Alaska IEP Evaluation Timeline, Dispute Routes and Parent Resources (2026)
- Evaluation window
- 90 calendar days
- The clock starts at
- Parental consent
- State complaint deadline
- One year
- Due process deadline
- 12 months
How long does a school in Alaska have to complete an IEP evaluation?
An Alaska school district works to a single 90 calendar day deadline in place of the federal 60 days. The count starts the day the district receives signed parental consent, so by day 90 the evaluation, the eligibility decision, the IEP for a child who qualifies plus the start of services are all meant to be finished. A second state rule keeps the IEP due within 30 days of the eligibility decision, which is why a district that finds a child eligible at day 35 owes the IEP by day 65. The same 90 days covers a reevaluation of eligibility, a deadline the federal rules leave open. When a family disagrees with a district, the special education office at the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development investigates written complaints going back one year, mediation runs at no cost to families through Alaska Special Education Mediation Services plus a due process request carries a 12 month window counted from the district's written notice.
The evaluation timeline in Alaska
| Initial evaluation window | 90 calendar days |
|---|---|
| The clock starts at | parental consent to evaluate |
| Against the federal rule | A timeframe Alaska sets for itself |
IDEA sets a default of 60 calendar days from parental consent for an initial evaluation (34 CFR 300.301(c)(1)). It also lets a state set its own timeframe instead, which is what Alaska has done, so the window above is the one that applies here.
Alaska sets its own timeline in place of the federal 60 calendar day default. One 90 calendar day window runs from the day a district receives signed parental consent. Inside that window the district evaluates the child, determines eligibility, develops the IEP where the child is eligible plus the family consents to services, then begins those services. The same 90 days covers a reevaluation of eligibility. A second state rule keeps the IEP itself due within 30 days of the eligibility decision, so an early eligibility decision does not push the IEP to the end of the window.
Source: 4 AAC 52.115(a) (Timelines), the state timeframe the federal rule allows at 34 CFR 300.301(c)(1)(ii), with the 30 day IEP obligation at 4 AAC 52.115(b) plus AS 14.30.278; the evaluation procedures themselves sit at 4 AAC 52.120, which adopts 34 CFR 300.301 by reference so the two exceptions to the timeline at 34 CFR 300.301(d) and (e) ride along www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/alaska/4-AAC-52.115
The same window sits beside all fifty-one jurisdictions on the evaluation timelines by state table, which explains where the federal deadline comes from. To pull one state's window on its own, the evaluation deadline checker returns that single result.
Reevaluation and IEP review cadence in Alaska
Alaska keeps the federal cadence. A reevaluation happens at least once every three years, no more than once a year unless the family and the district agree otherwise. Alaska's own rule sets the three year requirement flatly. The federal rule the state works under adds one more line: a family and a district can agree a reevaluation is unnecessary. The state education department reprints that federal wording in full in its own guidance. The IEP team reviews the IEP at least once a year. Two state rules sit around that cadence. The 90 calendar day window that governs an initial evaluation also covers a reevaluation of eligibility, which is a deadline the federal rules leave open. The state education department states in its own guidance that the 90 days applies to any additional testing sought as part of a reevaluation. The group that reviews existing data is described as qualified professionals together with a parent of the child. Where that group decides no additional data are needed, the family gets written notice of the decision, the reasons behind it plus the option to ask for an evaluation of continued eligibility anyway. One more Alaska rule follows children identified early: for a child in the early childhood developmental delay category, which runs from age three through age eight, an IEP team reevaluation happens before the child turns nine to look at whether the child fits one of the named disability categories.
Source: 4 AAC 52.180(a) for the three year cycle plus the once a year limit, 4 AAC 52.180(b) for the review group that includes a parent, 4 AAC 52.180(d) for the reevaluation before age nine, 4 AAC 52.180(e) for the notice where no more data are needed, with the developmental delay age range at 4 AAC 52.130(n), the annual IEP review at 4 AAC 52.140(d) plus the 90 calendar day reevaluation window at 4 AAC 52.115(a); the department's Guidance for Special Education Personnel states that the 90 day timeline applies to reevaluations and reprints the federal cadence; that cadence sits at 34 CFR 300.303(b)(1) for the once a year limit plus 34 CFR 300.303(b)(2) for the three year requirement, which is also where the option to agree a reevaluation is unnecessary is stated, since 4 AAC 52.180(a) does not name it; the annual review is at 34 CFR 300.324(b)(1)(i) www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/alaska/4-AAC-52.180
If you disagree in Alaska
IDEA gives families in every state the same three routes when a disagreement with the school does not resolve at the team table. What changes at the state line is who administers each route, how long you have to file and the local detail below.
The state complaint
Handled by the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development, which takes filings at the Special Education Dispute Resolution address published in the state's own procedural safeguards notice. Time limit to file: one year, counted back from the date the department receives the complaint.
