Reevaluations: From REED to Evaluation

A reevaluation must occur at least once every three years unless the parent and the local educational agency or LEA agree it is unnecessary. A review of existing evaluation data or REED is part of any reevaluation and is a process to identify what, if any, additional data is needed to determine eligibility and or programming. In this video, participants will examine regulations related to a REED and review the process for conducting a REED. Please note that this presentation is copyrighted by the Texas Education Agency. If you have any questions or need any further information, please contact copyrights@tea.texas.gov. The Texas Education Agency, or TEA, has developed this document to provide technical assistance to Local Educational Agencies, or LEAs. The intention of this document is to provide helpful general information. It does not constitute legal advice nor is it a substitute for consulting with a licensed attorney. The information should not be relied upon as a comprehensive or definitive response to all specific legal situations. This document does not include a complete rendition of the law. Throughout this video when the term parent or parents is used, the term includes the definition aligned to Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations section 300.30. That definition includes biological or adoptive parent, foster parent, guardian, an individual acting in the place of a biological parent with whom the child lives or is legally responsible for the child's welfare, or a surrogate parent as defined in Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations section 300.519. Throughout this video the term local educational agency or LEA will be used and applies to both public school districts and open enrollment charter schools. This video is intended to provide guidance and best practices to LEAs regarding the REED process and reevaluation and is to be used in conjunction with the Question and Answer document, Review of Existing Evaluation Data and Reevaluation, and the TEA Technical Assistance Child Find and Evaluation document. Both of which can be found on the Texas SPED Support or TSS website. We want to share two TEA resources you may find helpful when obtaining informed consent. The Special Education Informed Consent: Quick Guide document and the Video Training Highlight the legal requirements, key points and important resources for LEAs to consider for obtaining informed consent for special education evaluations and services. You can locate these resources on the Texas SPED support website. In this video, we are reviewing the questions and answer document, review of existing evaluation data and reevaluation, updated April 2025. We will review the questions and answers from section one, REED questions 1.1 through 1.4. These questions and answers are worth reviewing periodically once you become familiar with them. Let's review our learning outcomes for this presentation. After viewing this presentation, participants will be able to Identify the federal and state requirements related to the read process and reevaluation written report. Follow required timelines and recognize when informed parental consent is required. Reevaluations are considered just as important as the initial evaluation in the overall process of determining a student's eligibility and need for special education and related services. The student's special education and related services needs may change frequently throughout their educational career, and the reevaluation assesses changing needs. The review of existing evaluation data is not an independent process but is part of the reevaluation process. The reevaluation begins with the review of existing evaluation data. Let's start with the federal and state requirements or the rules and regulations for REEDS. A REED is a process of looking at a student's existing data along with input from the parent to determine if any additional data are needed as part of an initial evaluation or as part of a reevaluation. Specifically the group conducting the REED must decide if further assessments are required to determine whether the student has or continues to have a disability and the educational needs of the student, What the student's academic and developmental needs are or whether the student's present levels of academic achievement and developmental needs have changed. Whether the student needs or continues to need special education and related services. And for a student already receiving special education and related services, whether the student needs any additions or changes to their special education and related services to meet the measurable annual goals set out in the individualized education program or IEP, and to participate as appropriate in the general education curriculum. For an initial evaluation, the REED is completed by the multidisciplinary team or MDT, which is a group of qualified professionals to determine evaluation needs based on the suspected disability or disabilities. For reevaluation, the REEd is completed by the admission, review, and dismissal or ARD committee members, including the parent or adult student, LEA representative, general education teacher, special education teacher, person who can interpret instructional implications of evaluation results and other qualified personnel as appropriate. While it is acceptable for an LEA to conduct a portion of the REED and draft recommendations as to whether additional data are necessary for a reevaluation, the REED must include parental input and the parent must be afforded an opportunity to request an assessment if the LEA's drafted portion of the REED determines that assessment is not necessary. Additional members may also be included as appropriate. Any student eligible as a student with a visual impairment in Texas requires a certified orientation and mobility specialist or COMS to be included in a REED. If a student has a visual impairment, is deaf or hard of hearing, or DHH, or is deaf blind, or DB, then a teacher of students with a visual impairment and or a teacher of students who are deaf or hard of hearing must be included in the REED as well. When dyslexia is suspected, a person with specific knowledge of the reading process, dyslexia and related disorders, and dyslexia instruction is required to serve on the LEA's MDT and any ARD committee that is convened to determine eligibility for special education and related services. Additionally, this member must be a part of an ARD committee meeting at which a change in and or continued eligibility is discussed, such as when conducting a REEd as part of a reevaluation. Is an ARD committee meeting required when conducting a REEd? No. A REED may be conducted without holding an ARD committee meeting. It is common practice however for REEDs to be conducted in conjunction with an ARD committee meeting when considering a reevaluation. This enables the group to review the