Cal. Codes » Education Code
California Codes

Cal. Education Code § 56329 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

As part of the assessment plan given to parents or guardians pursuant to Section 56321, the parent or guardian of the pupil shall be provided with a written notice that shall include all of the following information:

(a)(1)Upon completion of the administration of tests and other assessment materials, an individualized education program team meeting, including the parent or guardian and his or her representatives, shall be scheduled, pursuant to Section 56341, to determine whether the pupil is an individual with exceptional needs as defined in Section 56026, and to discuss the assessment, the educational recommendations, and the reasons for these recommendations.

(2)In making a determination of eligibility under paragraph (1), a pupil shall not, pursuant to Section 1414(b)(5) of Title 20 of the United States Code, and Section 300.306(b) of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations, be determined to be an individual with exceptional needs if the determinant factor for the determination is one of the following in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive, plus subparagraph (D):

(A)Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including the essential components of reading instruction as defined in Section 6368(3) of Title 20 of the United States Code.

(B)Lack of appropriate instruction in mathematics.

(C)Limited-English proficiency.

(D)If the pupil does not otherwise meet the eligibility criteria under Section 300.8(a) of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

(3)A copy of the assessment report and the documentation of determination of eligibility shall be given to the parent or guardian.

(b)A parent or guardian has the right to obtain, at public expense, an independent educational assessment of the pupil from qualified specialists, as defined by regulations of the board, if the parent or guardian disagrees with an assessment obtained by the public education agency, in accordance with Section 300.502 of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations. A parent or guardian is entitled to only one independent educational assessment at public expense each time the public education agency conducts an assessment with which the parent or guardian disagrees. If a public education agency observed the pupil in conducting its assessment, or if its assessment procedures make it permissible to have in-class observation of a pupil, an equivalent opportunity shall apply to an independent educational assessment of the pupil in the pupil’s current educational placement and setting, and observation of an educational placement and setting, if any, proposed by the public education agency, regardless of whether the independent educational assessment is initiated before or after the filing of a due process hearing proceeding.

(c)The public education agency may initiate a due process hearing pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 56500) to show that its assessment is appropriate. If the final decision resulting from the due process hearing is that the assessment is appropriate, the parent or guardian maintains the right for an independent educational assessment, but not at public expense.

If the parent or guardian obtains an independent educational assessment at private expense, the results of the assessment shall be considered by the public education agency with respect to the provision of free appropriate public education to the child, and may be presented as evidence at a due process hearing pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 56500) regarding the child. If a public education agency observed the pupil in conducting its assessment, or if its assessment procedures make it permissible to have in-class observation of a pupil, an equivalent opportunity shall apply to an independent educational assessment of the pupil in the pupil’s current educational placement and setting, and observation of an educational placement and setting, if any, proposed by the public education agency, regardless of whether the independent educational assessment is initiated before or after the filing of a due process hearing proceeding.

