On December 8, 2009, the Department of Public Instruction received a complaint under state and federal special education law from XXXXX against the Luck School District. This is the departments decision regarding that complaint. The issues are whether the district, during the 2009-2010 school year, properly developed and implemented the students behavioral intervention plan.
In October 2009, the student engaged in several behavioral incidents. In order to address the behavior, the district conducted an individualized education plan (IEP) team meeting on October 29, 2009 to review and revise the students IEP. The IEP team also reviewed a functional behavioral assessment that had been conducted. The IEP identified behavior as a special factor, and positive reinforcement and role modeling were listed as interventions. The students schedule was changed because the student was having more behavioral incidents in one particular class. As positive reinforcement, the student was permitted to participate in athletic activities in the gym and weight room. The students input was considered in determining these incentives. District staff also worked with the student on replacement behaviors by replaying situations, role modeling, reviewing better choices, and using calming techniques. The student was allowed to leave the classroom when he needed to cool down. The students IEP also included two annual goals addressing behavior.
These strategies were not successful, and repeated behavioral incidents continued to occur. In the beginning of November 2009, the IEP team met again and the student was provided with a one-on-one aide to assist during the school day. Prior to mid-November, the district, relying on information from a functional behavioral assessment and considering student needs, properly developed and implemented the students behavioral intervention. The district continued to try to address the students behavior through IEP team meetings and revisions to the IEP. However, these strategies were not effective and behavioral incidents continued to occur. In mid-November, the district significantly modified services to be provided to the student, and these services were not determined through the IEP team process as required. Within 30 days from the date of this decision, the district must conduct an IEP team meeting to determine the services required and whether additional services are needed because of the failure to determine the services through the IEP team process. The district will submit a copy of the revised IEP to the department. Within 30 days from the date of this decision, the district must also provide a corrective action plan to ensure services are properly determined.
All noncompliance identified above must be corrected as soon as possible, but in no case more than one year from the date of this decision. This concludes our review of this complaint.
//signed CST 1/22/10
Carolyn Stanford Taylor
Assistant State Superintendent
Division for Learning Support: Equity and Advocacy
Dec/pmw