A Parent Review Guide
How to read your child’s PLAAFP.
The foundation of your child’s entire IEP, decoded in plain language, with a worksheet, red-flag checklist, and scripts for the meeting.
Start here
What is a PLAAFP, exactly?
The PLAAFP, Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance, is the section of your child’s IEP that describes where they are right now.
It covers academic skills, functional abilities, evaluation results, and how the disability affects involvement in grade-level curriculum. Depending on your state, you may see it called “Present Levels,” “PLOP,” “PLEP,” or just “Present Levels of Performance.” Different names, same thing.
Why it matters so much
The PLAAFP is the foundation of everything else in the IEP. Goals are built from it. Service minutes are justified by it. Accommodations are tied to it. If the PLAAFP is vague, incomplete, or inaccurate, every decision that flows from it is built on a shaky foundation, which leads to weak goals, which leads to a year your child doesn’t make the progress they could have.
The readability test
Hand the PLAAFP to someone who has never met your child. Can they understand who your child is, what they struggle with, and why they need services? If not, it needs work.
The six elements
What should be in a strong PLAAFP.
A complete PLAAFP covers six things. Skim your child’s document and confirm each one is present, and specific.
-
01
Evaluation data and test scores
Results from the school’s evaluation (MET/ETR), any outside evaluations, and what they mean in plain language. Not just numbers, what the numbers tell you about how your child learns.
-
02
Current academic performance
Where your child is right now in reading, writing, math, and any other affected areas. Specific levels, “reading at a kindergarten instructional level,” not just “below grade level.”
-
03
Functional performance
How the disability affects daily school life: attention, behavior, social skills, communication, sensory needs, executive functioning, self-advocacy.
-
04
Progress on previous goals
If your child had an IEP before: what happened with last year’s goals? Met? Partially met? Not addressed?
-
05
Impact statement
How the disability affects your child’s involvement and progress in the general education curriculum. This is what connects the data to the need for services.
-
06
Parent input
Your observations, concerns, and what you see at home. This is required by IDEA and should be meaningfully incorporated, not buried in a single sentence.
Reading it section by section
Three questions to ask of every section.
Go through your child’s PLAAFP one section at a time. For each area, ask yourself:
01
Is it accurate?
Does this match what I see at home?
02
Is it complete?
Is anything important missing?
03
Is it specific?
Could someone unfamiliar with my child understand this?
How to use the next section
Keep your child’s PLAAFP next to you. For each pair below, read the vague column first, then find the equivalent language in your document. If you only see vague-style phrases, that section needs work.
Vague vs. specific
Academic & functional performance.
Academic performance
Vague · red flag
“Jack is below grade level in reading.”
“He struggles with phonics.”
“Reading skills are emerging.”
“Student is making progress in ELA.”
Specific · what you want
“Jack reads at a kindergarten instructional level (San Diego Quick Assessment, 8/10). He decodes CVC words at 80% but scores 0% on pseudoword r-controlled vowels (CORE Phonics).”
“iReady Reading composite declined from 54th %ile (Spring K) to 35th %ile (Fall Gr 2).”
Functional performance
Vague · red flag
“Student sometimes has difficulty paying attention.”
“Behavior is generally appropriate.”
“Social skills are developing.”
Specific · what you want
“Teacher reports Jack’s focus declines significantly in the last third of the school day, consistent with medication wearing off. He requires 2–3 verbal redirections per class period in the afternoon vs. 0–1 in the morning.”
“BASC-3 parent rating: clinically significant in Withdrawal and Atypicality. Student will not ask for help due to embarrassment about reading difficulty.”
Vague vs. specific
Evaluation data & impact statement.
Evaluation data
Vague · red flag
“Cognitive abilities are within the average range.”
“Academic testing revealed some areas of weakness.”
“Results indicate a need for support.”
Specific · what you want
“WISC-V Full Scale IQ: 119 (90th %ile). GAI: 123 (94th %ile). This high cognitive ability allows the student to compensate by guessing words from context, masking the fact that foundational phonics skills are not in place.”
“CTOPP-2 Memory for Digits: 2nd %ile (severe deficit in phonological processing).”
Impact statement
Vague · red flag
“The student’s disability impacts his academic performance.”
“He requires specially designed instruction.”
Specific · what you want
“Jack’s reading disability causes him to read at a kindergarten level while his 2nd grade peers read at grade level. He cannot independently access any text-based content in science, social studies, or ELA without read-aloud support. His articulation difficulties reduce speech intelligibility, affecting peer interactions and oral participation.”
Vague vs. specific
Parent input & progress on prior goals.
Parent input
Vague · red flag
“Parents expressed concerns about reading.”
“Family reports difficulty with homework.”
“Parent is supportive and involved.”
Specific · what you want
“Parent reports the family supplements with 90 minutes per week of private Orton-Gillingham tutoring and 30+ minutes daily of structured literacy practice at home.”
“Parent reports night terrors in which the student cries, ‘I can’t do this. Somebody help me. Is anybody going to help me?’ Parent observes that the student refuses to attempt unfamiliar words and guesses based on first letter and context.”
Progress on previous goals
Vague · red flag
“Student has made progress on previous goals.”
“Progressing as expected.”
“Goals were partially addressed.”
Specific · what you want
“Goal 1 (r-controlled vowels): Baseline 40%, current 80% on real words. However, pseudoword accuracy remains at 0%, suggesting memorization rather than decoding mastery. Spelling of the same patterns regressed from 60% to 30% between January and February probes.”
Before moving on
The consistency check.
Read the PLAAFP, then read the goals. They should tell the same story.
Ask
Does every deficit described in the PLAAFP have a matching goal?
