Fremont USD's Psychoeducational Assessment Upheld; Parent's IEE Request Denied

Fremont Unified School District filed for due process after a parent disagreed with the district's psychoeducational assessment and requested an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) at public expense. The ALJ found that the district's assessment was comprehensive and legally appropriate, covering all areas of Student's suspected disability. As a result, the district was not required to fund an IEE.

What Happened

Student was a 17-year-old 12th grader who had not been receiving special education services. In the fall of 2008, Fremont Unified School District (FUSD) conducted a psychoeducational evaluation to determine whether Student was eligible for special education. At an IEP team meeting on December 11, 2008, the district concluded that Student did not qualify for special education or related services.

Parent disagreed with the district's findings and, in January 2009, formally requested that the district pay for an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) — an assessment conducted by an outside expert, not employed by the school district. Under federal and state law, when a parent requests an IEE, the district must either pay for it or promptly file for a due process hearing to defend the appropriateness of its own assessment. FUSD chose to file for a due process hearing, and the case was heard on March 10, 2009.

What the ALJ Found

Because the district prevailed in this case, this section explains why the parent's request for a publicly funded IEE was denied.

The ALJ found that the district's psychoeducational assessment was thorough and met all legal requirements. The district's licensed school psychologist, who had over 13 years of experience, administered a wide battery of tests covering cognitive ability, emotional functioning, behavior, anxiety, and academic achievement. A credentialed resource specialist teacher also administered a standardized academic achievement test. Together, these assessments covered all areas related to Student's suspected disability.

Parent raised two specific concerns: (1) that the district should have conducted a speech and language evaluation, and (2) that the assessment should have tested reading fluency more specifically. The ALJ rejected both arguments. On the speech and language issue, the evidence showed that Student had received articulation services as a young child but was exited from special education in second grade after those problems resolved. No teachers — and not even Parent — had raised concerns about Student's speech or language at the time of the assessment, so there was no reason for the district to evaluate those areas. On reading fluency, the ALJ found that the academic testing did in fact cover reading, including letter-word identification, word attack skills, and reading comprehension. Parent did not call any expert witnesses to challenge the district's evidence, which the ALJ found credible and unrebutted.

The ALJ also confirmed that the assessment met all other legal standards: it was not racially, culturally, or sexually discriminatory; it was administered in Student's native language; the assessors were qualified and knowledgeable about disabilities; and all tests were given according to the test producers' instructions.

What Was Ordered

The district's psychoeducational assessment of Student was found to be appropriate.
Fremont Unified School District is not required to fund an IEE for Student.
The district prevailed on all issues.

Why This Matters for Parents

When you disagree with a district assessment, you have the right to request an IEE — but the district can challenge that request in court. Requesting an IEE does not automatically mean the district must pay. The district can file for a due process hearing to prove its assessment was legally appropriate, and if it succeeds, you will not receive funding for an outside evaluation.
To win an IEE dispute, it helps to present your own expert evidence. In this case, the ALJ noted that Parent called no expert witnesses to challenge the district's assessment. If you believe the district's evaluation missed something important, consider consulting an independent specialist who can testify about what was lacking.
Districts are only required to assess in areas of "suspected disability." The law does not require a district to assess every possible area — only those where there is a reasonable basis to suspect a problem. If you believe your child needs evaluation in a specific area like speech, language, or reading fluency, document your concerns in writing to the district before the assessment begins so the district is on notice.
A prior history of special education services does not automatically require re-evaluation in that same area. Student had previously received speech services but had been exited years earlier. The ALJ found that because the problem had resolved and no current concerns were raised, the district had no obligation to re-assess speech and language. If your child has a history of a specific need, and you believe it is still relevant, raise it explicitly and in writing before the assessment is completed.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

Because the district prevailed in this case, this section explains why the parent's request for a publicly funded IEE was denied.

What Was Ordered

The district's psychoeducational assessment of Student was found to be appropriate.
Fremont Unified School District is not required to fund an IEE for Student.
The district prevailed on all issues.

Why This Matters for Parents

When you disagree with a district assessment, you have the right to request an IEE — but the district can challenge that request in court. Requesting an IEE does not automatically mean the district must pay. The district can file for a due process hearing to prove its assessment was legally appropriate, and if it succeeds, you will not receive funding for an outside evaluation.
To win an IEE dispute, it helps to present your own expert evidence. In this case, the ALJ noted that Parent called no expert witnesses to challenge the district's assessment. If you believe the district's evaluation missed something important, consider consulting an independent specialist who can testify about what was lacking.
Districts are only required to assess in areas of "suspected disability." The law does not require a district to assess every possible area — only those where there is a reasonable basis to suspect a problem. If you believe your child needs evaluation in a specific area like speech, language, or reading fluency, document your concerns in writing to the district before the assessment begins so the district is on notice.
A prior history of special education services does not automatically require re-evaluation in that same area. Student had previously received speech services but had been exited years earlier. The ALJ found that because the problem had resolved and no current concerns were raised, the district had no obligation to re-assess speech and language. If your child has a history of a specific need, and you believe it is still relevant, raise it explicitly and in writing before the assessment is completed.