District Wins Right to Assess Student with Autism Over Parent's Objection

What Happened

Student is a 15-year-old with autism and a medical history of aplastic anemia, a condition that weakens the immune system and increases the risk of infection. Student moved into Vista Unified School District near the end of 7th grade, and for most of the following two years received little to no educational services — partly because Student's physician initially recommended home instruction, and partly because Parent repeatedly cancelled sessions or made Student unavailable. By December 2015, Student's last comprehensive evaluation had been completed nearly two years earlier by a different school district (Oceanside Unified), and Vista had never conducted its own independent assessment.

At Student's December 2015 annual IEP meeting, the district identified an urgent need to reassess Student in six areas: academic achievement, intellectual development, speech and language, social-emotional development, adaptive behavior, and health/medical. The district sent a formal assessment plan to Parent multiple times by certified mail, regular mail, and email. Parent agreed to most of the assessments but flatly refused to consent to a medical evaluation by the district's contracted pediatrician, Dr. Howard Taras, citing a prior disagreement with him. Parent also failed to return rating scales needed by the speech-language pathologist and school psychologist, and stopped making Student available for assessments after Student briefly attended high school for about two months in early 2016. With no way to complete the evaluation and a looming need to build an appropriate IEP, the district filed for due process to obtain the right to assess Student without parental consent.

What the ALJ Found

Because the district filed this case, the district carried the burden of proof — meaning it had to prove it was entitled to conduct the assessments. The ALJ found the district met that burden on every point.

The ALJ found that reassessment was genuinely necessary. Student's last evaluation was nearly three years old and had been done by a different district. Vista had never had a real opportunity to assess Student itself. Due to frequent absences and Parent's cancellations, the district had almost no data on Student's current academic levels, communication skills, or behavioral needs. Without updated information, the IEP team could not determine what services Student needed or whether home instruction or a school setting was the appropriate placement.

The ALJ also found that the district's assessment plan was procedurally correct. It was sent in a language Parent could understand, it described each type of assessment, it named qualified assessors for each area, and it gave Parent more than 15 days to respond. Each proposed assessor — the special education teacher, speech-language pathologist, school psychologist, school nurse, and contracted pediatrician — was found to be fully credentialed and qualified for their assigned role.

Critically, the ALJ applied a well-established legal principle: parents who want their child to receive special education services cannot block the school district from conducting its own reassessment. Courts across the country have consistently held that if a family wants IDEA services, they must allow the district to evaluate the student using assessors of the district's choosing. A parent's preference for an independent evaluation does not substitute for the district's right to assess.

What Was Ordered

1. The district was authorized to assess Student pursuant to the December 17, 2015 assessment plan without parental consent.
2. The district was required to notify Parent by certified mail within 10 business days of the decision, specifying the dates, times, and locations of all assessments.
3. Parent was ordered to present Student for assessments on the scheduled dates. If Student could not attend, Parent was required to promptly communicate this so the district could reschedule within 30 days.
4. Parent was ordered to timely complete and return any paperwork requested as part of the assessments, including rating scales.
5. If Parent failed to present Student or complete paperwork as ordered, the district would no longer be obligated to provide special education and related services to Student until Parent complied.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Refusing a district assessment can put your child's services at risk. Under federal and California law, if your child receives special education services, you must allow the district to conduct its own evaluations. Withholding consent — or agreeing in writing but then refusing to cooperate — can result in the district being released from its obligation to provide services, as happened here.

2. A parent's objection to a specific assessor is not enough to block an evaluation. Parent's disagreement with the district's contracted pediatrician was not a legally sufficient reason to refuse the medical assessment. If you have concerns about a specific assessor, raise them at the IEP meeting and document them — but understand the district generally has the right to use assessors of its choosing.

3. Outdated assessments from another district are not a substitute for current data. The fact that Oceanside had assessed Student in 2014 did not prevent Vista from reassessing him in 2016. Districts are entitled to gather their own current data, especially when years have passed or the student's situation has changed significantly.

4. Failing to return rating scales or make your child available can be treated as non-cooperation. Even though Parent had partially consented, her failure to return paperwork and make Student available for testing effectively blocked the process. Courts and ALJs treat this as a refusal to cooperate, with serious consequences for the child's services.