and sometimes distractive) social life. unfortu- theless, k.l.'s individualized educational program team dations in her general education classes including peers to 2003. k.l.'s iq showed improvement in mathematics and nomic self-sufficiency," the district court relied on three new specific number of minutes to any of the above accommoda- we hold that the district did not commit a procedural viola- appropriate public education and in improving educational the second percentile of eighth graders. although k.l. made rowley. see branch v. smith, 538 u.s. 254, 273 (2003) (stat- the district argues that the district court failed to appreciate vi alj's "thorough and careful" administrative findings. see jg v. douglas late jurisdiction under 28 u.s.c. � 1291. we hold that rowley students. see rowley, 458 u.s. at 192, 200. for ease of discussion, we in english foundations. k.l.'s case manager asked mother if instructed the alj that under the new standard, k.l. did not study skills objective. at the end of eighth grade, k.l. not receive a free appropriate public education in eighth and benefit" standard or indicate that it sought to supersede row- k.l.'s individualized educational program still functions as a in k.l.'s mainstreamed general education classes, the district "competitive employment." id. � 306, 100 stat. at 1163. mark school curriculum did not target k.l.'s deficient areas district that k.l. would not return to mercer island high at 1357, or indicate its disapproval with rowley, see generally tional evaluation reports from children's hospital over- education") in reading and writing in a "resource room" for municipal washington corporation, opinion id. at 197 n.21, 200. "congress did not impose upon the later in june 2004, parents sent the district a letter request- opinion by judge beezer of her mathematics and study skills individualized educational on the same day, parents applied to landmark school, a amended in 1990. the district suggests that this explains the trict court did not realize that the individuals with disabilities made among appropriate instructional methods. 964 j. l. v. mercer island school district ley. in fact, congress did not even mention rowley. no. 3, 31 f.3d 1489, 1496 (9th cir. 1994) (discussing com- [7] we hold that the district court erred in declaring rowley mathematics, k.l. was placed in a ninth grade algebra class cation art. district attempted once more, in august 2005, to appease par- k.l. took a standardized test of basic skills and scored in tual disputes" because it still lists k.l.'s accommodations and eral changes that followed dr. hill's recommendations, be devoted to each of k.l.'s services in her individualized educational program, which meant keeping her in several gen- 1103, 1141-42 (1990). congress again did not change the def- supervision and direction, and without charge, (b) would be necessary to make such access meaningful." id. at post-school adult living objectives, and, when appro- of an administrative or judicial interpretation of a statute and no more." id. at 207. ated in this opinion. we deny the district's request for a dif- tional benefit upon the handicapped child." id. at 200. tion of the individuals with disabilities education act by not newly required individualized educational programs to con- because it is not clear whether our rulings dispose of all of appropriate transition services. we hold that the district court though congress added numerous new findings, see id. � 101, local agencies in educating children with disabilities, but con- lt. t.b. ex rel. n.b. v. warwick sch. comm., 361 f.3d 80, 83 reversed in part, vacated in part and j. v. clark cty. sch. dist., 267 f.3d 877, 892 (9th cir. 2001)). mitted." hellgate, 541 f.3d at 1207 (internal quotation marks believe that mainstreaming was appropriate for k.l. ensure that all children with disabilities have available to � 1415(i)(2)(a). recommendations suggested by dr. hill and all made by chil- motivated. k.l. turned in only half of her algebra homework 953j. l. v. mercer island school district at the end of ninth grade, k.l. received a "b-" in special the district argues that the district court erred in conclud- notes, not being called on without warning, extra time to structured study, an "a" in general education science, an "a" [10] the district next argues that the district court erred in not just a single "right" choice.5 congress did not express disagreement with the "educational ences, the development of employment and other specifying a teaching methodology in k.l.'s individualized 104 stat. at 1103-05, or indicate disapproval with the rowley v. cv-06-00494-mjp its renowned "educational benefit" free appropriate public sch. dist. v. smith, 15 f.3d 1519, 1526 (9th cir. 1994). in an procedures." n.b. v. hellgate elementary sch. dist., 541 f.3d services, it is not reasonable to expect the school district to counsel after receiving the independent educational evaluation formulation process, the district changed various aspects of with disabilities education act, it would seem that "evolu- over time to eventually supercede rowley in 1997. neither 253-54 (1992); rubin v. united states, 449 u.s. 424, 430 for social and academic purposes. to "level the playing field" "clear record that will do much to eliminate troublesome fac- tion. dr. hill recommended landmark school because of its tionally, for legislation enacted pursuant to the spending trict's "pre-meeting meeting," lack of a specified teaching have occurred did not deny k.l. a free appropriate public reimbursement. see 20 u.s.c. � 1412(a)(10)(c)(i) (stating gram's transition statement indicated that k.l.'s program- the average range at the low end. in accordance with k.l.'s dissatisfaction with the proposed program. parents received research on proven methods of teaching and learning for chil- trict held an individualized educational program meeting and tion act in 1997, the effect of which is disputed in the present definition of "transition services," originally added in the capped children act ceased to exist in 1990 when it was "mother" and "father." post-secondary education represents a failure to confer the 956 j. l. v. mercer island school district 9 county sch. dist., 552 f.3d 786, 793 (9th cir. 2008). specially designed instruction in reading, writing, mathemat- that k.l. was generally average and had an iq of 101. k.l. appeal followed. progress on all of her eighth grade individualized educational remarks. first, the district court stated that "[i]t is important k.l. completed tenth, eleventh and twelfth grades at land- conducted by children's hospital regional medical center 1997 amendments, as have several [other] circuits. we hold that the district did not violate the individuals tion if it results in the loss of an educational opportunity, seri- son central school district v. rowley, 458 u.s. 176 (1982), and general education algebra. � 101(c)(3), 111 stat. 37, 39 (1997). second, congress found free appropriate public education standard, see generally pub. quotation marks omitted)). concluding that it predetermined k.l.'s individualized educa- stantive compliance with the individuals with disabilities vii tant. k.l.'s grade point average was a 3.49, which was higher although we remand to the district court the issue of sub- hill because she was not on the district's approved list of 976 j. l. v. mercer island school district ditions such funding on compliance with certain goals and clusion that congress abrogated sub silentio the supreme the court noted that "congress was rather sketchy in estab- learning-disabled students.4 the proper standard to determine whether a dis- 1997, i.e., "about ten years" before the district court's 2006 receive. they do not allege that she was denied an educational grades. however, the alj equitably reduced tenth grade reim- their consent for an independent educational evaluation to be a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been com- riculum in the program. the district also declined to name a k.l. returned to the district for her sixth grade education [2] in 1982, the supreme court rendered its seminal deci- mercer island, 2006 wl 3628033, at *4 (citations omitted). generally thought that her peers were "competitive academi- mathematics and study skills. the program included transition whelmingly agreed with the district's proposed december 10, 2008--seattle, washington whether the district appropriately mainstreamed k.l. and provided her grade after her individualized educational program team con- the individuals with disabilities education act, 20 u.s.c. 1975, this act has been successful in ensuring children with against k.l.'s grades and the use of additional computer tech- 7 after, mother told k.l.'s case manager at the district that ents. the district sent parents a letter offering a program amendment. on remand, the district court may revisit these issues in light special education and related services which (a) over the instant case under 28 u.s.c. � 1331. we have appel- should be educated with her typically-developing peers as them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes spe- washington could provide k.l. with an appropriate educa- process hearing request before the 2004 act's effective date of july 1, predict the amount of time the student will actually use the utes per week of specially designed instruction in reading, to enable those students to receive an appropriate education." eral education art and a "pass" in general education spanish. supreme court in board of education of the hendrick hud- special students. for fourth and fifth grades, parents paid for thought that k.l. "had a very successful year, her grades have classroom participation and self-confidence. in her part of the application, k.l. to assist courts in this labyrinth of experts, educational pol- of the individuals with disabilities education act by not expenses and attorneys' fees were premised on its determination that the dural violation by not specifying the minutes of instruction to ply transition services. see id. order. the second remark demonstrating that the district court 1982--it would have expressed a clear intent to do so. dard. we vacate the district court's orders except to the extent respect. if congress desired to change the free appropriate lacked subject matter jurisdiction to consider this unexhausted preparatory activities that public agency personnel engage in vocational education program)." id. � 614(d)(1)(a)(vii)(i), opinion focused on transition services: tion report concluded that k.l. exhibited age-appropriate pho- k.l. would be more comfortable in a class with either a one- 951 district court did not impose the alj's equitable reduction. the district court held that k.l. was denied a free appropriate who are involved." 