District's $900 Cap on Speech-Language IEE Was Too Low, Parent Wins Funding for $1,500 Evaluation

A parent of an 8-year-old student with autism and speech-language impairment disagreed with San Diego Unified's speech and language assessment and requested a publicly funded independent educational evaluation (IEE). The district capped its funding at $900, but the ALJ found that cap was too restrictive and interfered with the parent's right to choose a qualified evaluator. The district was ordered to fund the IEE at up to $1,500 through the parent's chosen assessor, Crimson Center for Speech & Language.

What Happened

Student was an 8-year-old girl with autism and speech-language impairment who had been receiving special education services since age three. In May 2016, the district held a triennial IEP meeting that included a new speech and language assessment. Parent disagreed with the district's assessment and, in September 2016, requested a publicly funded independent educational evaluation (IEE) in the area of speech and language. The district agreed to fund an IEE — but only up to $900.

Parent found a qualified evaluator, Crimson Center for Speech & Language, through recommendations from other special education families. Crimson Center charged $1,500 for a speech and language IEE — $150 per hour for a minimum of 10 hours — covering parent consultation, record review, school observation, testing, report writing, and IEP meeting attendance. When Parent asked the district to fund the full $1,500, the district refused, citing its IEE cost policy capping speech-language evaluations at $750–$900. Parent filed for due process. The San Diego County Office of Education was also named as a respondent because it helped facilitate the development of the regional IEE policy, but the ALJ found County was not a decision-maker and ruled in County's favor.

What the District Did Wrong

The ALJ found that the district's $900 maximum was too low to be a lawful cost cap. Under federal law, a district may set a maximum allowable charge for IEEs — but that cap must be set high enough that parents can actually choose from among qualified evaluators in the area. It cannot simply represent an average of local rates; it must eliminate only unreasonably excessive fees.

The evidence showed the district's own payment history contradicted its $900 cap: since adopting the policy in March 2016, the district had paid an average of $1,040 per speech-language IEE, and had paid $1,500 for three IEEs. Testimony from eight licensed speech-language pathologists established that a comprehensive speech-language IEE typically takes 10 to 12 hours and customarily costs around $1,250 at $125 per hour — already above the $900 cap. The district's own expert witness was found to have offered overly conservative estimates that were inconsistent with the evidence.

The ALJ also found that Crimson Center was fully qualified: it was located within San Diego County, was staffed by licensed speech-language pathologists, had conducted IEEs since 2010, and performed three to four IEEs per month. The district had no objection to Crimson Center's credentials — only its price. Because the $900 cap eliminated reasonable (not just excessive) fees, it improperly restricted Parent's ability to choose a qualified evaluator, which is a procedural violation of the IDEA that significantly impeded Parent's participation in the IEP process and constituted a denial of FAPE.

What Was Ordered

The district must schedule a speech and language IEE with Crimson Center for Speech & Language, or another qualified assessor of Parent's choice, within 45 days of the order.
The district must fund the IEE in an amount not to exceed $1,500.
The district must convene an IEP team meeting within 21 days of receiving the completed IEE report.
Student's requests for staff training and adjustment of the district's cost criteria were denied — the ALJ found those remedies were beyond what was necessary to resolve the specific issue in the case.
All claims against the San Diego County Office of Education were denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

A district's IEE cost cap must be high enough to give you a real choice. The law does not allow a district to set a cap at whatever it finds convenient. The cap must be set so that you can actually access qualified evaluators in your area — not just the cheapest ones. If the going rate among qualified professionals exceeds the cap, the cap is likely unlawful.
The district's own payment history can be used against it. In this case, the district had already paid $1,500 for IEEs on three occasions — which directly undermined its argument that $900 was a reasonable maximum. If a district has ever paid more than its stated cap, that's important evidence.
You don't have to pick from the district's pre-approved list. Districts can give you a list of evaluators, but you are not required to choose from it. You have the right to select any qualified professional in the area whose fee is not unreasonably excessive — even if they're not on the list.
Blocking your choice of evaluator is a procedural violation that can rise to a FAPE denial. When a district's cost policy prevents you from using a qualified evaluator you have selected, that interference with your participation in the IEP process can — and in this case did — constitute a denial of a free appropriate public education.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

What Was Ordered

The district must schedule a speech and language IEE with Crimson Center for Speech & Language, or another qualified assessor of Parent's choice, within 45 days of the order.
The district must fund the IEE in an amount not to exceed $1,500.
The district must convene an IEP team meeting within 21 days of receiving the completed IEE report.
Student's requests for staff training and adjustment of the district's cost criteria were denied — the ALJ found those remedies were beyond what was necessary to resolve the specific issue in the case.
All claims against the San Diego County Office of Education were denied.

Why This Matters for Parents

A district's IEE cost cap must be high enough to give you a real choice. The law does not allow a district to set a cap at whatever it finds convenient. The cap must be set so that you can actually access qualified evaluators in your area — not just the cheapest ones. If the going rate among qualified professionals exceeds the cap, the cap is likely unlawful.
The district's own payment history can be used against it. In this case, the district had already paid $1,500 for IEEs on three occasions — which directly undermined its argument that $900 was a reasonable maximum. If a district has ever paid more than its stated cap, that's important evidence.
You don't have to pick from the district's pre-approved list. Districts can give you a list of evaluators, but you are not required to choose from it. You have the right to select any qualified professional in the area whose fee is not unreasonably excessive — even if they're not on the list.
Blocking your choice of evaluator is a procedural violation that can rise to a FAPE denial. When a district's cost policy prevents you from using a qualified evaluator you have selected, that interference with your participation in the IEP process can — and in this case did — constitute a denial of a free appropriate public education.