Parent's Right to IEE Survives Revocation of Consent to Special Education Services

What Happened

A student with disabilities attended school in the Capistrano Unified School District. The district conducted an assessment of the student, and the parent disagreed with the results. The parent then made a critical decision that many parents face: revoking consent to special education services, meaning the student would no longer receive services under an IEP.

After the revocation, the parent requested an independent educational evaluation at public expense to challenge the district's assessment. Capistrano Unified refused, arguing that because the parent had revoked consent to special education, the district no longer had any obligation to fund an IEE. In the district's view, revoking consent extinguished the parent's right to an independent evaluation.

What the District Did Wrong

Inventing a Legal Exception That Does Not Exist

The IDEA's IEE provisions are straightforward: when a parent disagrees with a district's evaluation, the parent has the right to an IEE at public expense, and the district must either fund it or file for due process. There is no exception in the law for situations where the parent has revoked consent to services.

Capistrano Unified essentially created its own legal rule — that revocation of consent eliminates IEE rights. But the regulations do not say this. A parent's disagreement with an evaluation is a separate matter from whether the parent wants the student to continue receiving special education services.

Punishing Parents for Exercising Their Rights

The district's position had a chilling practical effect. If sustained, it would mean that parents who revoke consent — perhaps because the services being offered are inadequate — would lose their ability to challenge the evaluations on which those inadequate services were based. Parents would face an impossible choice: accept unsatisfactory services to preserve their IEE rights, or revoke consent and lose the ability to prove the district's evaluations were wrong.

What the Judge Found

ALJ Deborah Myers-Cregar found that Capistrano Unified violated the IDEA by refusing to fund the IEE. The ALJ held that a parent's right to an independent educational evaluation at public expense survives the revocation of consent to special education services.

The ALJ's reasoning was clear: the IEE right arises from the parent's disagreement with a district evaluation. That disagreement does not disappear simply because the parent revokes consent. The evaluation was conducted while the student was receiving special education services, and the parent retains the right to challenge it through the IEE process regardless of the student's current enrollment status.

The ALJ rejected the district's argument that revocation of consent eliminated its obligation to respond to the IEE request. The district was required to either fund the IEE or file for due process — and its refusal to do either was a violation.

What Was Ordered

1. Capistrano Unified must fund the independent educational evaluation at public expense

2. The evaluation must be conducted by a qualified evaluator of the parent's choosing who meets the district's IEE criteria

Why This Matters for Parents

This decision addresses a question that comes up more often than you might think: what happens to your IEE rights if you pull your child out of special education?

1. Revoking consent does not erase your IEE rights. If the district evaluated your child while they were in special education and you disagreed with the evaluation, you retain the right to an IEE at public expense even after revocation. The two decisions are independent of each other.

2. This was later confirmed by OSEP. In 2015, the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs issued a Letter to Baus confirming this exact principle: a parent who has revoked consent to special education services retains the right to request an IEE at public expense if they disagree with a district evaluation.

3. Districts cannot use revocation as a shield. Some districts may try to use a parent's revocation of consent as a reason to avoid accountability for flawed evaluations. This decision makes clear that revocation does not immunize a district from IEE challenges to evaluations conducted while consent was in effect.

4. Consider the IEE before or alongside revocation. If you are thinking about revoking consent to special education because services are inadequate, consider requesting your IEE first. While your right survives revocation, it is simpler to pursue the IEE while your child is still enrolled in special education. Document your disagreement with the evaluation in writing before taking any action on consent.

If you have revoked consent and a district refuses your IEE request on that basis, cite this decision and the 2015 Letter to Baus. The law is settled on this point: your IEE right survives revocation.