64 fed. reg. 12,479. k.l. to attend a private school serving children with reading the district's reevaluation of k.l. prior to her tenth grade from an education alongside her typically-developing peers (1st cir. 2004). 955j. l. v. mercer island school district stat. at 44. 968 j. l. v. mercer island school district l. no. 101-476, 104 stat. 1103. congress made two substan- (1981) ("when we find the terms of a statute unambiguous, record supports the finding but the reviewing court is left with "transition services," the district court concluded that con- finding that the district made program decisions at this prepa- specify "the anticipated frequency, location, and duration of focus on improving phonological awareness skills. sition services. "[w]hen a plaintiff has alleged injuries that cluded that states must provide a "basic floor of opportunity" federal court." id. at 1208 (quoting w.g. v. bd. of trs. of tar- see pub. l. no. 105-17, 111 stat. 37 (1997). even education for all intents and purposes.8 congress' next amendment came in 1990 when the act's 954 j. l. v. mercer island school district ized educational program formulation process was harmed. respond to the district before k.l. left to attend landmark 1212-13. as we read the supreme court's decision in rowley, all three plaintiffs moved out of the district prior to k.l.'s twelfth grade year. individualized educational program meeting "does not include refer to this standard as the "educational benefit" standard. dren with disabilities." id. � 101(c)(4), 111 stat. at 39. third, standard that courts have followed vis-�-vis rowley since plaintiffs nor the district court have pointed to authority sup- issues because the district court's analysis did not turn on any claim that the district committed a procedural violation of the eleventh grade. no representatives from landmark school tional consultant and began researching private schools for did not return the consent form. a few days later, the district sent a letter to parents seeking utes of instruction in k.l.'s individualized educational pro- we do not interpret this statutory language, which nately, in march 2004, k.l. missed three weeks of school due superseded rowley in the 1997 individuals with disabilities instead, three omissions suggest that congress intended to regression in numerical operations. one of k.l.'s teachers abilities education act that resulted in the denial of a free grated employment (including supported employ- tional program at the "pre-meeting meeting" in september the alj conducted the due process hearing over the course hill. see target range, 960 f.2d at 1484. we hold that the to note that the law regarding `disability education' underwent clude[ ] supported employment" as an acceptable form of with a difficulty level between special education mathematics refused to allow any communication between the doctors that attorney. the administrative law judge ("alj") ana- set forth in rowley. the district court's analysis yielded the can accept the funding "voluntarily and knowingly"). mercer island school district, a amended 4 tional vocational evaluation. during first semester of ninth grade at mercer island high amended at 20 u.s.c. � 1401(8)(d)). expressive language skills and spelled poorly. the report rec- "a-" in special education language arts, a "b+" in special failing to specify minutes, not every procedural violation grade, k.l. received an "a-" in special education language account the student's preferences and interests." this educational evaluation proposed by the district. parents indi- 2 would have access to these accommodations for 972 minutes the district court mostly upheld the alj's decision. the consuelo m. callahan, circuit judges. priate public education "educational benefit" standard--a individuals with disabilities education act in regards to tran- tions would make no sense because they are all access-based [w]hether the district's approach to [the student's] assignments, alternative exam methods, preferential seating various services to be provided must be (1) appropriate to the education, and reverse the district court. the individualized educational program developed through the the district court reversed and remanded. after examining comprehension and written language. dr. hill concluded that mother contacted the district regarding k.l.'s frustrations the district court stated: evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of landmark beezer, circuit judge: dent manner. the individualized educational program pro- in general education social studies and a "pass" as a teacher's "in idea cases, unlike other cases reviewing administra- ate public education": be too restrictive. mother declined this more reading intensive minor at all relevant times, we identify plaintiffs as "k.l.," "parents," arts (i.e., reading and writing), an "a" in special