information together and to document the determinations made by the participants. LEAs need to keep in mind that this REED should be done early enough in the process so that if any assessments or other evaluations are determined necessary, there will be sufficient time to complete them before the reevaluation due date. Is there a timeline to conduct a REED? For an initial evaluation, the timing of the REED would occur shortly after the LEA receives informed written consent from the parent to evaluate in order to meet the initial evaluation timeline required under law. In most cases forty five school days. For the three year reevaluation the REED needs to be conducted prior to the due date of the three year reevaluation with enough time for any requested evaluation to be completed and a report written by the reevaluation due date. A best practice recommendation is that a REED be completed at least forty five school days before the three year anniversary date. If additional data is needed, the information must be obtained prior to the reevaluation due date. What information is reviewed when a REED is conducted? At a minimum, a REED must include the following information if the data is available. The student's evaluations, including independent evaluations conducted by outside entities and information provided by the student's parents or the adult student. The student's current classroom based and local assessments, classroom based observations, curriculum based measurements, or CBMs, criterion referenced assessments, State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness, or STAAR, results, report cards, discipline reports, attendance records, medical and health records, the most recent full and individual evaluation, or FIE, and any other pertinent information. And in the case of a reevaluation, the teachers and related service providers observations of the student. According to IDEA, a review of existing evaluation data not only includes evaluations from previous years, but also evaluations and information provided by the parents of the student, including any outside reports that the parents may have obtained, as well as the inclusion of informal, curriculum based, and criterion reference information from the student's teacher. In other words, it is not just reviewing evaluation data, but all current information and data for the student. We will discuss the various types of information and questions to consider for each area to ensure the sufficiency of the data for answering the required questions. During the language and communication information review, the team should consider the student's language development including receptive and expressive language. Is the student's language developmentally appropriate and commensurate with peers? If not, this may indicate that an evaluation may be warranted. Data include the student's home language survey, language observations and samples, and parent and teacher interviews and or information. If the student receives any language development intervention, the data from progress monitoring should be gathered, reviewed, and analyzed. For an emergent bilingual student, the team should include an LPAC representative in the review and determine if additional data is needed. This collaboration between special programs is critical to ensure that services and supports for English learners with disabilities are aligned. The team will want to review previous evaluations of the student's language proficiency and consider the student's Texas English Language, proficiency assessment system or TELPAS, results, instructional concerns and LPAC reports. The team should also consider the student's current services and instructional supports that have been provided to address language development. During this time, if the student has been identified as having a speech impairment, review the results of the last evaluation. What are the student's goals regarding speech and language? Are they receiving speech therapy? What kind of progress has the student made? If progress is not made on the goals listed, the team may want to consider a new evaluation. If the team is considering removing this service, reducing these services, or dismissing this child from this eligibility, what data do we need to do so? If we are considering dismissal, the student must be evaluated before determining that the student is no longer a student with a disability. Remember, as part of the reevaluation, the REED data should reveal what additional data is necessary, if any, to determine if the student continues to have a disability and the student's educational needs as a result of the disability, or if the student continues to need special education and related services. If the ARD committee members and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, determine no additional data is necessary, then the data or information gathered for the REED could be formulated into a written report identifying the student as no longer a student with a disability. In this instance the LEA must notify the parent of the determination that no additional data is needed and the reasons for the determination, as well as the right of the parents to request an assessment to determine whether the student continues to be a student with a disability. If the student is deaf or hard of hearing, the team will need to review the results of the last evaluation and identify any areas that may need to be updated. Does the student need an updated audiological exam? Also consider the student's mode of communication if they are a student who is deaf or hard of hearing. What is the implication of a student's hearing loss on the student's ability to process linguistic information including amplification in the school setting? The physical, health and motor information should provide the current functioning of motor skills and medical conditions the student may have. Data to consider include observation, information, and or interviews from parents, teachers, licensed physicians, school nurses, and or therapy providers regarding motor skills, medical conditions, and or medications. The motor skills data could include current fine and gross motor skills and functional motor skills, such as being able to button a coat, fasten shoes, open milk cartons, et cetera. If any related service personnel are involved in providing services for the student, the related service personnel, such as a physical therapist or occupational therapist, should provide information and identify any needed data or assessment. And don't forget about any adapted physical education, or APE, needs. Any changes in the student's medical conditions, previously existing or new conditions, and the current medications the student has been prescribed should be documented. Additionally, any previous medical evaluation should be summarized and the impact on the educational setting should be identified. At this point in the review, the team