The District Is Ignoring Our Private Evaluation
What to do when the school acknowledges receiving your private evaluation but dismisses its findings without genuine consideration or explanation.
Page Information
Jurisdiction: Federal IDEA + California special education law
Reviewed: Pending expert review
This page is informational but is still being reviewed by a special education expert. Some details may change.
The District Is Ignoring Our Private Evaluation
You spent thousands of dollars on a private evaluation. A qualified professional spent hours with your child, ran comprehensive testing, and wrote a detailed report identifying needs the school has missed. You handed it to the IEP team. And they treated it like it didn't exist.
This happens constantly. And it is illegal.
Quick Answer
The district must genuinely consider your private evaluation -- not just receive it. Under federal law (IDEA Section 300.502(c)) and California law (Education Code Section 56327), the IEP team is required to review the findings, discuss them at the meeting, and explain in writing if it disagrees. If the team glanced at your report and moved on, that is a procedural violation that can invalidate the IEP. You do not need to accept this. You can demand a written explanation, request a new meeting, and file a complaint if they refuse to engage.
What the Law Actually Says
Three legal provisions work together to protect you here:
Federal -- IDEA Section 300.502(c): The results of any "shall be considered by the public agency...in any decision made with respect to the provision of FAPE to the child." The word "shall" is mandatory. It does not mean "may" or "should" or "if the team feels like it."
Federal -- IDEA Section 300.503 (Prior Written Notice): Every time the district proposes or refuses an action, it must give you written notice explaining what it decided, why, what information it considered, what options it rejected, and what other factors are relevant. A that does not specifically address your private evaluation's findings fails this requirement.
California -- Education Code Section 56327: The IEP team "shall consider" assessments and information provided by the parent. This reinforces the federal mandate under California state law.
The Ninth Circuit -- which governs California -- addressed this directly in M.M. v. Lafayette School District (2014). The court found that a district violated IDEA when it failed to meaningfully consider a private evaluation and instead relied exclusively on its own assessment data. The court emphasized that "consider" requires genuine engagement with the outside data, not a perfunctory acknowledgment.
Tip
"Consider" has a specific legal meaning. It requires the team to: (1) review the evaluation's findings, (2) discuss those findings at the IEP meeting, (3) weigh them against the district's own data, and (4) document in writing why the team agreed or disagreed with the private evaluator's conclusions. If any of these steps was skipped, the consideration was not genuine.
What the District Might Say -- And How to Respond
"We reviewed it and we disagree." Ask: "Can you show me where in the Prior Written Notice you explained which specific findings you disagree with and why? What data contradicts the private evaluator's conclusions?" If they cannot answer with specifics, the "disagreement" is not documented and does not satisfy IDEA.
"Our evaluator is more familiar with the educational setting." Respond: "Familiarity with the school does not make a school evaluation more valid. The private evaluator used standardized, normed instruments. Under IDEA Section 300.502(c), the team must consider these results. Please explain which specific test results you find unreliable and why."
"The private evaluation recommends services we don't offer." This is not a legal basis for ignoring the evaluation. The IEP team must determine what the child needs first, then figure out how to provide it. If the child needs a service, the district must provide it or contract it out -- not pretend the need does not exist.
"We'll take it under advisement." This phrase is a red flag. It means nothing legally. Ask: "Will the team discuss the evaluation's findings today, and will the Prior Written Notice document how those findings affected the team's decisions?" If the answer is no, state on the record that you do not believe the evaluation is being considered as required by law.
"The evaluation is from an outside provider -- we use our own assessment tools." Federal law does not give district assessments priority over private evaluations. Both must be considered. If the two conflict, the team must explain why it credits one over the other with reference to specific data points.
What to Do in the Next 48 Hours
- Get the Prior Written Notice in hand. If you do not already have it from the last IEP meeting, send a written request today. Email is fine. Write: "I am requesting the Prior Written Notice from the [date] IEP meeting. Please provide it within 5 business days." Keep a copy of your request.
- Audit the PWN against the private evaluation. Go through the private evaluation finding by finding. For each major conclusion or recommendation, check: Does the PWN mention it? Does the PWN explain whether the team agreed or disagreed? Does the PWN cite specific data supporting the team's position? Make a list of every finding the PWN does not address.
- Send a written objection to the Special Education Director. Do not call. Write a letter or email. Identify each specific finding from your evaluation that was not addressed. Cite IDEA Section 300.502(c) and California Education Code Section 56327. Request a written response within 10 business days. Use the sample letter below.
- Request a new IEP meeting with the private evaluation as a specific agenda item. In the same letter or a separate one, request that the team reconvene to discuss the evaluation. State that you want the evaluation's findings on the formal agenda -- not as an afterthought.
- Invite your private evaluator to the meeting. Ask them to attend in person or by phone. Most private evaluators will do this for an additional fee. Their presence forces the team to engage with the data directly and makes it much harder to dismiss the findings without explanation. Under IDEA Section 300.321(a)(6), you can invite anyone with knowledge or special expertise about your child.
- At the meeting, ask pointed questions on the record. For each finding: "Dr. [Name] found that [Child] scored in the [X] percentile on [test]. What did the district's testing show on this same skill area? What test was used? What was the score? Why does the team believe its data is more accurate?" Ask the note-taker to record both your questions and the team's responses.
- If the team still refuses to engage, file a compliance complaint. You can file with the California Department of Education (CDE) at any time. A compliance complaint costs nothing, requires no attorney, and CDE must investigate and issue a decision within 60 days. The complaint form is available at cde.ca.gov. You can also pursue due process through the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) if the failure to consider your evaluation resulted in a denial of FAPE -- meaning your child was denied services, found ineligible, or placed inappropriately.
Letter to District: Demanding Genuine Consideration of Private Evaluation
Dear [Special Education Director's Name],
Re: [Child's Full Name], DOB: [Date of Birth], [School Name]
I am writing regarding the IEP meeting held on [date] for my child, [Child's Name]. At that meeting, I submitted the independent evaluation conducted by [Evaluator's Name, credentials] dated [evaluation date]. I have reviewed the Prior Written Notice issued following the meeting and find that it does not satisfy the district's obligation to consider this evaluation.
Specifically, the Prior Written Notice does not address the following findings from the independent evaluation:
- [Finding #1 -- e.g., "[Evaluator] identified a Specific Learning Disability in reading based on [Child]'s scores on the [test name] (standard score: [X], [Y] percentile), which is significantly below [his/her/their] cognitive ability ([test name] FSIQ: [X], [Y] percentile)."]
- [Finding #2 -- e.g., "[Evaluator] found clinically significant deficits in working memory ([test name]: standard score [X]) and processing speed ([test name]: standard score [X]), which were not assessed in the district's evaluation."]
- [Finding #3 -- e.g., "[Evaluator] recommended [specific service or placement] based on [specific data]. The IEP does not include this service, and the PWN does not explain why the team rejected this recommendation."]
Under IDEA Section 300.502(c), the results of an independent educational evaluation "shall be considered by the public agency...in any decision made with respect to the provision of FAPE." Under California Education Code Section 56327, the IEP team must consider all assessments and information provided by the parent. The Ninth Circuit held in M.M. v. Lafayette School District (2014) that this obligation requires genuine engagement with outside evaluation data -- not a perfunctory acknowledgment.
Under IDEA Section 300.503, the Prior Written Notice must describe the information the team considered and the basis for its decisions. A PWN that fails to address the specific findings of a parent-provided evaluation does not meet this standard.
I am requesting:
-
A supplemental Prior Written Notice that specifically addresses each of the findings listed above, including: (a) whether the team agrees or disagrees with each finding, (b) what specific data the team relied on in reaching its conclusions, and (c) why the team's data should be credited over the independent evaluator's data where the two conflict.
-
A new IEP meeting at which the independent evaluation's findings are a specific agenda item, with sufficient time allocated to discuss each finding and recommendation.
-
Permission for [Evaluator's Name] to participate in the meeting by [phone/video], as my invited team member under IDEA Section 300.321(a)(6).
Please respond in writing within 10 business days. If I do not receive a substantive response, I will file a compliance complaint with the California Department of Education.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] [Your Email] [Your Phone Number] [Today's Date]
cc: [Principal's Name], [School Psychologist's Name]
When to Escalate
File a CDE compliance complaint if the district refuses to hold a new meeting, provides another vague PWN, or continues to dismiss your evaluation without specific engagement. A compliance complaint is appropriate for procedural violations -- the district failed to follow the required process. CDE can order corrective actions including new IEP meetings, revised PWNs, compensatory services, and staff training. There is no cost, no attorney required, and the investigation must be completed within 60 calendar days.
File for due process with OAH if the failure to consider your evaluation caused substantive harm -- your child was denied services, found ineligible, or placed in an inappropriate setting when the private evaluation data supported a different outcome. Due process allows you to seek compensatory education (make-up services for what was missed), changes to placement or services, and reimbursement for the private evaluation. An attorney is strongly recommended for due process but is not required.
You can pursue both simultaneously. A compliance complaint and a due process filing address different aspects of the same problem and can run in parallel.
Learn More
- Independent Educational Evaluations -- Your right to request an IEE at district expense when you disagree with the school's evaluation
- The District Must Consider Outside Data -- The full legal framework for parent-provided evaluations
- Predetermination -- When the team has already decided before you walk in the door
- Dispute Resolution Options -- How to file complaints, request mediation, or pursue due process
When to get one-on-one help from an advocate or attorney
Consider contacting an advocate or attorney if any of these apply:
- The district fails to respond to your assessment request within 15 days, misses the 60-day assessment deadline, or repeatedly refuses requests you've made in writing.
- Your child is losing instruction time, being disciplined frequently, or showing significant regression.
- The district wants to move your child to a different school or classroom against your wishes, or you are preparing for mediation or due process.