District Wins Right to Assess Autistic Student Over Parents' Refusal to Cooperate

Torrance Unified School District sought permission to conduct a triennial assessment of a seven-year-old student with autism after parents repeatedly refused to make her available for testing. The ALJ ruled in the district's favor, finding the November 8, 2011 assessment plan was legally proper and the parents had no right to be present during testing sessions. The decision also warned that if parents continued to withhold the student from assessment, the district could stop providing special education services entirely.

What Happened

Student is a seven-year-old girl eligible for special education under the category of autistic-like behaviors. She had been originally assessed by Torrance Unified School District just before her third birthday in January 2009, but never attended preschool or received any services following that assessment. When Student turned five, the district held an IEP meeting in May 2011 to plan her kindergarten placement and presented parents with an assessment plan — necessary because the district had no current information about Student's abilities. Mother signed the assessment plan in September 2011, but parents never brought Student in for testing. Student attended her kindergarten special day class (SDC) for only six days before parents pulled her out in late September 2011, citing safety concerns. From that point forward, Student received home and hospital instruction rather than attending school.

The district prepared a new assessment plan in November 2011 and sent it to parents. Parents never gave unconditional consent. Instead, Father said parents would only allow the assessment if a parent was present in the room during testing — a condition the district refused. By the time of the February 2013 hearing, Student had not received a comprehensive assessment in over four years. The district filed for due process to obtain legal authority to assess Student without parental consent and without a parent present during the sessions.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled entirely in the district's favor. Under federal and state special education law, districts are required to reassess students at least every three years. If parents refuse to consent, the district can go to a due process hearing to override that refusal — which is exactly what happened here. The ALJ found that the district's November 8, 2011 assessment plan met all legal requirements: it was written in plain language, explained each area to be assessed, identified qualified staff who would administer each test, and was accompanied by a copy of parents' procedural rights.

On the question of whether parents could be present during testing, the ALJ sided with the district. Five district staff members — including the school psychologist, the SDC teacher, a program specialist, a behavior analyst, and the school nurse — credibly testified that a parent's presence during standardized testing can distort results, distract the student, and violate the publisher's instructions for how tests must be administered. Father argued that Student's asthma and limited verbal communication made a parent's presence necessary for safety, but he provided no medical documentation or expert testimony to support that claim. Student's own doctor had not written any order requiring parents to be present at all times, and no prior IEP had included such an accommodation. The ALJ found Father's safety argument unsupported by the evidence.

What Was Ordered

The district is authorized to assess Student under the November 8, 2011 triennial assessment plan without parental consent.
The district must send parents written notice by certified mail of the dates, times, and locations of each assessment session.
Parents must bring Student to the scheduled assessment sessions at the times and locations chosen by the district.
Parents are not permitted to be in the same room as Student during any assessment session.
If parents fail to bring Student for assessment, the district is relieved of its legal obligation to provide Student with a free appropriate public education (FAPE) — meaning it can stop providing special education services — until parents cooperate with the assessment process.

Why This Matters for Parents

Districts have a legal right to reassess your child every three years, and refusing to cooperate can backfire severely. Under the IDEA, periodic reassessments are mandatory. If parents withhold consent, the district can take the matter to a due process hearing — and if the district wins, the ALJ can authorize the assessment anyway. Worse, as this case shows, the ALJ can also authorize the district to cut off all special education services if parents continue to refuse.
Wanting to be present during your child's testing is not automatically a right you are entitled to. Many parents understandably want to observe assessments, especially for young children with significant needs. However, this decision makes clear that for school-age students, a parent's presence during standardized testing can legally invalidate the results. If you have genuine safety concerns, document them with a written medical opinion from your child's doctor before the hearing — verbal arguments alone are not enough.
If you have concerns about a proposed assessment, the right move is to engage — not withdraw. Parents in this case had legitimate worries about the district's intentions. But by pulling Student from school entirely and refusing to consent to testing, they left the district unable to develop a current IEP. This ultimately hurt Student, who went four years without a comprehensive evaluation or consistent services. If you disagree with an assessment plan, you can request changes, ask questions at the IEP meeting, or seek an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) — but refusing all cooperation can result in losing services.
When a district files for due process, it bears the burden of proving its assessment plan is legally sound. In this case, the district met that burden by presenting detailed testimony from five qualified staff members about the specific tools they planned to use and why those tools were appropriate. This is useful to know: if a district seeks to override your refusal, they must demonstrate the plan is valid — they cannot just show up to court and demand access to your child.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

The district is authorized to assess Student under the November 8, 2011 triennial assessment plan without parental consent.
The district must send parents written notice by certified mail of the dates, times, and locations of each assessment session.
Parents must bring Student to the scheduled assessment sessions at the times and locations chosen by the district.
Parents are not permitted to be in the same room as Student during any assessment session.
If parents fail to bring Student for assessment, the district is relieved of its legal obligation to provide Student with a free appropriate public education (FAPE) — meaning it can stop providing special education services — until parents cooperate with the assessment process.

Why This Matters for Parents

Districts have a legal right to reassess your child every three years, and refusing to cooperate can backfire severely. Under the IDEA, periodic reassessments are mandatory. If parents withhold consent, the district can take the matter to a due process hearing — and if the district wins, the ALJ can authorize the assessment anyway. Worse, as this case shows, the ALJ can also authorize the district to cut off all special education services if parents continue to refuse.
Wanting to be present during your child's testing is not automatically a right you are entitled to. Many parents understandably want to observe assessments, especially for young children with significant needs. However, this decision makes clear that for school-age students, a parent's presence during standardized testing can legally invalidate the results. If you have genuine safety concerns, document them with a written medical opinion from your child's doctor before the hearing — verbal arguments alone are not enough.
If you have concerns about a proposed assessment, the right move is to engage — not withdraw. Parents in this case had legitimate worries about the district's intentions. But by pulling Student from school entirely and refusing to consent to testing, they left the district unable to develop a current IEP. This ultimately hurt Student, who went four years without a comprehensive evaluation or consistent services. If you disagree with an assessment plan, you can request changes, ask questions at the IEP meeting, or seek an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) — but refusing all cooperation can result in losing services.
When a district files for due process, it bears the burden of proving its assessment plan is legally sound. In this case, the district met that burden by presenting detailed testimony from five qualified staff members about the specific tools they planned to use and why those tools were appropriate. This is useful to know: if a district seeks to override your refusal, they must demonstrate the plan is valid — they cannot just show up to court and demand access to your child.