should consider if a release to talk with the student's physician is needed to gather current information regarding any health issues that may impact the student in the educational setting. A common question from multidisciplinary evaluation teams is, should new data and information be gathered from the appropriate medical provider including a new other health impairment or OHI form? It depends. If the student's medical symptoms, or medical condition, or conditions have changed, then it may be necessary to gather additional data from the appropriate medical provider, such as depending on the disability, a licensed physician, physician's assistant, or an advanced practice registered nurse to document any changes in strength, vitality, or alertness that adversely affects the student's educational performance. If the student's medical condition appears to be unchanged and the previous OHI data and provider's information captured the student's current medical presentation, then it would not need to be updated. Please note, an OHI form is not included in statute as a required source of data. However, many LEAs request this form to be completed by a licensed physician as a means to document information from the medical provider. Note that this applies to any disability condition that requires medical documentation to support the disability. A review of vision and hearing screenings and evaluation should be summarized in this area. If the student has a visual impairment or is deaf or hard of hearing, remember that you will need a teacher certified to work with students with visual impairments and or students who are deaf or hard of hearing in the review of existing evaluation data. Next, the team should review the student's current behavior and emotional status. During the data review for this area, consider if the student's behavior is appropriate or problematic. If the student's behaviors are problematic, was an evaluation conducted previously? If yes, the team should review the previous evaluation and identify data and assessments needed to address the student's behaviors. If an evaluation was not conducted previously, additional data will be necessary. Data to consider include discipline records, observations, information regarding relationships with others, parent and teacher information, and student input and information if appropriate. If applicable, the following data should also be gathered: behavior interventions and the progress monitoring data, functional behavior assessment and behavior intervention plan, medical diagnoses and or outside evaluations, and information from outside therapy and or service providers. If an FBA has been completed in the last three years, describe the target behaviors included. If the student's IEP includes a BIP, describe the progress monitoring data available and determine if it is still appropriate. Has the behavior changed or improved? Is the FBA still appropriate? If there is a need for a change in the BIP and the target behavior is not addressed in the FBA, the team will need a new FBA. Suppose the student has had the same BIP for a prolonged period and no progress has been noted. In that case, the team should conduct a new FBA to identify if there may be a different function for the behavior or if something is maintaining the problematic behavior. As the team reviews this data, it indicates whether the student's current behavior warrants further evaluation. For students who meet the disability condition criteria for emotional and or behavioral disability, the team would need to consider if the data continues to be representative of the student's current levels of functioning. If this student were involved with a Manifestation Determination Review, or MDR, would the ARD committee have enough current data to make decisions? If this student receives counseling services, is the data current? Are those goals still appropriate for the child? Unless the team determines the data is current and appropriate, additional data must be considered necessary and included in a re evaluation. When addressing the student's academic skills, there are several data sources to review. Remember that the academic achievement section of an FIE will include information about the student's academic strengths and weaknesses. During the read, reviewing previous assessments and documenting the areas of academic concern found in those assessments should be identified. Does the student continue to have difficulties in those areas? Are there new areas of concern? The team should gather parent and teacher information, classroom observation information from the teacher or other school staff, student grades, current and previous, and work samples. Have there been any changes in the student performance in the classroom, either identified through observation or grades? In addition, the team should gather any historical data on screenings, curriculum based assessments, and state and district assessment performance since the last evaluation. It is important not only to collect the data but also to analyze the student's performance. Is the student performing commensurate with their peers in their class or grade level? What areas does the student indicate difficulty in? In the area of state assessment, does the student currently have an accelerated instruction or intensive program of instruction or IPI? Is that plan working for them? Are they making progress? Another important piece of data is the progress monitoring data from the interventions and supports the student receives. This data should include the type of intervention, the start date of intervention, frequency and duration of the intervention, as well as the baseline where the student began, target goal, and current performance. This progress monitoring data also includes the information gathered on the student's measurable annual academic goals, if appropriate. Norm referenced academic achievement scores were likely provided in the student's initial evaluation. The team needs to ask if more standard scores will answer any questions about the student. These standard scores are often misunderstood. They do not measure progress from one year to three years. The scores only compare the student to a normative group at a point in time. Would information from curriculum based data or criterion referenced assessments, such as STAAR, TELPAS, etc, provide more updated information? These scores compare the student to the grade level curriculum criterion. The most valuable information may come from curriculum based measurements, or CBMs. This is real time information about where the student's skills are in relation to grade level skills. Progress monitoring data will provide information about the student's rate of learning. This is also the opportunity to review the student's current accommodations and analyze what is working or not working for the student. For intellectual functioning, the team should review the results of any