California OAH special education order · August 19, 2025
Order Denying Motion for Stay Put
OAH Case No. 2025080379 · ALJ Jennifer Kelly
OAH denied Student's stay-put motion because Los Banos Unified agreed it would keep implementing her CALO placement and had not moved to graduate or exit her, so no actual dispute existed.
Summary
Student asked OAH for a stay-put order keeping her at Change Academy at the Lake of the Ozarks (CALO). She worried Los Banos Unified would issue her a diploma on a projected August 15, 2025 graduation date discussed at an April 3, 2025 IEP meeting, which would end her special education rights. Los Banos Unified opposed. It said it had made no changes to her program, had not exited her from special education, and would keep implementing the April 3, 2025 IEP at CALO. OAH found no actual dispute because Student did not claim the district was failing to implement the placement or had given prior written notice to end it, so it denied the motion without prejudice to a new request if a dispute arises.
Why it matters
A stay-put request needs an actual dispute, such as non-implementation or prior written notice of a change. A district's written promise to keep the current placement can defeat the motion. Families worried about an upcoming graduation or exit should be ready to refile with specifics if the district acts.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j)
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.518(a)
- Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (d)
- Thomas v. Cincinnati Bd. of Educ. (6th Cir. 1990) 918 F.2d 618
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3042, subd. (a)
Topics
Full text of the order
Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.
BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE MATTER OF:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
LOS BANOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2025080379
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR STAY PUT
AUGUST 19, 2025
On August 8, 2025, Parents on behalf of Student filed a due process hearing request with the Office of Administrative Hearings, called OAH, naming Los Banos Unified School District, called Los Banos Unified. On August 8, 2025, Student filed a motion for stay put seeking continued placement of her current program at Change Academy at the Lake of the Ozarks, referred to as CALO. On August 13, 2025, Los Banos filed an opposition to Student’s stay-put motion and argued an order for stay put is not necessary because the last agreed upon and implemented program at CALO is not disputed by the parties, and is being implemented by Los Banos Unified.
Until due process hearing procedures are complete, a special education student is entitled to remain in his or her current educational placement, unless the parties agree otherwise. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(j); 34 C.F.R. § 300.518(a) (2006); Ed. Code, § 56505 subd. (d).)
This is referred to as stay put. For purposes of stay put, the current educational placement is typically the last agreed upon and implemented individualized educational program, called IEP, placement prior to the dispute arising. (Thomas v. Cincinnati Bd. of Educ. (6th Cir. 1990) 918 F.2d 618, 625.) In California, specific educational placement is defined as the unique combination of facilities, personnel, location or equipment necessary to provide instructional services to an individual with exceptional needs, as specified in the IEP. (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 5, § 3042, subd. (a).)
Student contends a dispute exists regarding her stay-put placement because on April 3, 2025, an individualized education program, called, IEP team reviewed Student’s progress towards graduation requirements and discussed a projected high school graduation date of August 15, 2025. Student argues a stay put order is required to prevent Los Banos Unified from issuing Student a high school diploma, thereby terminating her right to special education and services.
Los Banos Unified represents it will continue to implement Student’s program at CALO. Los Banos Unified asserts it has not made any changes to Student’s educational program through the IEP process or through any unilateral decision about Student’s special education and related services, including exiting Student from special education on August 15, 2025. Los Banos Unified represents it will continue to implement Student’s last agreed upon and implemented IEP dated April 3, 2025.
Student does not allege Los Banos Unified is not implementing her placement at CALO, or that Los Banos Unified has provided Student prior written notice to discontinue her placement at CALO. Therefore, an actual dispute does not exist about Student’s stay-put placement pending the completion of this due process matter. If a dispute does arise during the pendency of this matter, Student may file a request for stay put with more specificity as to the nature of the dispute and the terms of stay put.
Accordingly, the motion for stay put is denied.
ORDER
Student’s motion for stay put is denied.
Jennifer Kelly Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings