## Facts

- L.H., a child with Down syndrome, attended a public elementary school in an inclusive setting through second grade with supports under annual IDEA individualized education programs (IEPs).
- Although L.H. progressed, he did not keep pace with nondisabled peers; school staff proposed moving him to a Comprehensive Development Classroom (CDC) at a different school.
- Teachers reported disruptive behavior and responded by modifying L.H.’s curriculum and isolating him; behavior improved but academic progress toward IEP goals did not.
- For third grade (2013–2014), the school district placed L.H. in the CDC over parental objection.
- The CDC was a segregated special-education classroom with minimal interaction with nondisabled peers and used an online program (Unique Learning System) not tied to the state’s general-education standards; the record reflected low academic expectations and limited alignment to grade-level standards.
- L.H.’s parents rejected the CDC IEP, withdrew him, and enrolled him in a private Montessori school where he was fully educated with nondisabled peers, supported by a dedicated aide, and taught through individualized lessons embedded in a standardized curriculum linked to grade-level content.
- The parents sought relief under IDEA, including tuition reimbursement.
- An administrative law judge sided with the district; the federal district court found an IDEA LRE violation but denied reimbursement; both sides appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the district complied with IDEA by removing L.H. from a mainstream setting and placing him in a segregated CDC, consistent with FAPE and the least restrictive environment (LRE) requirement.
2. Whether the parents’ unilateral private Montessori placement was “appropriate” under IDEA such that tuition reimbursement was available, and if so, in what amount.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit affirmed that the CDC placement violated IDEA because it was more restrictive than necessary and failed to provide FAPE in the LRE.
- The court reversed the denial of reimbursement, holding the Montessori placement was appropriate under IDEA.
- The case was remanded to determine the proper amount of reimbursement and to enter judgment consistent with the opinion.

## Legal Principles

- IDEA requires a free appropriate public education (FAPE) for eligible children with disabilities, delivered in the least restrictive environment (LRE) to the maximum extent appropriate.
- LRE analysis asks (1) whether satisfactory education in the regular classroom can be achieved with supplementary aids and services, and (2) if not, whether the student is mainstreamed to the maximum extent appropriate.
- A placement may violate IDEA when a student is moved to a segregated setting because inclusion is difficult, rather than because education in the regular classroom cannot be achieved satisfactorily with supports.
- Substantive FAPE requires an IEP reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit; goals and instruction should meaningfully connect to general-education standards where appropriate.
- Parents may obtain tuition reimbursement when (1) the public placement denies FAPE and (2) the unilateral private placement is appropriate; the private placement need not meet all public-school procedural or state-approval requirements.
- Reimbursement is an equitable remedy; the amount may depend on reasonableness and other equitable considerations.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit held that placing L.H. in a segregated special-education classroom violated IDEA’s LRE and FAPE requirements and that the parents’ inclusive Montessori placement was appropriate, entitling them to tuition reimbursement subject to a remand to calculate the amount.


L.H. v. Hamilton Cnty. Dep’t of Educ., 900 F.3d 779 (6th Cir. 2018)