previous evaluation. If there has been more than one evaluation, the team will want to consider the consistencies or inconsistencies in the data. The team should not expect progress in intellectual functioning standard scores, but identifying areas of weakness may serve to recommend specific accommodations to support the student's access and progress in the general curriculum. The team should also consider if there are any concerns with the student's functioning in the educational environment, such as with working memory or executive function skills like organization, planning, initiation, etc. If the team believes that there is a concern with intellectual functioning, gathering additional data may be recommended and provided through observations, rating scales, or norm reference testing to identify the students' strengths, weaknesses. Remember though that norm referenced testing is not always required. A formal evaluation of cognition is required only when an intellectual disability is suspected. If identified appropriately, this disability condition can be expected to remain static. When conducting the REED, ARD committee members need to consider the following. What is the value added in administering another formal cognitive norm reference test? Specific subtests can be administered without administering an entire cognitive test. Adaptive behavior functioning is important to investigate for all students but particularly for students with certain disability conditions including intellectual disability and autism. But don't forget about other disability conditions such as visual impairment, deaf or hard of hearing, traumatic brain injury and or orthopedic impairment, or students with emotional behavioral disability and other health impairment. Adaptive behavior functioning should be examined to determine if the student needs any supports in any of these areas: communication, self care, home living, social and interpersonal skills, use of community resources, self direction, Functional academic skills. Work. Leisure, Health, safety. Did the previous evaluation indicate areas of concern regarding adaptive behaviors? If so, describe those concerns. What special education and related services were implemented to address those needs? Has the student shown progress? If this was not identified as an area of concern in the previous evaluation, is that still true? Do the school staff or parents indicate a concern with any area of adaptive functioning? Gathering this information for a re evaluation does not automatically mean a norm referenced adaptive behavior scale needs to be administered. Observations, anecdotal records, progress monitoring of functional skills, and parent and teacher interviews can provide up to date information. For the assistive technology or AT area, the team should review the previous data and or evaluation for recommendations for AT for the student. Is the student currently provided with AT? If so, how successful was the student using the AT strategies, devices and or services? Were they tried and found to be successful for the student? Were they tried and found to be unsuccessful? Does the student no longer need to use the AT device or service? Document your findings. If the student is not currently provided AT, does the student's current functioning indicate a need for AT? The team may need further data, including possibly an AT evaluation. An area that should be included in a three year reevaluation if age appropriate is transition planning and information for training, education, employment, and or independent living skills if applicable. The first IEP to be in effect when the student turns fourteen years of age, the ARD committee must address the transition to life outside of public school, appropriate post secondary options, an appropriate functional vocational evaluation, an appropriate referral to governmental services or public benefits. The IEP must include measurable post secondary goals and a transition plan with identified services. It is recommended that the transition be addressed as part of the evaluation. If the student does not currently have a transition plan, what data is necessary to develop a plan and appropriate goals? If the student does have a transition plan and post secondary goals have been developed, are these goals appropriate and reflect the student's interests and is the student making progress toward meeting these goals? Or does the team need any additional data in this area? The team may review student interviews and information, interest inventories, any functional vocational assessments, and any parent information or input. Related services mean transportation and such developmental, corrective, and other supportive services as are required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education, and include audiology services, interpreting services, psychological services, physical and occupational therapy, counseling services, and orientation and mobility services. Related services also include school health services and school nurse services, social work services in schools, and parent counseling and training. Is the student receiving any of these related services? What supports are currently in place? Is the student making progress? Data and information should be gathered from the related services provider. A better practice would be to include these personnel in the review of existing evaluation data. If the student is not receiving related services, does the student's current functioning indicate a need for this service? If so, additional data will most likely be necessary to determine what is needed and a recommendation for the frequency, duration, and location of the services. Lastly, the team will want to identify any significant changes in the student's education or home environment over the previous three years that may have impacted the student's ability to learn. Document any situational experiences that may be affecting the student's educational performance. The team will wanna review the student's school records including any transfers that may have occurred in the last three years, absences, and the number of times the student was tardy. The team will want to examine if there is a pattern and or if the absences and or number of times tardy are interfering with the student's learning. This would also be the area to document if the student has repeated any grade levels or attended summer school. Although a full sociological summary is not necessary if it was included in the initial evaluation, the team should identify any changes that may affect the student's progress. Also, the team should identify any difficulties the student may have accessing materials. Data to consider include observation of the student in the educational environment, information and possibly an interview with the student's teachers and parent, and with the student if appropriate. The review of existing evaluation data should begin