How Many Assessments Are Required in a Comprehensive Evaluation Under IDEA?

No. It's not a trick question.

There is no magic number.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) doesn’t specify a checklist of assessments by name or number. Under § 300.304(b), a comprehensive evaluation must “use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information” that assist in determining “whether the child is a child with a disability . . . and to determine the educational needs of the child.”

Example: An Evaluation Falls Short

In one case, a parent raised concerns about a comprehensive evaluation administered to her child. The principal immediately jumped to her feet and responded, “We only test for identification.”

The principal’s mindset missed the point. Why? Because limiting an evaluation to eligibility testing—such as stopping once low scores confirm a disability—is inconsistent with IDEA’s requirement for a comprehensive evaluation.

In this example, the student was re-evaluated three weeks after the initial evaluation, and more areas of need were identified. A year later—after the parent continued to state the evaluation wasn’t comprehensive—the student was re-evaluated again, and additional needs were uncovered.

These delays resulted in IEPs that failed to provide a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

Parents & Educators: Raise ALL Your Concerns

Under § 300.304(c)(4), the comprehensive evaluation must assess the child “in all areas related to the suspected disability.” This includes areas raised by both parents and educators.

In the example above, a first-year teacher later apologized to the parent for not speaking up. She said she thought her input didn’t matter as much as that of others at the meeting. Yet, she was the only one with firsthand classroom insight—insight that could have redirected the evaluation from the beginning.

Educator and parent input isn’t optional—it’s essential. It helps identify areas of need, guides the direction of the evaluation, and helps avoid future disputes. The excuse, “No one mentioned it as a concern,” is often used by schools and attorneys to justify limited testing.

The teacher in this case was the only one at the meeting with firsthand experience observing how the student functioned during the school day—and was best suited to speak to academic trends, such as the student being highly motivated in math while regularly avoiding reading assignments by asking for bathroom passes.

Final Words

Comprehensive evaluations aren’t about “testing for everything possible.” They are guided by concerns raised and needs observed.

Parents: Share all your concerns.

Educators: Speak up.

Schools: Administer evaluations that are consistent with IDEA.