You are here

IDEA Complaint Decision 13-024

On April 23, 2013, the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) received a complaint under state and federal special education law from XXXXX against XXXXX. A copy of the complaint is enclosed. This is the department’s decision regarding that complaint. The issue is whether the district, during the 2012-13 school year, properly implemented the student’s behavioral intervention plan (BIP).

The student had three individualized education programs (IEPs) in effect during the 2012-13 school year. All three IEPs addressed behavior as a special factor and included positive behavior supports and strategies to address the student’s behavior. The student also had a BIP in effect at the start of the 2012-13 school year, which, in addition to specific positive and proactive strategies and supports, included a plan for addressing escalating behavior. The BIP also called for two adults to be with the student at all times. Staff members responsible for implementing the IEP and BIP were fully aware of all the required components. Neither seclusion nor restraint were determined to be an appropriate option for this student and were not used with the student.

The IEP team met to annually review and revise the student’s IEP on December 19, 2012. The revised IEP addressed behavior as a special factor and included positive behavior supports and strategies. No changes were made to the student’s existing BIP and the plan remained in effect and was implemented as written.   

The IEP team next met on March 15, 2013. During the meeting, the IEP team reviewed and discussed a behavior support plan developed by an outside agency involved in the student’s care dated January 24, 2013. The complainant believed this plan had been shared with school staff and had been adopted by the school. School staff indicated not all components of the outside agency plan could be implemented in school. However, school staff felt most of the provisions of the outside agency behavior support plan were already addressed in the school’s BIP. One change requested by the complainant was made to the student’s existing BIP. The district was not required to adopt and implement an outside agency behavior support plan. The BIP implemented by the district during the 2012-13 school year appropriately addressed the student’s behavior needs.

This concludes our review of this complaint, which we are closing.

//signed CST 6/20/2013
Carolyn Stanford Taylor
Assistant State Superintendent
Division for Learning Support