Los Angeles Unified School District Accused by Parents of Children with Special Needs of Restricting Services and Withholding Information

Parents of students with special needs in the Los Angeles Unified School District are encountering resistance after the district’s attempt to oust members of a state panel advocating for enhanced services for these students.

The proposed Initiative to Enhance Special Education, which aims to elevate services for special needs students, was put forth by individuals from the Community Advisory Committee, comprising approximately 20 parents, educators, and community representatives. The committee members called for a boost in parental resources and a broader array of services for the students.

During the submission of the resolution by CAC members a year ago, the district reportedly made efforts to oust members advocating for special education improvements, as alleged by parents. While the attempt did not succeed, parents speculate that this action raises doubts about the district’s commitment and cooperation with them.

“Especially under Superintendent (Alberto) Carvalho, it seems they are clamping down on initiatives to empower families to voice their desires,” expressed Ariel Harman-Holmes, CAC chair and a parent of a child with special needs. “Previously, as a committee, we had great open communication with…[the district]…but now we merely receive pre-scripted responses that clearly indicate they are reiterating a very limited set of viewpoints.”

Carl Petersen, a father and member of CAC, shared his challenges in securing adequate support for his daughters within LAUSD’s special education programs.

Petersen’s spouse visited their daughter’s classroom while preparing for legal action against the school and was unsettled by the scene she witnessed.

“Essentially, the teacher segregated the special education students to the rear and said, ‘Here, entertain yourselves,’ while continuing the lesson without their inclusion. Just being in the same classroom doesn’t constitute inclusion.”

Members of the CAC contend that persistent obstacles have exacerbated and become more pronounced following the introduction of the resolution.

A spokesperson from LAUSD declined to address the parents’ claims, redirecting inquiries to the ADA compliance department and the district’s strategic plan for special education.

These accusations emerge within three years of a lawsuit filed against LAUSD by parents for failing to support students with disabilities during remote learning. An investigation by the U.S. Department of Education revealed that more than 66,000 students were impacted.

LAUSD implemented a compensatory plan the following year to offer additional services to students. Nevertheless, parents remain dissatisfied, with many reporting unfulfilled commitments of services pledged for their children.

Supporters highlight that resources have become increasingly scarce following these events, requiring parents to seek basic information through Public Records Act requests, as disclosed by Harman-Holmes.

Lisa Mosko, a former LAUSD parent and the founder of Speducational, an organization promoting parental advocacy, recounted an incident where a student was initially denied access to a program that she was eventually eligible for during a recent meeting.

After parents challenged the decision and enlisted legal representation, the student gained admission to the program.

“There’s a lot of misinformation routinely presented at IEP meetings,” Mosko remarked. “That parent had to resort to the due process to secure accessibility for her child. It ultimately boils down to cutting costs…knowing only a limited number of parents will pursue due process.”

This content is a contribution from both The 74 and the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism.