A due process complaint is how a special education dispute moves from the meeting room to a hearing officer. Federal law says who can file one, what it can cover, and how long you have.
You asked for the evaluation, the meeting produced nothing, and the Prior Written Notice confirmed the refusal in writing. The disagreement is still standing months later, and asking the district to reconsider has stopped producing anything new.
At that point some families ask a hearing officer to decide, and the formal mechanism for doing that is a due process complaint under 34 C.F.R. § 300.507. This post is general information rather than legal advice, and a special education attorney or your state's Parent Training and Information Center can advise you on a specific case.
A parent or a public agency may file a due process complaint on any of the matters described in § 300.503(a)(1) and (2) (relating to the identification, evaluation or educational placement of a child with a disability, or the provision of FAPE to the child). ... The due process complaint must allege a violation that occurred not more than two years before the date the parent or public agency knew or should have known about the alleged action that forms the basis of the due process complaint
34 C.F.R. § 300.507(a)
Under 34 C.F.R. § 300.507(a)(1), either a parent or a public agency may file a due process complaint on any of the matters described in § 300.503(a)(1) and (2): the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of a child with a disability, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to the child. That scope covers most of what families and districts genuinely fight about, from whether a child qualifies to whether the services in the IEP are appropriate.
Notice that the right runs in both directions. Districts file due process complaints too, so receiving one does not mean you did something wrong; it means the district chose the same formal channel available to you.
Under § 300.507(a)(2), the complaint must allege a violation that occurred not more than two years before the date the parent or agency knew or should have known about the alleged action, unless your state has set an explicit time limitation for filing under Part B, in which case the state's deadline governs.
The phrase worth sitting with is "knew or should have known." The clock starts when a parent learned of the problem or reasonably should have learned of it, rather than on the date the violation happened. A violation buried in records you never received may still be within reach, while a problem you watched unfold at the time is measured from when you watched it. Waiting carries its own cost either way, because witnesses move on and records get harder to assemble.
Section 300.507(a)(2) incorporates the exceptions in § 300.511(f), which remove the timeline for a parent who was prevented from filing for either of two reasons. The first is specific misrepresentations by the district that it had resolved the problem forming the basis of the complaint. The second is the district's withholding of information it was required under Part B to provide to the parent.
Both exceptions describe the same underlying situation: a parent who missed the window because the district's own conduct kept the problem out of view. A family told in writing that a service gap had been fixed, who later learns it never was, is the kind of case the first exception exists for.
Under § 300.507(b), the public agency must inform you of any free or low-cost legal and other relevant services available in the area if you request that information, or if either you or the agency files a due process complaint. You do not have to file first, so a family weighing its options can ask for the list before deciding anything.
Families sometimes use the two names interchangeably, and they are different tools. A state complaint, filed under the procedures each state must adopt under 34 C.F.R. § 300.151, is a written complaint to the state education agency, which resolves it and must order corrective action, such as compensatory services or reimbursement, where it finds a failure to provide appropriate services. It is the simpler and less formal of the two mechanisms. A due process complaint leads toward a hearing before an impartial hearing officer, with the structure and stakes that a hearing implies. Which one fits depends on the dispute, and that choice is exactly the kind of question a Parent Training and Information Center can help you think through.
Our free IEP Audit reviews your child's IEP across six research-grounded areas and returns a written report naming what is missing and what to ask for. Families pay nothing. Book a New Family Registration call and we will walk you through how it works.
Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities, 34 C.F.R. § 300.151 (2017).
Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities, 34 C.F.R. § 300.503 (2017).
Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities, 34 C.F.R. § 300.507 (2017).
Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities, 34 C.F.R. § 300.511 (2017).
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).
Keep reading
When you and the district disagree, federal law offers a middle path between giving in and going to a hearing. The state pays for it, a neutral mediator runs it, and a signed agreement is enforceable in court.
Federal law lets you elect to receive the most important special education notices by email if your district offers the option. One sentence in the regulations can turn a crumpled paper in a backpack into a dated, searchable record.
If you disagree with the school's evaluation of your child, federal law gives you the right to an independent educational evaluation, often at public expense, and requires the district to act without unnecessary delay.