education we need not separately address the district court's analysis concerning this was the first time that parents had ever expressed dissat- arts class "boring," "stupid" and "too hard." specifically, k.l. defendant-appellant. enth grades based on the district court's holding that k.l. did at 44. congress newly required, "beginning at age 14, and at islander middle school. the district reevaluated k.l. and on procedural violations involving transition services, the dis- see 64 fed. reg. 12,552. we accord deference to the dis- failure of the ieps to focus on progressing k.l. toward self- nological awareness skills, scored in the low range of set of activities for a student, designed within an slightly changed the law regarding transition services to "in- 2005. general education chemistry and an "a" as a teacher's assis- indicated that she did not like attending mercer island high progress reports. the proposed program incorporated many educational challenges met the idea standard of cation act." see pub. l. no. 101-476, � 901(a)(1), 104 stat. recognizes that courts are ill-equipped to second- help her read and take notes, use of spelling software, modi- v. jackson, 4 f.3d 1467, 1469 (9th cir. 1993)). the individu- plaintiffs assert that they were actually interested in four-year colleges; program to parents. the proposed program provided 972 min- states any greater substantive educational standard than circumstances." (internal quotation marks omitted)). addi- litigation.7 of eleven days in september and october 2005. the alj con- trict failed to confer a free appropriate public education based trict is likely correct based on two of the district court's court's decision in rowley. cf. forest grove, 129 s. ct. at abled students with "educational benefit," "some educational benefit" or a "meaningful" educational benefit. see, e.g., hellgate, 541 f.3d at grade program with the addition of spelling not counting dren with disabilities is an essential element of our national ing goal was to increase reading decoding and comprehension tion standard requiring transition services targeted at "equality [1] "the idea provides federal funds to assist state and guess reasonable choices that school districts have ing, the district emailed parents to set up another individual- murphy, 548 u.s. 291, 296 (2006) (requiring congress to set educational programs, and reverse the district court. u.s. at 206. the district that sixth to eighth grade was the appropriate evaluators; however, the district approved dr. hill shortly and shall include instruction, community experi- secondary school education in the state involved, the district court ordered the district to pay for three years [9] the district next argues that the district court erred in individualized educational program, the district educated tion of a free appropriate public education, see id. � 2, 97 stat. congress found that "[s]ince the enactment and implementa- of rowley and its progeny. instructional level for k.l and that k.l. demonstrated age- on remand were to determine whether landmark school was her teaching style, thereby galvanizing k.l. to increase her expectations, and an insufficient focus on applying replicable benefit or missed an educational opportunity. nor do they dent living, and economic self-sufficiency" for the services, independent living, or community partici- ments and extra time for assignments. k.l. ended her sixth to disabled students, not a "potential-maximizing education." per year at the district. the doctors concluded that k.l. reimbursement if it offered a free appropriate public educa- ate public education. id. at 206-07. "first, has the state com- consent form. the district also scheduled an individualized tive from landmark school attended this meeting. the indi- als with disabilities education act in its "pre-meeting meet- congress merely changed "which" to "that," replaced commas with and her quiz and test grades decreased as a result. at k.l.'s replaced by the individuals with disabilities education act, ii october, parents finally consented. the independent educa- court's order, it is also possible that the district court thought review the alj's determination that the district provided school to post-school activities . . . taking into � 1415(b)(1)(a). parents indicated that they disagreed with of the idea's goals. its interpretation of the 1997 individuals with disabilities education act iii modifications consist of many access-based accommodations, per week. while a lump-sum number like this may not be ful dyslexic adults, developing self-advocacy and increasing educational programs. an individualized educational program of the alj's second decision. concept of "transition services" by authorizing federal fund- postsecondary education, vocational training, inte- graders in the district. by the end of ninth grade, k.l. met all plain. see conn. nat'l bank v. germain, 503 u.s. 249, superseded.9 proposal. the term "transition services" means a coordinated "ieps may not need to address the instructional method to be free appropriate public education. the district appeals. grade year with an "a-" in special education reading, an this factual background reflects our "particular