with a review of the student's current IEP. The team will want to document the disability condition or conditions for which the student meets the criteria. Does the disability condition or conditions continue to reflect the student's abilities and difficulties accurately? Does it accurately describe the student? Next, the team should review the student's progress toward their measurable annual goals. Is the student making adequate progress and on target to achieve those goals? Another question to consider is, does it appear that the same or very similar goals have been written year after year? For example, little or no change in the goals conditions, behavior, or criterion. This is a red flag for a need for additional data. Then the team will want to look closely at the special education and related services the student receives including accommodations. Are the current special education and related services assisting the student in progressing toward the measurable annual goals and access to and progress in the general curriculum? Review the current classroom accommodations. What data is available that indicates these accommodations are appropriate and are working for the student or are they not working for the student. If data indicates that the current plan is not working for the student, then the team will need to determine if additional data is needed to inform the development of a new IEP. The IDEA does not require parental consent before reviewing existing data as part of an evaluation or re evaluation process. However, informed parental consent is required before an initial evaluation or reevaluation is conducted. The LEA must have received informed consent from the parent for the evaluation to proceed. Regarding initial evaluation. While a REED is part of an initial evaluation, if appropriate, it is considered best practice to always collect and review all existing evaluation data on a student as part of an initial evaluation. For example, there is an outside evaluation submitted for consideration and the MDT conducted a REED. The MDT may determine that no additional data is needed. This is considered an initial evaluation and parental consent is required. If a student is referred for an initial evaluation, all procedures prior to initiating the evaluation must be followed. This includes the distribution of the prior written notice, the Notice of Procedural Safeguards, and the Overview of Special Education for Parents form. In addition, the opportunity to sign informed consent must be provided to the parents or guardians, or the adult student. Regarding re evaluation, a REED is the first step in the reevaluation process. Parental consent is not required before conducting a REED for a reevaluation of any kind, triennial or otherwise. It is typical for members of the ARD committee to conduct a REED and review existing data. The parent needs to be part of this discussion to ensure they are informed about the REED process, which requires up to date parent information. Following the REED, the LEA must obtain parental consent in order to conduct a reevaluation. Let's begin with when parent consent is not required. It is not required prior to reviewing existing evaluation data or when a test or assessment is administered to all students unless that administration requires consent from the parents of all students. Once the ARD committee reviews the existing data and information, there are three possible outcomes or conclusions the committee can determine. One, the ARD committee could determine that additional data is needed in all areas resulting in a comprehensive reevaluation. Two, the ARD committee could determine that additional data is needed in specific areas of the reevaluation. For example academic achievement or language communication. Three. The ARD committee could determine that no additional data is needed in any area of the reevaluation. What if the group conducting a REED for a reevaluation concludes that additional data are needed? If the group conducting a REED determines that additional data are needed, the LEA must provide the parent or the adult student with a copy of the Notice of Procedural Safeguards and Prior Written Notice that describes any assessments that it proposes to conduct. Obtain consent from the parent or the adult student before conducting any assessments, except that an LEA need not obtain consent to conduct a reevaluation if it can demonstrate that it made reasonable efforts to obtain consent, and administer the assessments and evaluation measures needed to produce the necessary data on or before the three year reevaluation due date. What if the group conducting a REED concludes that no additional data are needed? For an initial evaluation there will rarely be a case in which an MDT decides that no additional data are needed. The group conducting the REED will determine any applicable assessments that are necessary and follow the process of obtaining consent from the parent or adult student before conducting any assessments. In the case of a reevaluation, if the group conducting a REED determines that no additional data are needed, the LEA must notify the student's parent or the adult student. Best practice is to document this notification in writing through the deliberations and or prior written notice of, the ARD committee's determination and the reasons for the determination, and their right to request an evaluation to determine whether the student continues to have a disability and to determine the student's need for special education and related services. It is important for an LEA in the REED process to carefully consider the reevaluation due date because if a parent requests additional evaluations after the LEA informs the parent of its determination that no additional data are needed, Any additional evaluations must be completed in a timely manner as there is no extension of the reevaluation deadline. If the parent or the adult student does not request additional evaluation, the LEA is not required to conduct further evaluation and the REED may constitute the student's three year reevaluation. The date of the REED establishes the new three year reevaluation date if no additional data are needed. If a REED is conducted during an ARD committee meeting and the parent agrees that no additional data are needed for a reevaluation, does the parent still need to be notified in writing of this decision? Yes. In the case of a reevaluation, if the ARD committee conducting a REED determines that no additional data are needed, the LEA must still notify the student's parent or the adult student. Best practice is to document this notification in writing through the deliberations and or prior written notice, the committee's determination and the reasons for the determination, and their right to request an evaluation to determine whether the student continues to have a disability and to determine the student's need for special education and related