If the PLAAFP names a specific weakness, phonological processing, written expression, social pragmatics, there should be a goal targeting it.
And
Does every goal connect back to something documented in the PLAAFP?
Goals that appear out of nowhere, without baseline data in the PLAAFP, are unmeasurable and often unenforceable.
Flag it. A deficit without a goal is a need the IEP isn’t addressing. A goal without baseline data in the PLAAFP is one you can’t hold the team accountable to.
The PLAAFP Review Worksheet
Check each one as you read.
Print this section, or work through it with your child’s PLAAFP open next to you. The score at the end tells you how solid the foundation is, and what to flag at the meeting.
Is it accurate?
- The test scores listed match the actual evaluation reports I have.Compare each score against the original report, transposition errors and rounding discrepancies happen.
- Descriptions of my child’s abilities match what I observe at home.If the school says “demonstrates solid phonics skills” but they can’t sound out words at home, flag it.
- Outside evaluation data (if applicable) is included and accurately represented.Scores shouldn’t be cherry-picked. A severe deficit in an outside evaluation should be described that way.
- The classification labels for test scores are correct.A standard score of 85 at the 16th percentile is not “average.” Check that descriptors match the ranges.
- Progress claims are supported by data, not just subjective impressions.“Making progress” should have numbers attached. What’s the evidence?
Is it complete?
- All evaluation data is included, cognitive, academic, speech/language, behavioral, sensory.If your child had a WISC-V, CTOPP, BASC, GFTA, CELF, OT evaluation, etc., each one should be reflected.
- There is a clear impact statement connecting the disability to classroom performance.Not just “impacts academics”, how, when, and in what specific ways.
- Parent input is meaningfully included (not just “parent expressed concerns”).Your specific observations, home strategies, and emotional impact should be captured in your words.
- Functional performance is addressed, attention, behavior, social skills, sensory needs.Academic data alone doesn’t tell the whole story. How does the disability affect the school day?
- Trend data is included, is the gap growing, shrinking, or staying the same?A single test score is a snapshot. Multiple data points over time tell the real story.
- If there was a previous IEP, progress on prior goals is documented with data.Not just “progressing,” but actual numbers, dates, and whether goals were met.
Is it specific enough?
- Performance levels use specific numbers, not just “below grade level.”Instructional reading level, percentile rank, words correct per minute, accuracy on specific skills.
- Different skill areas within a subject are broken out separately.“Reading” should split into decoding, fluency, comprehension, phonological processing, each with its own data.
- The language is precise enough that two professionals would interpret it the same way.“Struggles with reading” is subjective. “Decodes CVC at 80% but r-controlled vowels at 0%” is objective.
- Strengths are documented alongside weaknesses.A child at the 90th %ile in reasoning but 8th in reading has a very different profile than one below average in both.
- The PLAAFP is organized and readable, with clear sections and headers.If you can’t follow it, neither can a new teacher, a substitute, or a hearing officer. Structure matters.
How did it score?
Red flags
Patterns that signal a weak PLAAFP.
If you spot more than one or two of these, it’s a sign the PLAAFP isn’t doing the work it needs to, and the goals built on top of it won’t either.
-
!
Copy-paste from the evaluation report with no interpretation
The PLAAFP should explain what the data means for your child’s daily learning, not just repeat numbers back.
-
!
Contradictions between the data and the narrative
Example: the PLAAFP says “solid phonics foundation” but the CORE Phonics Survey shows 0% on pseudowords. Data and words should tell the same story.
-
!
Missing or minimized parent input
If you shared detailed concerns and the PLAAFP reduces them to “parent expressed concerns about reading,” your input was reduced to a checkbox.
-
!
No connection between evaluation findings and recommended services
A phonological processing deficit at the 2nd percentile should come with an explanation of why it matters and what the child needs.
-
!
Scores reported without context
“Standard score of 79” means little to most parents. The PLAAFP should translate: “8th percentile, 92 out of 100 same-age peers scored higher.”
-
!
Selective data inclusion
If an outside evaluation found a more severe profile than the school’s, both should be represented. Omitting inconvenient data is a problem.
-
!
No trend data
A single test score is a photograph. Multiple scores over time are a movie. If your child’s percentile has dropped every year, that trend belongs in the PLAAFP.
Questions to bring
Scripts for the meeting.
You don’t need to be confrontational. You just need to be specific. For every gap you flagged in the worksheet, here’s a way to raise it constructively.
-
If data is missing or incomplete
“I noticed the PLAAFP doesn’t include [specific evaluation/score]. Can we add that so the present levels reflect the full picture?”
-
If descriptions are vague
“Can we add specific numbers to this section? Instead of ‘below grade level,’ can we say what instructional level [child] is actually at?”
-
If parent input was watered down
“I’d like my input section to include [specific observation]. What I shared was more detailed than what’s captured here.”
-
If the narrative contradicts the data
“The PLAAFP says [child] has a solid foundation in [skill], but the [test name] score shows [specific result]. Can we revise the language to match the data?”
-
If outside evaluation data is missing
“We provided the [evaluation name] results in [month]. I don’t see that data reflected in the present levels. IDEA requires the team to consider all available evaluation data.”
-
If there’s no trend data
“Can we include [child]’s scores over time so we can see the trajectory? A single score doesn’t show whether the gap is growing or closing.”
-
If a deficit has no matching goal
“The PLAAFP identifies a deficit in [area] but I don’t see a goal targeting it. How is the IEP addressing this need?”
-
If you want to add information
“I have additional observations I’d like included in the parent input section. Can we schedule time to update the PLAAFP before finalizing the goals?”
Part of the IEP guide hub. For the bigger picture on what your child’s IEP can include, see the complete guide to related services in the IEP.