(d)If a parent or guardian proposes a publicly financed placement of the pupil in a nonpublic school, the public education agency shall have an opportunity to observe the proposed placement and the pupil in the proposed placement, if the pupil has already been unilaterally placed in the nonpublic school by the parent or guardian. An observation conducted pursuant to this subdivision shall only be of the pupil who is the subject of the observation and shall not include the observation or assessment of any other pupil in the proposed placement. The observation or assessment by a public education agency of a pupil other than the pupil who is the subject of the observation pursuant to this subdivision may be conducted, if at all, only with the consent of the parent or guardian pursuant to this article. The results of an observation or assessment of any other pupil in violation of this subdivision shall be inadmissible in a due process or judicial proceeding regarding the free appropriate public education of that other pupil.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2008–2024 · leading case: C.W. Ex Rel. K.S. v. Capistrano Unified Sch. Dist., 784 F.3d 1237 (9th Cir. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
C.W. Ex Rel. K.S. v. Capistrano Unified Sch. Dist., 784 F.3d 1237 (9th Cir. 2015). · cites it 4× “See Cal. Educ. Code § 56329 (b) (granting parents the “right to obtain, at public expense, an independent educational 8 C.”
M.M. v. Lafayette Sch. Dist., 767 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “502 (b)(2); Cal. Educ. Code § 56329 (c). 12 M.M. V. LAFAYETTE SCH.”
M. M. v. Lafayette Sch. Dist., 681 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2012). “502 (b)(2); Cal. Educ.Code § 56329(c). Lafayette declined to provide an IEE, but it did not immediately request a due process hearing regarding the disagreement.”
Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. v. D.L., 548 F. Supp. 2d 815 (C.D. Cal. 2008). · cites it 3× “Parents have the right to an IEE at public expense if the parent disagrees with an assessment obtained by the school district and the school district does not prove its assessment is appropriate in a due process hearing.”
KS Ex Rel. PS v. Fremont Unified Sch. Dist., 545 F. Supp. 2d 995 (N.D. Cal. 2008). “It therefore follows that standards applicable to the review of an IJ's credibility determinations can certainly be applied in the IDEA context. 5 . Plaintiff also asserts that the ALJ’s reasoning for dismissing parents' experts' testimony “defies special education law.”
San Jose Unified Sch. Dist. v. H. T. et.al. (N.D. Cal. 2022). · cites it 4× “502 (b); Cal. Educ. Code § 56329 (b). The school 6 district may initiate a due process hearing to show that its assessment is “appropriate.”
Douglas v. California Off. of Admin. Hearings, 650 F. App'x 312 (9th Cir. 2016). “Code § 7572(c); Cal. Educ. Code § 56329 (b). 2. J.C.’s parents were also entitled to a stay put order.”
C. W. v. Capistrano Usd (9th Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “See Cal. Educ. Code § 56329 (b) (granting parents the “right to obtain, at public expense, an independent educational assessment of the pupil from qualified specialists .”
L.C. v. Alta Loma Sch. Dist., 389 F. Supp. 3d 845 (C.D. Cal. 2019). “See Cal. Educ. Code §§ 56329 (b), (c). The Court GRANTS the District's request for judicial notice, Dkt.”
T.S., a minor v. Long Beach Unified Sch. Dist. (C.D. Cal. 2023). “502(c); Cal. Educ. Code § 56329 (b)–(c). When presented with an IEE, a school 23 district need only review and consider the report; it need not follow its 24 25 4 At oral argument, T.”
Etiwanda Sch. Dist. v. D. P. (C.D. Cal. 2024). “502 (a) & (b); Ed. Code §§ 56329(b), 56506(c). If IDEA procedural violations significantly impede parents’ opportunity to participate in the decision-making process concerning the provision of a FAPE or otherwise causes a deprivation of educational benefits, then such violations…”
Diaz v. East Side Union High Sch. Dist. (N.D. Cal. 2021). “17 Educ. Code § 56329(c). The Court finds that the District complied with these requirements by 18 filing a due process complaint, and the ALJ correctly found that the District’s assessments were 19 appropriate.”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Cal. Education Code § 56329(b) — 3 cases
C.W. Ex Rel. K.S. v. Capistrano Unified Sch. Dist., 784 F.3d 1237 (9th Cir. 2015). “See Cal. Educ. Code § 56329 (b) (granting parents the “right to obtain, at public expense, an independent educational 8 C.”
Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. v. D.L., 548 F. Supp. 2d 815 (C.D. Cal. 2008). “Parents have the right to an IEE at public expense if the parent disagrees with an assessment obtained by the school district and the school district does not prove its assessment is appropriate in a due process hearing.”
Etiwanda Sch. Dist. v. D. P. (C.D. Cal. 2024). “502 (a) & (b); Ed. Code §§ 56329(b), 56506(c). If IDEA procedural violations significantly impede parents’ opportunity to participate in the decision-making process concerning the provision of a FAPE or otherwise causes a deprivation of educational benefits, then such violations…”
— Cal. Education Code § 56329(c) — 5 cases
M. M. v. Lafayette Sch. Dist., 681 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2012). “502 (b)(2); Cal. Educ.Code § 56329(c). Lafayette declined to provide an IEE, but it did not immediately request a due process hearing regarding the disagreement.”
C.W. Ex Rel. K.S. v. Capistrano Unified Sch. Dist., 784 F.3d 1237 (9th Cir. 2015). “See Cal. Educ. Code § 56329 (b) (granting parents the “right to obtain, at public expense, an independent educational 8 C.”
M.M. v. Lafayette Sch. Dist., 767 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. 2014). “502 (b)(2); Cal. Educ. Code § 56329 (c). 12 M.M. V. LAFAYETTE SCH.”
KS Ex Rel. PS v. Fremont Unified Sch. Dist., 545 F. Supp. 2d 995 (N.D. Cal. 2008). “It therefore follows that standards applicable to the review of an IJ's credibility determinations can certainly be applied in the IDEA context. 5 . Plaintiff also asserts that the ALJ’s reasoning for dismissing parents' experts' testimony “defies special education law.”
Diaz v. East Side Union High Sch. Dist. (N.D. Cal. 2021). “17 Educ. Code § 56329(c). The Court finds that the District complied with these requirements by 18 filing a due process complaint, and the ALJ correctly found that the District’s assessments were 19 appropriate.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.