services. When a child is referred from early childhood intervention or ECI, is the LEA required to conduct a REED? Best practice dictates that a REED is always necessary as part of an initial evaluation, including an initial evaluation for a child referred from ECI. The MDT will collect and review all existing evaluation data on a child as part of an initial evaluation from ECI to assist in determining eligibility. How is a REED conducted for an initial evaluation? The first step of the initial evaluation should be for the MDT to conduct a REED. If a student is referred for an initial evaluation, all procedures prior to initiating the evaluation must be followed. This includes the distribution of the Prior Written Notice, the Notice of Procedural Safeguards, and the Overview of Special Education for Parents form. In addition, the opportunity to sign informed consent must be provided to the parents or the adult student. If the parent provides an outside evaluation this would be included in the REED to determine what additional data, if any, are needed to determine if the student is a student with a disability and the educational needs of the student. An initial evaluation was conducted and the student did not qualify for special education services because the ARD committee determined the student did not require the provision of special education and related services. The school later refers the student for an evaluation. How does the LEA proceed with the new evaluation? This is considered a new initial evaluation so the same procedures apply as they would for any other initial evaluation. Once those procedures are followed, the MDT will conduct a REED to determine what additional data is needed to determine if the student is a student with a disability under IDEA and whether the student needs special education and related services. New testing may or may not be needed, however there will be new information related to the student's access to and progress in the general education curriculum. This new information could include informal data from teachers and parents, changes in attendance, grades, behavior, et cetera, criterion referenced data from district and state assessments, and data from curriculum based measurements. For a reevaluation, if the ARD Committee suspects a new or different disability, does a REED need to be completed? Yes. The ARD committee and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, must conduct a REED on the student and based on that review, including input from the student's parents, identify what additional data, if any, are needed to make an informed decision regarding the identification of a different disability or an additional disability. For students with an other health impairment or OHI, should new data and information be gathered from the appropriate medical provider for a REED as part of a reevaluation? It depends. If the student's medical symptoms or medical conditions have changed, then it may be necessary to gather additional data from the appropriate medical provider, such as depending on the disability, a licensed physician, physician's assistant or an advanced practice registered nurse to document any changes in strength, vitality, or alertness that adversely affects the student's educational performance due to the chronic or acute health problem. If the student's medical condition appears to be unchanged and the previous OHI data and provider's information capture the student's current medical presentation, then it would not need to be updated. Please note an OHI form is not included in statute as a required source of data. However, many LEAs request this form to be completed to document information from the medical provider. The OHI data must include identification or confirmation of the student's chronic or acute health problems. This applies to any disability condition that requires a medical diagnosis to support the disability. Remember, after a full and individual initial evaluation or FIIE is conducted all other evaluations are reevaluations. Informed parental consent is not required for a test administered to all students. Before we end our video on review of existing evaluation data or REED and reevaluation, we wanna share some helpful resources with you. The resources and information related to reevaluations and REEDs informed consent, and the fact sheet for a summary of performance can be located on the Texas SPED support website. These have been hyperlinked in your handout. We have also linked the frameworks for a REED, consent for reevaluation, evaluation procedures, and summary of performance from the legal framework for the child centered special education process website. We hope you find these resources helpful. Thank you so much for joining us today to learn more about REEDs and reevaluations. If you have any questions or need more information, please connect with your regional child find and evaluation statewide contact. You can access the statewide contact list by clicking the link in the handout or scanning the QR code.

A reevaluation must occur at least once every three years unless the parent and the local educational agency, or LEA, agree it is unnecessary. A review of existing evaluation data or REED is part of any reevaluation and is a process to identify what, if any, additional data is needed to determine eligibility and or programming. In this video, participants will examine regulations related to reevaluations and determine best practices for a comprehensive reevaluation. Please note that this presentation is copyrighted by the Texas Education Agency. If you have any questions or need any further information, please contact copyrights@tea.texas.gov. The Texas Education Agency or TEA has developed this document to provide technical assistance to local educational agencies or LEAs. The intention of this document is to provide helpful general information. It does not constitute legal advice nor is it a substitute for consulting with a licensed attorney. The information should not be relied upon as a comprehensive or definitive response to all specific legal situations. This document does not include a complete rendition of the law. Throughout this video, when the term parent or parents is used, the term includes the definition aligned to Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulation section 300.30. That definition includes biological or adoptive parent, foster parent, guardian, an individual acting in the place of a biological parent with whom the child lives or is legally responsible for the child's welfare, or a surrogate parent as defined in Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 300.519. Throughout this video, the term local educational agency or LEA will be used and applies to both public school districts and open enrollment charter schools. This video is intended to provide guidance and best practices to LEAs regarding the REED process and reevaluation and is to be