District Cannot Force Assessment When Student Shows No Signs of Disability

Del Mar Union School District sought court permission to assess a first-grade student for special education eligibility over her parents' objections, citing two elopement incidents at the start of first grade and a parent's letter requesting an independent evaluation. The ALJ ruled in favor of the parents, finding the district failed to present sufficient evidence that the student had a suspected disability requiring assessment. The district's request to conduct the assessment was denied.

What Happened

Student was a seven-year-old girl in first grade at a Del Mar Union School District school. She had never been found eligible for special education and had an outstanding kindergarten record — her teacher described her as a "tremendous help in the classroom" who would "excel in 1st grade." At the start of first grade, however, Student had a rough transition: she was placed in a class without her kindergarten friends, and on at least one occasion she attempted to leave ("elope" from) the school campus. A school nurse spent about 20 minutes calming her before she returned to class. There may have been a second similar incident around the same time, though the district presented no direct evidence of it.

Around October 2013, Student's father sent a letter to the district raising concerns about the elopement incidents and the possibility that Student had an eating disorder. Critically, he did not ask the district to assess Student — he requested that the district fund an independent educational evaluation (IEE) by outside professionals. Because the district had never conducted its own assessment, it denied the IEE request. The district then proposed its own assessment plan covering academic, health, intellectual, speech, motor, and social-emotional development. Both parents refused to sign it. When parents withhold consent for an assessment, a district can go to court to seek permission to assess anyway — and that is exactly what Del Mar did, filing this due process complaint in November 2013.

What the ALJ Found

The ALJ ruled in favor of the parents, finding that the district simply did not bring enough evidence to justify forcing an assessment on this child. By the time of the hearing in March 2014, Student was thriving. Her first-grade teacher called her "an absolute pleasure to teach" and "a very strong student." Her mother testified, without contradiction, that Student had made friends and was happy. The only concerning events — one or two brief elopement incidents at the very start of the school year — had not recurred, and the district offered no evidence that those incidents reflected an ongoing disability rather than a normal adjustment challenge.

The district argued it was fulfilling its legal "child find" duty — the obligation to identify students who may need special education. The ALJ acknowledged that the district acted reasonably in offering an assessment plan given the father's letter and the early-year incidents. It was even acceptable for the district to file this action out of caution. But offering an assessment and proving the need for one in court are two different things. The district's burden was to show by a preponderance of the evidence that Student was suspected to have a disability. On the evidence presented — primarily hearsay about a parent's letter and two isolated elopement incidents in an otherwise high-performing student — the district fell far short of that standard.

What Was Ordered

The district's request to assess Student was denied.
Del Mar may not conduct the October 15, 2013 assessment over the parents' objections.
The ALJ found that the district had fulfilled its child find obligations simply by proposing the assessment plan — no further action was required of the district.

Why This Matters for Parents

Districts must prove a genuine suspicion of disability before forcing an assessment. A school district cannot obtain court permission to assess a child just because something unusual happened. The district must present real, current evidence — not isolated past incidents — that the child may have a disability affecting their education.
Requesting an IEE is not the same as requesting a district assessment. Student's father asked for an independent evaluation by outside experts. The district interpreted this as triggering its own assessment obligation. Parents should be aware that these are legally distinct requests, and a poorly worded letter could set off a process you did not intend.
A child's current performance matters enormously. The ALJ placed great weight on the fact that Student was doing well at the time of the hearing, even if she had struggled months earlier. If your child has recovered from a difficult period, document that progress — report cards, teacher comments, and your own testimony can be powerful evidence.
Parents have the right to withhold consent for assessments — and that right has teeth. When both parents refused to sign the assessment plan, the district had to go to court and prove its case. It failed to do so. Withholding consent is a meaningful legal protection, not just a formality, and districts cannot override it without meeting a legal burden of proof.

What Happened

What the ALJ Found

What Was Ordered

The district's request to assess Student was denied.
Del Mar may not conduct the October 15, 2013 assessment over the parents' objections.
The ALJ found that the district had fulfilled its child find obligations simply by proposing the assessment plan — no further action was required of the district.

Why This Matters for Parents

Districts must prove a genuine suspicion of disability before forcing an assessment. A school district cannot obtain court permission to assess a child just because something unusual happened. The district must present real, current evidence — not isolated past incidents — that the child may have a disability affecting their education.
Requesting an IEE is not the same as requesting a district assessment. Student's father asked for an independent evaluation by outside experts. The district interpreted this as triggering its own assessment obligation. Parents should be aware that these are legally distinct requests, and a poorly worded letter could set off a process you did not intend.
A child's current performance matters enormously. The ALJ placed great weight on the fact that Student was doing well at the time of the hearing, even if she had struggled months earlier. If your child has recovered from a difficult period, document that progress — report cards, teacher comments, and your own testimony can be powerful evidence.
Parents have the right to withhold consent for assessments — and that right has teeth. When both parents refused to sign the assessment plan, the district had to go to court and prove its case. It failed to do so. Withholding consent is a meaningful legal protection, not just a formality, and districts cannot override it without meeting a legal burden of proof.