With the increasing prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), clinicians and schools are receiving a larger number of assessment referrals for eligibility or diagnostic clarification of ASD in children who are deaf and hard of hearing (D/HH).Meeting this increasing demand is often difficult given not all assessment professionals seek specialized ASD training and even fewer have experience working with D/HH children.Therefore, families are disadvantaged because of the lack of assessment professionals who specialize in both these areas.School psychologists without such experience are at-risk for misinterpreting or missing key diagnostic information. This study explored the assessment experiences of four families of D/HH children who have ASD. Hearing parents' and D/HH parents' perspectives were gathered to explore the familyneeds. An open-ended survey asked parents to recall the assessment techniques utilized during the process and relate how their child's language skills were accounted for by the clinician. Parent responses revealed interpreters were utilized for various reasons unique to each family. Families expressed difficulty finding ASD specialists who had experience working with D/HH children. This study highlights the importance of selecting a trained interpreter and emphasizes the need of more professionals who have experience assessing ASD in D/ HH children. K E Y W O R D S American sign language, ASD, assessment, autism, D/HH (ADOS-2; Lord et al., 2012) is often referred to as the gold standard instrument for diagnosing ASD and is considered an essential part when conducting best practices in assessment of autism (Aiello et al., 2017). The ADOS-2, however, falls in line with most standardized assessments in its lack of standardization with the D/HH population. The validation sample of the ADOS-2 did not include individuals who were D/HH (Lord et al., 2012) andtest developers did not include administration modifications for ASL within the administration manual.Furthermore, because the ADOS-2 relies on understanding the child's level of spoken language to determine the proper module for administration, test developers caution its use with children whose main mode of communication is sign language. The ADOS-2 authors explicitly indicate that sign language not be utilized when determining the appropriate module, which would make most children who are D/HH and utilize sign language, regardless of their fluency in ASL, fall in Module 1, preverbal. This approach could result in developmentally inappropriate tasks being administered to a child who actually has more language skills than spoken language would suggest.Little research has been conducted on the efficacy of using the ADOS-2 to diagnose autism in children who are D/HH. In a retrospective chart review sample of 30 children who were D/HH and diagnosed with autism at an academic medical center, the authors determined that only two children were administered the ADOS-2 as part of the diagnostic evaluation; however, results of these administrations wer...