District Wins Right to Assess Autistic Student Over Parents' Objections

Temecula Valley Unified School District filed for due process after parents of a 12-year-old student with autism refused to consent to a triennial reassessment. The ALJ ruled that the District had both the right and the obligation to conduct the assessment, and authorized it to proceed without parental consent. Parents were ordered to make the student available for testing within 45 days.

What Happened

Student is a 12-year-old boy with autism who had been receiving special education services since age three. Starting in fall 2005, his parents unilaterally decided to home school him without the District's agreement. At an October 2005 IEP meeting, parents requested home schooling; the District denied the request and the IEP team could not reach agreement on Student's program for the 2005-2006 school year. Student was receiving nine hours per week of a home-based program through a private provider (EECA) under a 2004 IEP, but had not been formally assessed by the District since April 2003.

Because Student's triennial reassessment was due in 2006 and the District had not observed him in nearly a year, the District prepared a comprehensive assessment plan dated February 22, 2006. The plan covered cognitive/developmental ability, academic achievement, language/speech, social/emotional/behavioral development, health, and other areas. Parents partially agreed — they consented to some portions of the assessment — but refused to consent to the psychological evaluation, the health/medical assessment, observations, and interviews. They raised concerns about the school psychologist's impartiality, the usefulness of another IQ test, and whether the District was using the assessment to build a case that it had offered FAPE for the 2005-2006 school year. When negotiations broke down, the District filed for due process to obtain authorization to assess without parental consent.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled entirely in favor of the District. Under California law, students must be reassessed at least once every three years, and the District has both the right and the legal obligation to conduct those reassessments. Because Student had not been assessed since 2003, the triennial was clearly due — and the fact that parents refused to sign the plan did not relieve the District of its duty to reassess.

The ALJ rejected the parents' concern that the school psychologist would manipulate test results or act on orders from District administrators. The psychologist testified credibly that he had never been asked to tailor his findings and had assessed over 2,000 students over 23 years. The ALJ also rejected the parents' argument that the private EECA provider should perform the psychological assessment instead — California law specifically requires that psychological assessments be conducted by a credentialed school psychologist, full stop.

The ALJ also declined to rule on whether the District had offered FAPE for the 2005-2006 school year, noting that even if the reassessment might later be used in a separate FAPE dispute, that possibility did not make the assessment itself improper. The health assessment was also upheld, with the school nurse explaining that if she was unable to complete a vision or hearing screening (as had happened before), she would refer the family to outside providers through their insurance.

What Was Ordered

The District is authorized to conduct the triennial assessment pursuant to the February 22, 2006 assessment plan without parental consent, within 45 days of the decision date.
Parents must make Student reasonably available for all assessments included in the plan.

Why This Matters for Parents

Refusing to sign an assessment plan does not stop the District from assessing your child. When a triennial reassessment is legally due, the District can go to a due process hearing and get authorization to assess without your consent. Withholding consent buys time, but it rarely prevents the assessment entirely — especially when the last assessment was three or more years ago.
You cannot require that a private provider conduct the psychological assessment instead of a school psychologist. California law mandates that psychological assessments be performed by a credentialed school psychologist. Even if a private therapist or home-program provider knows your child much better, they cannot legally replace the school psychologist for this purpose. What you can do is ensure that the school psychologist reviews reports and gets input from your private providers.
Partial consent is possible — and strategic. In this case, parents consented to several parts of the assessment plan (academic achievement, speech/language, adaptive PE) while objecting to others. Agreeing to less-controversial portions can demonstrate good faith and narrow the dispute to the areas you genuinely object to.
Be specific and timely when requesting information about assessment tools. Parents here asked for more detail about which tests would be used, which is a reasonable request. However, courts and ALJs generally allow districts some flexibility to adjust specific subtests during the assessment process. Document your requests in writing and respond promptly — delays in correspondence can weaken your position at hearing.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

The District is authorized to conduct the triennial assessment pursuant to the February 22, 2006 assessment plan without parental consent, within 45 days of the decision date.
Parents must make Student reasonably available for all assessments included in the plan.

Why This Matters for Parents

Refusing to sign an assessment plan does not stop the District from assessing your child. When a triennial reassessment is legally due, the District can go to a due process hearing and get authorization to assess without your consent. Withholding consent buys time, but it rarely prevents the assessment entirely — especially when the last assessment was three or more years ago.
You cannot require that a private provider conduct the psychological assessment instead of a school psychologist. California law mandates that psychological assessments be performed by a credentialed school psychologist. Even if a private therapist or home-program provider knows your child much better, they cannot legally replace the school psychologist for this purpose. What you can do is ensure that the school psychologist reviews reports and gets input from your private providers.
Partial consent is possible — and strategic. In this case, parents consented to several parts of the assessment plan (academic achievement, speech/language, adaptive PE) while objecting to others. Agreeing to less-controversial portions can demonstrate good faith and narrow the dispute to the areas you genuinely object to.
Be specific and timely when requesting information about assessment tools. Parents here asked for more detail about which tests would be used, which is a reasonable request. However, courts and ALJs generally allow districts some flexibility to adjust specific subtests during the assessment process. Document your requests in writing and respond promptly — delays in correspondence can weaken your position at hearing.