District Wins Right to Assess Student with Autism Without Parental Consent

What Happened

Student was a 12-year-old with autism who had previously attended Los Angeles Unified School District before enrolling at a Garvey School District school in January 2016. The most recent assessments on file were from March 2011, when Student was six years old — nearly five years out of date. Student's last triennial assessment had been conducted in October 2013, making a new triennial assessment overdue by the time the dispute arose. The only IEP available to Garvey was one developed by Los Angeles in September 2015, which placed Student in a general education classroom with speech and language, counseling, behavior intervention, and behavior consultation services.

In April 2016, Parents attended an IEP team meeting and raised concerns about Student's safety, the district's implementation of the IEP, and Student's maladaptive behaviors. In response, Garvey issued a formal assessment plan in May 2016, proposing evaluations in academic achievement, health, speech and language, social/emotional development, and adaptive behavior. The plan identified qualified assessors for each area and included Parents' procedural rights. Parents did not consent to the plan. Despite multiple attempts by the district to hold annual IEP team meetings — in September, October, and November 2016 — Parents did not attend any of them. Parents also did not participate in the due process hearing itself, despite repeated notices from OAH.

What the ALJ Found

Because the district filed this case (not the parents), the ALJ examined whether the district had met its legal obligations to justify conducting an assessment without parental consent. The ALJ found that the district did everything right. The assessment plan was written clearly in English (which Parents spoke and understood), covered all areas related to Student's known disabilities and suspected needs, identified each assessor by name and title, and was accompanied by a copy of Parents' procedural rights. The district gave Parents 15 days to review and respond, as required by law.

The ALJ also found that the district's need to reassess was genuine and urgent. Student's last assessments dated back to 2011 — when Student was six years old. The district could not develop meaningful, up-to-date IEP goals or determine what services Student needed without current evaluation data. Parents' own concerns about Student's behaviors at the April 2016 IEP meeting further triggered the district's duty to reassess. Because the district proved all of this by a preponderance of the evidence, and because Parents offered no rebuttal, the ALJ authorized the district to proceed with assessments without parental consent.

What Was Ordered

1. The district may begin assessing Student without parental consent within 15 days of the decision, covering academic achievement, health, speech and language, social/emotional development, and adaptive behavior.
2. Within seven days of the decision, the district must notify Parents of proposed assessment dates and times.
3. Parents must agree to assessment dates within 30 days of the district's proposed dates and make Student available.
4. Parents must timely complete and return any documents reasonably requested as part of the assessments.
5. Any delays caused by Student's unavailability or parental non-cooperation will toll (pause) the 60-day assessment timeline.
6. If Parents do not comply, the district will not be legally obligated to provide Student a FAPE until Parents cooperate.

Why This Matters for Parents

1. Parents cannot indefinitely block a required triennial reassessment. Under the IDEA, districts must reassess students at least every three years. If you withhold consent, the district can go to a due process hearing and obtain authorization to assess without your consent — especially when assessments are clearly overdue.

2. Your concerns at an IEP meeting can trigger the district's duty to reassess. If you raise issues about your child's behaviors or educational needs at an IEP meeting, this can actually strengthen the district's legal case for conducting new evaluations. Raising concerns and then refusing the resulting assessment plan is legally inconsistent.

3. Not participating in the hearing is a serious risk. Parents in this case did not attend the hearing, which meant all of the district's evidence went completely unchallenged. Even if you disagree with an assessment plan, consult a special education advocate or attorney and participate in the process — your silence can be treated as conceding the district's position.

4. If you have concerns about an assessment plan, you have specific rights. You can request changes to the plan, ask questions about the assessors' qualifications, or seek an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) after assessments are completed. Refusing consent outright and not engaging with the process leaves your child without updated services and puts you at a legal disadvantage.