In this article, we reviewed how intelligence tests were developed and normed, with a careful eye to underserved groups. Based on state recommendations, five group-administered and five individually-administered tests were reviewed for demographics; invariance testing; validity and reliability reporting; and gifted identification suitability. We found only one test included Indigenous youth in their sample; only one test reported racial group means; only two provided internal consistency estimates for different subgroups; and only four reported group invariance testing. Therefore, we concluded that tests developed on samples that omit those to which results are applied, or tests that are developed without regard to how the test functions across different groups should not be used to make high stakes decisions about gifted identification.