An organization, a parent or another individual can file. Only a parent may file the one kind of complaint that alleges a district failed to carry out a due process hearing decision. The complaint is written, signed plus dated. It goes to the department at the same time as a copy goes to the respondent plus the district serving the child. The department's notice gives three routes for sending it: mail, fax or email. A complaint may raise a systemic problem, one child's rights or both, with a separate complaint for each child whose own rights are at issue. The department may consolidate related complaints for the investigation while still issuing separate decisions where confidentiality calls for it. Alaska counts its decision clock from acceptance rather than from receipt: once the department accepts a complaint as meeting the filing requirements, it has 60 days to issue a written decision. It extends that only for exceptional circumstances or where both sides agree to mediate, with the reasons documented. Before investigating, the department helps clarify the allegations, invites more information plus offers both sides a chance to settle without an adversarial process. The written decision carries a summary of the complaint, a summary of the investigation, findings of fact, conclusions addressing each allegation plus, where a violation is found, an order to stop it and remedy it. Alaska names compensatory education, monetary reimbursement plus corrective action as forms that remedy can take, including system wide corrective action discovered while investigating one child's complaint. Two Alaska specifics are worth knowing before filing. Where a due process hearing is already pending on the same allegations, the department sets those parts aside until the hearing ends. An issue already decided in a hearing between the same parties is binding. A complaint decision on an issue that could instead go to a due process hearing is not the last word: the party that did not prevail may request a hearing on that issue. Only where the issue cannot go to a hearing is the decision final, appealable to the superior court.
Source: 4 AAC 52.500(a) for who may file plus the one year window, (b) for the writing, the signature, the date plus the simultaneous copy to the district, (c) for the acceptance step plus the offer to resolve without an adversarial process, (d) for the independent investigation, (e) for the written decision within 60 days of acceptance, its two extension grounds, its required contents plus the remedies, (f) for the compliance documentation, (g) for the set aside where a hearing is pending, (h) for what makes a decision final; the same one year window sits at 34 CFR 300.153(c) with the 60 day limit at 34 CFR 300.152(a); the Special Education Dispute Resolution filing address plus the mail, fax and email routes come from the department's Notice of Procedural Safeguards www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/alaska/4-AAC-52.500
Mediation
The state education department runs the mediation system. Alaska law puts two standing duties on it: keep a list of mediators who know the federal and state special education rules, then qualify them through a training program open to anyone who meets the department's criteria. The department names its provider on its own special education page, Alaska Special Education Mediation Services, with a direct phone number plus email for requesting a session. Mediation is voluntary for both sides, free to families and never a reason to delay or deny a due process hearing, since Alaska adopts the federal mediation rule wholesale rather than writing its own. Two places in Alaska practice push mediation forward. A family and a district who agree to mediate can use it in place of the resolution meeting that otherwise follows a due process complaint. Once a hearing officer is appointed, that officer has to tell the parent and the district that mediation is available plus encourage them to try it before the hearing goes ahead. Agreeing to mediate is also one of the two grounds on which the department can take longer than 60 days to decide a written complaint.
Source: 4 AAC 52.490, which adopts 34 CFR 300.506 by reference rather than writing Alaska's own mediation rule, so the federal subsections state the facts here: mediation is voluntary for both sides at 34 CFR 300.506(b)(1)(i), it may not be used to deny or delay a parent's right to a hearing at 34 CFR 300.506(b)(1)(ii) plus the state bears the cost at 34 CFR 300.506(b)(4); the department's duty to keep a mediator list plus run a training program sits at AS 14.30.194(b), the hearing officer's duty to raise mediation at AS 14.30.193(d), mediation in place of the resolution meeting at 4 AAC 52.550(f) plus mediation as a ground for extending the complaint decision at 4 AAC 52.500(e); Alaska Special Education Mediation Services is named on the department's own special education page and in the department's Alaska Special Education Parents' Guide www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/alaska/4-AAC-52.490
A due process hearing
Time limit to file: 12 months from the date the school district gave the parent written notice of the decision the parent disagrees with, which is shorter than the federal two year window.
Alaska writes its own filing clock into statute: a parent requests a hearing no later than 12 months after the district's written notice of the decision at issue. That clock does not run where a district misrepresented that it had resolved the problem or withheld information it was required to give the family. A district that wants a hearing files within 60 days after the parent action or inaction it is complaining about. How the hearing officer is chosen is the part families ask about most. The department keeps a list of trained hearing officers as a public record, picks one at random, then sends both sides a notice of appointment with that person's qualifications within five working days. Each side may reject one appointed hearing officer within five days without giving a reason. The department then appoints another the same way. Hearings are run one at a time rather than through a two tier review. Alaska's rule puts the burden of proof on whoever asked for the hearing, lets a parent bring the child plus open the hearing to the public, requires both sides to exchange evidence at least five business days ahead plus holds the hearing officer to questions arising under the federal special education law and Alaska's own special education statutes rather than other law. The shape of the case follows the federal pattern: a resolution meeting within 15 days, a 30 day resolution period, then a written decision within 45 days of one of four trigger events, extended only for good cause stated in writing. Discipline cases move faster, with an expedited hearing within 20 school days plus a decision mailed within 10 school days after it. The district pays all costs of the hearing. The decision is a final administrative order that either side may take to the superior court.
Source: AS 14.30.193(a) for the 12 month filing window, (b) for random selection from the department's list plus the five working day notice of appointment, (c) for each side's single rejection, (d) for the mediation reminder, (f) for the appeal to the superior court, (g) for the public hearing officer list; 4 AAC 52.550(a) for the district's 60 day window, (c) for the two exceptions to the parent's filing window, (f) for the resolution meeting, (h) for the five business day disclosure, (i)(9) for the child's presence plus opening the hearing, (i)(11) for the burden of proof, (j) for the 30 day resolution period, (k) for the 45 day decision plus good cause extensions, (l) for expedited discipline hearings, (o) for the limits on what a hearing addresses, (p) for the district paying hearing costs; hearing officer qualifications sit at 4 AAC 52.560; the federal counterparts are 34 CFR 300.507, 34 CFR 300.511 plus 34 CFR 300.516 codes.findlaw.com/ak/title-14-education-libraries-and-museums/ak-st-sect-14-30-193/
Get the free Evaluation-Request Letter Template (PDF)
A ready-to-adapt letter to request an evaluation in writing, with the dates that matter and the language to use.
Instant download, plus a note if the guidance on this topic changes. Unsubscribe anytime.
Who to contact in Alaska
- The state special education office. Alaska Department of Education and Early Development, Special Education. This is the office that answers questions about Alaska rules and receives a state complaint.
- Your rights in writing. Notice of Procedural Safeguards: Parental Rights for Special Education, the edition the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development posts on its special education page. Every district hands parents this notice at least once a year (34 CFR 300.504). It is the plain summary of what you can ask for at each step.
- Parent training and information center. Stone Soup Group, the Parent Training and Information Center for Alaska. A parent center is free and federally funded under IDEA. Staff there talk families through the process in their own state at no cost.
- The state rules themselves. AS 14.30.180 through AS 14.30.350 (Education for Children with Disabilities), carried out through 4 AAC 52 (Education for Children with Disabilities and Gifted Children). These are the two places Alaska keeps its special education rules: a run of statutes covering district duties, IEPs, procedural safeguards, mediation plus due process hearings, then the administrative code chapter that fills them in with child find, evaluation, eligibility criteria, IEP content, placement, dispute procedures, funding plus gifted education. Chapter 52 works by pointing at the federal rules for much of the detail, so many of its sections adopt named parts of 34 CFR Part 300 by reference and then add the Alaska specifics on top. The chapter is not new. Its evaluation, IEP plus dispute sections were last amended between 2007 and 2012, with the eligibility criteria touched in 2016 and the advisory panel section in 2020. One 2026 law does change this run of statutes. House Bill 39 became chapter 27 of the 2026 session laws without the governor's signature on June 22, 2026. The legislature's own bill record puts its effective date at September 20, 2026, so it is law that has not started yet as of this check. It adds duties toward students who are deaf or hard of hearing: comprehensive, neutral plus unbiased information for families about hearing technology and communication methods, the family's choice of communication method for the child, delivery of services by professionals trained in that method, plus state support for one or more programs for the deaf. A second 2026 law, House Bill 246, raises the per student funding allocation for the Special Education Service Agency at AS 14.30.650 without touching evaluation timelines, IEP content or the dispute routes.
Child Find in Alaska
Alaska builds child find around how families in the state receive information. Each district writes procedures to identify children ages 3 through 21 who live in the district. Those procedures carry three named parts: an annual public notice, a screening program plus referral for evaluation. The notice has to be reasonably calculated to reach everyone in the district, which the rule spells out as public meetings, posters, newspapers, radio plus television as appropriate. It goes out in each language in which the district offers a bilingual program. The screening looks at health, vision, hearing, general development and basic skills, primary language and culture, plus daily skills at home and in the community gathered through what a parent reports. Two more pieces of the Alaska rule matter to families outside a neighborhood school. The same district duty reaches children taught at home by a parent, children in the district's correspondence study program, children in private schools plus children who move often. Where a district runs a statewide correspondence program that enrolls children living outside the district, that district administers special education for them plus coordinates with the district where the child lives. A companion rule enrolls a special education student in a correspondence program on the same basis as any other student. That is why the annual notice must also be aimed at families whose children are enrolled in the district's statewide correspondence program. The rule closes the familiar gap by naming it: a child suspected of having a disability is identified even while advancing from grade to grade. The state education department adds in its guidance that a response to intervention program cannot be required before, or used to delay, a timely evaluation.
Source: 4 AAC 52.100(a) for the written procedures, the annual public notice plus the screening program, 4 AAC 52.100(b) for the reach of that notice including families in the district's statewide correspondence program plus the language requirement tied to AS 14.30.400 and 4 AAC 34.055, 4 AAC 52.100(c) for children advancing from grade to grade, with the district duty to children ages 3 through 21 at 4 AAC 52.090(a) including children taught at home by a parent plus the statewide correspondence duty at 4 AAC 52.090(b), which points to 4 AAC 33.432; the response to intervention point comes from the department's Guidance for Special Education Personnel www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/alaska/4-AAC-52.100