used in conjunction with the Question and Answer Document, Review of Existing Evaluation Data and Reevaluation, and the TEA Technical Assistance: Child Find and Evaluation document, both of which can be found on the Texas SPED Support or TSS website. We want to share two TEA resources you may find helpful when obtaining informed consent. The special education informed consent quick guide document and the video training highlight the legal requirements, key points, and important resources for LEAs to consider for obtaining informed consent for special education evaluations and services. You can locate these resources on the Texas SPED support website. In this video, we are reviewing the questions and answer document, review of existing evaluation data and reevaluation, updated April 2025. We will review the questions and answers from section 2: Reevaluation, questions 2.1 through 2.10. These questions and answers are worth reviewing periodically once you become familiar with them. Let's review our learning outcomes for this presentation. After viewing this presentation, participants will be able to identify the federal and state requirements related to the reevaluation written report and identify the procedures for reevaluation when a dismissal may be appropriate and requirements for when a reevaluation is required for graduation. Now, let us explore reevaluation. When must a reevaluation be conducted? A reevaluation must occur at least once every three years unless the parent and the LEA agree that a reevaluation is unnecessary. A reevaluation may not occur more than once a year unless the parent and the LEA agree otherwise. The LEA must ensure that a reevaluation of each student with a disability is conducted when. The LEA determines the student's educational or related service needs, including improved academic achievement and functional performance warrant a reevaluation. The ARD committee suspects that the child has an additional disability. The student's parent or teacher requests a reevaluation. The ARD committee is determining whether the student continues to be a student with a disability such as considering dismissal from special education. Or an evaluation is being conducted as part of the summary of performance, or SOP, required for a student who is graduating. Who conducts a reevaluation? Although a reevaluation does not have to be conducted exactly as the initial evaluation, the evaluation procedures specified in IDEA still must be followed. Assessments and other evaluation materials must be administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel. This may include teachers, an educational diagnostician, a school psychologist, a speech language pathologist or SLP, other personnel with specializations in the areas of assistive technology, occupational therapy, physical therapy, visual impairments, DHH, or other areas. When dyslexia is suspected, a person with specific knowledge of the reading process, dyslexia, and related disorders, and dyslexia instruction must serve on the LEA's MDT and any ARD committee that is convened to determine eligibility or continued eligibility for special education and related services. This person would need to be involved in a reevaluation if dyslexia is the identified or suspected disability. What must be included in the reevaluation? The reevaluation is a written report or summary of the student's current functioning and special education and related services needs, regardless of whether formal assessments or other evaluation measures were administered. The reevaluation must include data and information, including any assessments and other evaluation measures specified in the REED. May the deadline for a student's reevaluation be extended by the LEA or parent? No. Nothing in statute, rule, or regulation allows an LEA and a parent to agree to extend the three year deadline for a reevaluation. In Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 300.303 b2, IDEA is clear that a student must be reevaluated at least once every three years unless the parent and district agree through the REED process that a reevaluation is not needed. This is why it is critical for an LEA to plan accordingly to allow for a REED to occur with enough time before the reevaluation deadline in case additional evaluations are part of the additional data that are necessary for the reevaluation. Is there a specified timeline to review a reevaluation report or summary once it is completed? There is no specified timeline in state or federal regulations when it comes to reviewing the reevaluation report or summary. However, it is recommended that LEAs follow the same process as they do with initial evaluations, in that the reevaluation report or summary is reviewed by the ARD committee within thirty calendar days of the completion of the report or summary. The date that the reevaluation report or summary is completed establishes the new three-year reevaluation due date. IDEA specifies that a reevaluation must be conducted if the LEA proposes that a student is no longer a student with a disability. Remember, a student with a disability is defined by IDEA as having a disability condition or conditions, in other words, meets the criteria for one or more of the thirteen disability conditions and, because of the disability, needs special education and related services. Therefore, if the LEA believes that the student no longer meets the criteria or no longer needs special education and related services to progress in the general curriculum, A reevaluation must be conducted. When considering dismissal from special education, must the LEA ensure that the reevaluation includes additional data? It depends. As part of the reevaluation, the REED data should reveal what additional data is necessary, if any, to determine if the student continues to have a disability and the student's educational needs as a result of the disability or if the student continues to need special education and related services. If the ARD committee members and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, determine no additional data is necessary, Then the data and information gathered for the REED could be formulated into a written report identifying the student as no longer a student with a disability. In this instance, the LEA must notify the parent of the determination that no additional data is needed and the reasons for the determination as well as the right of the parents to request an assessment to determine whether the student continues to be a student with a disability. Graduation with a high school diploma that is fully aligned with state standards or a higher diploma, such as a regular high school diploma, terminates a student's eligibility for special education services, and a reevaluation is not required. When is the reevaluation process required as part of the summary of performance or SOP prior to exit from the public school? There are two answers to this question. While