03/20/2026
We’ve been seeing a consistent pattern across many of the Independent Educational Evaluations (IEEs) we conduct:
A narrow focus on *one* aspect of a child’s profile—while other meaningful layers go unassessed.
For example, we often work with students who have been found eligible for Autism year after year. While that classification may absolutely be appropriate, the evaluation process has not always explored whether ADHD, learning disabilities, or anxiety are also present.
Similarly, we see students with Specific Learning Disabilities who are described as hardworking, compliant, and “doing their best”—but have never been assessed for internalizing conditions. In many of these cases, these students may be masking significant anxiety or distress related to their learning challenges.
This is what diagnostic overshadowing can look like in practice.
When one diagnosis becomes the primary lens, it can unintentionally limit the scope of assessment and case conceptualization. The result is that co-occurring conditions—each with their own intervention needs—may be missed.
This matters because intervention planning depends on a *full* understanding of the child.
A student with dyslexia may also need support for anxiety.
A student with autism may also need intervention targeting attention or executive functioning.
A student who appears “well-behaved” may be working incredibly hard to hold things together internally.
When these layers are not identified, they are not addressed.
If your child’s evaluation feels incomplete—or if the recommendations don’t fully explain what you’re seeing day-to-day—it’s reasonable to ask whether additional areas should have been assessed.
In those cases, families can request an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) or pursue a comprehensive private assessment to ensure a more complete understanding of their child’s needs.