deference" to the outcome-oriented process, which promotes move- public education set forth by the supreme court in rowley "we give particular deference to `thorough and careful' time. apply the rowley standard in cases following the 975j. l. v. mercer island school district pation. the coordinated set of activities shall be when determined appropriate for the individual, beginning at of landmark school and $160,687.50 in attorneys' fees. this would be examining k.l. and the district. parents asserted gress' intent. had congress sought to change the free appro- court simply appears to have been unaware of the 1990 meeting meeting" to develop an individualized educational "we review the district court's findings of fact for clear school, not only did k.l. earn good grades, such as an "a-" team rejected a landmark school placement as inappropriate congressional findings and the definition of "transition ser- 476, � 101(d), 104 stat. 1103, 1103-04 (1990). the district special education mathematics, an "a" in special education test, procedure, record or report used to formulate the dis- results for children with disabilities." pub. l. no. 105-17, wl 3628033, at *5. this footnote clearly shows that the dis- plaintiffs did not raise a transition services argument in their the district reevaluated k.l. after eighth grade in june could be redressed to any degree by the idea's administra- access to books on tape. the individualized educational pro- the term "free appropriate public education" means our holding is necessary to avoid the con- on june 6, 2005, plaintiffs filed a due process hearing actively participate in the individualized educational program because its experts recommended several effective programs, attended but the team reviewed k.l.'s landmark school tional evaluation took place in november when k.l. was a change about ten years ago. prior to that time, the statutory tain "a statement of the needed transition services for students another resource room period. parents hired a private educa- benefit contemplated by the idea."). the alj's only tasks large number of participants. district staff held a "pre- support its conclusion that the 1997 amendment dramatically clause, u.s. const. art. i, � 8, cl. 1, such as the individuals appropriate in other individualized educational programs, we observed that k.l. performed much better in class than her congress amended the act again in 1986. see pub. l. no. find it to be sufficient in this case. here, the allocation of a and word processing software, extended time for tests and that a school district is not responsible for private school presented a proposed tenth grade individualized educational respond to questions, no penalty for spelling errors and home- used because specificity about methodology is not necessary iep formulation process or causes a deprivation of educa- particular teaching methodology to be utilized by all teachers omitted). "questions of law and mixed questions of fact and mined by our opinion. on remand, the district court must between the 1990 amendment, 1997 amendment and the dis- priate, acquisition of daily living skills and func- defendant-appellant. abled student could not receive a free appropriate public edu- vices" to the following: awarded reimbursement for twelfth grade as "compensatory before: robert r. beezer, ronald m. gould and name was changed to the "individuals with disabilities edu- vices." k.l. ing an independent educational evaluation at the district's ability. ultimately, dr. hill determined, no public school in 5 970 j. l. v. mercer island school district the district sent parents a fourth independent educational updated annually, a statement of the transition service needs mathematics, a "c+" in general education history, a "b" in for the ninth circuit than both the median and mean grade point average for ninth individualized educational program team met and developed independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individ- beginning no later than age 16 and annually thereafter (and, and substantively with the idea." hellgate, 541 f.3d at 1207 ing that "absent a clearly expressed congressional intention, addition, we reverse the district court's conclusions that the scored in the borderline or extremely low range in written [3] congress amended the act in 1983. see pub. l. no. 98- of 1975 (eha) . . . ." mercer island, 2006 wl 3628033, at public education. the district court concluded that congress abled child has received a free appropriate public education is educational program. although school districts should specify amended january 13, 2010 100 stat. at 1146-47, or indicate disapproval with rowley, see inition in 1997, as congress had done in the act's three prior filed august 6, 2009 legislative findings cited by the district court are insufficient the day after the individualized educational program meet- education to k.l. as required by rowley and denied tuition 6 and (d) are provided in conformity with the individ- s. ct. 2484, 2492 (2009) ("congress is presumed to be aware 99-457, 100 stat. 1145 (1986). congress did not change the suggests that they should be available to her on demand. policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation,