School Refusing to Evaluate Your Child in Texas? Here's What to Do

You asked the school to test your child for special education. A teacher or counselor said your child needs to go through tiers of intervention first. Months pass. Nothing happens. You ask again. You are told to wait a little longer.

What is being described to you as a process is, in many Texas districts, a tactic. It is called the RTI shield, and it is illegal when used to delay or deny a special education evaluation.

Child Find: The District's Legal Obligation to Find and Evaluate

The starting point is a concept called Child Find. Under both IDEA and Texas law, every school district and charter school in Texas has an affirmative, ongoing obligation to locate, identify, and evaluate all children with disabilities who reside within its boundaries — regardless of whether their parents have asked for an evaluation, and regardless of whether the child is currently enrolled.

This is not a passive obligation. Districts are required to actively look for children who may need special education. When a teacher observes a student struggling in ways consistent with a disability, Child Find is triggered. When a parent requests an evaluation, Child Find is triggered. The district cannot wait for a child to fail spectacularly before acknowledging that an evaluation may be warranted.

In Texas, this obligation is codified in TAC Chapter 89 and has been the subject of significant federal scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Education's 2018 investigation that led to corrective action against the TEA was, at its core, a Child Find violation — the state had systematically suppressed identification through its illegal 8.5% enrollment cap, denying evaluations to hundreds of thousands of children who should have been identified.

The RTI Shield: How Districts Stall

Response to Intervention (RTI) — sometimes called Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) — is a legitimate educational framework. It provides students with increasing levels of academic or behavioral support to address learning difficulties before they become severe.

The problem is how Texas districts have weaponized it.

Instead of using RTI as a support layer that can operate alongside a special education evaluation, many districts use RTI tiers as a gatekeeping mechanism: the child must fail at Tier 1, then fail at Tier 2, then fail at Tier 3, before the district will even consider a referral for evaluation. This process can take a year or more. Meanwhile, the child is falling further behind, and the district is not required to pay for the services that special education would have provided.

A landmark 2011 memorandum from the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) made the law explicit: a school district cannot use RTI to delay or deny a timely initial evaluation for special education. If a parent suspects a disability and requests an evaluation in writing, the district must respond within 15 school days — regardless of what tier of RTI the child is currently receiving.

The OSEP memorandum states clearly that when a parent makes a written referral, the district must either consent to evaluate or provide a written refusal with its legal reasoning. Telling a parent "we need to complete RTI first" is not a legally valid refusal under IDEA or Texas law.

What to Do When the District Says Wait

Step one: Submit a written evaluation request immediately.

A verbal request, a note sent home, a conversation at open house — none of these trigger the legal timeline. You must submit a written request addressed to the district's director of special education or the campus principal. The letter should state that you suspect your child has a disability affecting their educational performance and that you are formally requesting a Full Individual and Initial Evaluation (FIIE) under TAC §89.1011.

Once the district receives your written request, it has exactly 15 school days to either send you a Consent to Evaluate form or provide a written refusal stating the legal basis for the denial. If it suggests completing RTI first rather than responding with one of those two options, that is itself a violation of TAC §89.1011.

Step two: Document every response and non-response.

Keep every communication with the school in writing. Follow up phone calls with emails summarizing what was discussed. Note the dates your letters were sent and received. Build a chronological record of the district's response to your request. This documentation is the foundation of any subsequent complaint.

Step three: If the deadline passes without a proper response, file a TEA state complaint.

The TEA investigates complaints alleging that districts have violated their Child Find obligations or misused RTI to delay evaluations. A complaint citing specific dates — your written request, the 15-school-day deadline, the district's failure to respond with a consent form or written refusal — gives the TEA concrete facts to investigate.

The TEA must issue a decision within 60 calendar days. If it finds a violation, it can order the district to provide the evaluation immediately. It can also order compensatory services if the delay caused the child to lose educational benefit.

When the District Issues a Written Refusal

Some districts, when confronted with a written evaluation request citing TAC §89.1011, will provide a proper written refusal rather than simply stalling. This is actually better than a non-response — it gives you something concrete to challenge.

The written refusal must explain the legal basis for the decision, identify the data used, and state what other options were considered. Review it carefully. The most common refusal argument is that the district does not believe the child has a disability requiring special education — it believes the child's challenges are due to language differences, lack of adequate instruction, or other factors.

A written refusal triggers your right to disagree in writing and to request mediation, file a state complaint, or request a due process hearing on the question of whether the evaluation should be conducted. You can also proceed with a private evaluation through a university clinic or independent psychologist, which generates data the district will be required to consider.

The Child Find Stakes in Texas Are High

Texas is in the midst of an identification surge following the removal of the 8.5% cap. The state added 77,404 new special education students in a single year. Austin ISD was placed under state conservatorship specifically because of a backlog of over 800 initial evaluations that violated Child Find obligations. Across the state, districts are managing caseloads they are not staffed to handle.

In that environment, delay tactics are tempting. A parent who does not know their rights will wait. A parent who submits a written request citing TAC §89.1011, documents every interaction, and files a TEA complaint when the 15-day window passes without a proper response — that parent forces the district to act.

House Bill 2 (2025) now provides districts $1,000 for each FIIE completed, acknowledging the staffing and resource crisis driving evaluation backlogs. That funding exists because the state recognizes the problem is systemic. It does not excuse the individual district that has been stonewalling your request.

The Texas IEP and 504 Advocacy Playbook includes a written evaluation request template that cites TAC §89.1011 and triggers the 15-school-day response clock, along with a follow-up demand letter for when the deadline passes without a proper response. The words you put in writing determine what the district is legally required to do next.

See more United States guides →