all students receiving special education services who exit public school through graduation or exceed age eligibility must receive an SOP, Not all SOPs must include an evaluation. We will discuss these two answers next. The following answers describe the graduation options included in the Texas Administrative Code. However, the ARD committee must use the full text from the Texas Administrative Code to make decisions related to graduation. One, the reevaluation process is not required for students who have met graduation requirements specified by Title 19 of the Texas Administrative Code section 89.1070 b1. These students have demonstrated satisfactory performance on the required end of course or EOC assessment instruments as established for students in general education. The reevaluation process is also not required for students who have exceeded maximum age eligibility without meeting graduation requirements. Two. The reevaluation process is required for students who have met graduation requirements specified by Title 19 of the Texas Administrative Code, section 89.1070 b2 or b3. Students who meet graduation requirements specified by Title 19 of the Texas Administrative Code, section 89.1070 b2 met curriculum and credit requirements without modifications, and their ARD committee determined that satisfactory performance was not required for more than two EOC assessment instruments. Students who meet graduation requirements specified by Title 19 of the Texas Administrative Code section 89.1070 b3 met curriculum and credit requirements with modifications. The requirements for the SOP are described in Title 19 of the Texas Administrative Code section 89.1070 f and g for students who are entitled to an evaluation with their SOP, as specified by section 89.1070 f2, the guidance in questions 1.5 through 1.9 regarding the reevaluation process may be used to determine an appropriate evaluation for the student's SOP. It is worth noting that while students who will be exiting public school through meeting the graduation requirements specified by section 89.1070 b1 or exceeding maximum age eligibility are not entitled to an evaluation, it is recommended that appropriate reevaluation is considered for each student. While all students receiving special education services who exit public school through graduation or exceed age eligibility must receive an SOP. Not all SOPs must include an evaluation. The following answers describe the graduation options included in the Texas Administrative Code. However, the ARD committee must use the full text from the Texas Administrative Code to make decisions related to graduation. For further information about SOP, you can access the TEA Technical Assistance, Child Find and Evaluation Guidance document, and the Fact Sheet Summary of Performance on the TSS website. If a reevaluation is conducted and the student no longer qualifies in one or all areas, is an ARD committee meeting necessary, or can the student be dismissed through an amendment? Eligibility determinations cannot be made through an IEP amendment. Any reevaluation report or summary that may result in a change in eligibility must be addressed as part of a properly constituted ARD committee meeting. If the LEA has attempted to obtain consent for the administration of additional assessments as part of the reevaluation, but the parent fails to respond to provide consent, can the LEA proceed with the reevaluation without having to use mediation or due process procedures? The LEA must make reasonable efforts to obtain informed consent for the administration of additional assessments as part of a reevaluation such as detailed records of telephone calls and the results of those calls, copies of correspondence sent to parents and any responses received, detailed records of visits to the parent's home and or place of work and the results of those visits. If the parent does not respond, despite reasonable efforts by the LEA to obtain the parent's informed consent, the reevaluation can proceed. Notice the reasonable efforts listed are plural, so this indicates multiple attempts via multiple methods. Note, this is not a circumstance where the parent has refused to provide consent. An LEA may only move forward with the reevaluation without mediation or due process when the parent fails to reply at all. What if the parent refuses consent for the administration of assessments for a reevaluation? For a student enrolled in an LEA, the LEA may, but is not required to do so, pursue consent override procedures such as mediation or due process procedures. If the LEA chooses not to pursue mediation or due process, they are not in violation of their obligation under the child find and evaluation requirements. When the student is enrolled in a private school or is homeschooled, the circumstances are different. If the parent of a student enrolled in a private school or is homeschooled refuses consent, the LEA may not pursue consent override procedures. In both circumstances, LEAs should document efforts to obtain parental consent. This could be in the form of written logs, certified mail receipts, email correspondence, or other methods of documentation. We've come to the end of our presentation. Don't forget the read and reevaluation process is conducted to identify any additional data necessary to determine whether the student continues to have a disability and the educational needs of the student, whether the student continues to need special education and related services, present levels of academic achievement and related developmental needs, whether any additions or modifications to the special education and related services are needed to enable the student to make progress towards the measurable annual goals and participate, as appropriate, in the general education curriculum. In other words, it is not just about reestablishing eligibility and or continuing special education and related services, it is about identifying the student's strengths and needs to develop an appropriate ambitious IEP. Before we end our video on review of existing evaluation data or REED and reevaluation, we wanna share some helpful resources with you. The resources and information related to reevaluations and REEDs, informed consent, and the fact sheet for a summary of performance can be located on the Texas SPED support website. These have been hyperlinked in your handout. We have also linked the frameworks for a REED, consent for reevaluation, evaluation procedures, and summary of performance from the legal framework for the child centered special education process website. We hope you find these resources helpful. Thank you so much for joining us today to learn more about REEDs and reevaluations. If you have any questions or need more information, please connect with your regional child find and evaluation statewide contact. You can access the statewide contact list by clicking the link in the handout or scanning the QR code.