MUKILTEO— A Mukilteo School District parent, Joli Pesek, is asking the district to allow her eighth-grade daughter to continue receiving compensatory special education services after state education officials found the district failed to fully implement the girl’s individualized education program (IEP).
The dispute centers on 200 hours of compensatory education ordered by the Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) after an investigation found the district materially failed to implement the student’s IEP during the 2023-24 school year.
According to the October 2024 OSPI decision, the former Mukilteo Elementary, and Olympic Middle School student was supposed to receive 1,750 minutes per week of specially designed instruction in social-emotional and behavioral skills. Investigators determined she received an average of about 925 minutes per week.
That amounted to an estimated 474 hours of missed instruction over the school year, OSPI found. The agency ordered the district to provide 200 hours of compensatory education as a remedy.
The case, identified by OSPI as Special Education Community Complaint No. 24-103, began with a complaint filed by the Pesek in August 2024. Pesek alleged, among other things, that the district was providing specially designed instruction through a paraeducator rather than the special education teacher identified in the student’s IEP.
OSPI agreed that the IEP had not been implemented as written but drew a distinction between the district’s procedural violations and whether those violations denied the student a free, appropriate public education.
The agency found that a paraeducator had provided substantial portions of the student’s specially designed instruction in a general education setting, even though the IEP called for instruction in a special education setting and identified a special education teacher as the provider.
However, OSPI also found that the special education teacher designed and supervised the instruction provided by the paraeducator and concluded that the investigation did not establish that the change in provider negatively affected the student’s access to a free appropriate public education.
The larger problem, OSPI determined, was the amount of social-emotional and behavioral instruction the student actually received.
The agency found the student made minimal progress on two social-emotional behavioral goals during the 2023-24 school year. Those goals were described as “emerging skills” in both December 2023 and April 2024 progress reports.
OSPI therefore ordered 200 hours of additional social-emotional and behavioral instruction, to be provided either individually or in a small group, depending on what the IEP team and parent determined was appropriate.
The state also found a second violation involving the development of the student’s 2024-25 IEP.
The parent had asked the district to specify paraeducator support in the student’s IEP. OSPI found that the May 2024 IEP did not identify that support, and the June 24, 2024 prior written notice did not adequately document the district’s response to the parent’s request.
OSPI said the lack of specificity meant service providers, particularly paraeducators, would not know what support they were expected to provide. The agency ordered the IEP team to meet and determine the precise nature of the paraeducator support needed.
The district was also ordered to provide staff training on implementing IEPs as written and revising IEPs when a student’s needs change.
A second dispute
Nearly two years after the original complaint, the parent is now challenging what she considers an unreasonable deadline for completing the 200-hour award.
In a June 7, 2026, email, Joli Pesek said her daughter had completed approximately 90 of the 200 hours. By August, she reported that Justice had completed approximately 105 hours, leaving roughly 95 hours remaining.
Pesek is asking the district to allow her daughter to use the remaining hours during the school year rather than requiring her to complete them under an accelerated summer schedule.
She argues that the services are most useful when they occur alongside the student’s actual academic and social challenges, including organization, anxiety, self-advocacy and emotional regulation.
“The issue is not whether more hours theoretically could have been scheduled,” Pesek wrote in an email obtained by the Lynnwood Times. “The issue is whether [my daughter] should now forfeit the remainder of an awarded remedy simply because she utilized it at a pace that was sustainable and beneficial to her.”
Pesek said her daughter has participated in more than 100 hours of coaching through The How Skills and has made substantial progress.
She said her daughter ultimately transitioned out of special education after Pasek revoked her consent and has since attended Harbour Pointe Middle School in general education while maintaining grade-level performance.
Pesek specifically acknowledged in her correspondence that OSPI did not adjudicate whether the student’s placement in special education was appropriate.
Pesek nevertheless argues that her 13-year-old daughter’s subsequent experience demonstrates that earlier assumptions about the level of specialized programming she needed were wrong.
Pesek informed the Lynnwood Times that she had her daughter tested for autism by three different professionals, for example, but, according to her, none of these tests came back positive despite the school district’s special education designation.
She also says the remaining compensatory services have helped her daughter rebuild confidence and develop emotional regulation, executive functioning and self-advocacy skills.
The deadline
OSPI’s original corrective action order required the 200 hours to be completed no later than Sept. 12, 2025. The district was required to document completion of the services with OSPI.
By 2026, however, the dispute had shifted to whether the district would voluntarily allow the remaining hours to continue after OSPI’s corrective-action monitoring period.
In an August 20, 2026 email, Pesek said OSPI had told her that although it would not require the district to provide or monitor additional compensatory hours, the district could choose to continue providing them through a separate agreement.
Pesek asked the district to do exactly that.
She said the district’s existing contract with The How Skills was scheduled to end August 31, 2026, but argued that the expiration of that contract did not answer her request for an agreement allowing the child to finish the compensatory award.
Pesek estimates that nearly $17,000 worth of compensatory services could otherwise disappear and said she may have to pay for continued coaching herself if the district does not agree to extend the arrangement.
“I am not asking the District to undo the past,” Pesek wrote in an email. “I am asking it to acknowledge the documented history, learn from what actually happened, remain accountable to the remedy that resulted from its established violations, and make the decision that best supports Justice going forward.”
On August 14, 2026, Becca Anderson, Director of Special Services with the Mukilteo School District responded to Pesek stating the district would not be extending its contract with the How Skills, explaining that OSPI extended the original timeline in 2024 to run through August of 2026.
Seeing as the contract expired on August 31, 2026, the school district said it would not be honoring the unused comp education hours, Pesek informed the Lynnwood Times, leaving her having to pay out of pocket.
The Lynnwood Times reached out to the Mukilteo School District to ask if they would allow Pasek’s daughter to utilize her remaining 95 hours of compensatory education, Julianne Repman, Director of Communications and Public Affairs responded that the district was complying with OSPI guidelines.
“While we cannot speak to specific student services, we can tell you that Mukilteo School District complies with guidelines as outlined by OSPI in situations like this,” Repman wrote.
In its decision, OSPI emphasized that districts must implement IEPs as written and revise them when a student’s needs or educational program change.
The resulting 200-hour award was intended as compensatory education — a remedy designed to make up for educational services a student should have received but did not.
For Pesek, however, the dispute is no longer simply about what happened during the 2023-24 school year.
It is about whether her daughter, after working through more than 100 hours of remediation and making progress, will be allowed to finish the remedy that OSPI ordered.
“I remain willing to discuss a reasonable agreement allowing [my daughter] to utilize all remaining awarded hours during the school year at the consistent and sustainable pace that has proven effective for her,” Pesek wrote.
Pesek said she is currently seeking legal representation to file due process.
Author: Kienan Briscoe
