IDEA Complaint Decision 23-117

On December 19, 2023, the Department of Public Instruction (department) received a complaint under state and federal special education law from #### (complainant) against the #### (district). This is the department’s decision regarding that complaint. The issues are whether the district, beginning the 2023-24 school year, properly implemented the individualized education program (IEP) of a student with a disability regarding adult support, and properly provided the student’s parent a copy of the IEP prior to its implementation.

 

Properly implemented the student’s IEP regarding adult support.

 

School districts must provide each student with a disability with a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment. School districts meet their obligation to provide a FAPE to each student with a disability, in part, by implementing each student's IEP. 34 CFR §§300.323(c)(2) & 300.324. The IEP must include a statement of the special education, related services, and supplementary aids and services to be provided to the child, including the projected date for the beginning of the services and the anticipated duration of the services. All services must be clearly stated in the IEP in a manner that can be understood by all involved in the development and implementation of the IEP. 34 CFR §§ 300.320(a)(4) and (a)(7).

 

The student’s IEP in effect for the 2023-24 school year specified the following services:

 

● Adult support for cues to focus, repeat directions, break tasks down into steps and guide completion of academic tasks, daily in all classes.

● Adult assistance in note taking and organizing assignments, daily.

● Instruction in attention and focus, 5 times weekly for 15 minutes.

 

In November 2023 the complainant, who is the student’s parent, examined the student’s district-issued Chromebook and noted that the student was frequently using it during school hours to access information on topics unrelated to school. The parent also noted that the student grades had fallen compared to prior school years. At parent-teacher conferences the parent was told by several staff members that the student frequently used their Chromebook during class and that individual adult support was not always available for the student. On November 15, 2023, the student inadvertently entered the incorrect single-gender restroom at school. The complainant believes that these instances demonstrate the student’s IEP was not being implemented regarding adult support. As an initial matter, the student’s IEP does not specify that the student be provided full-time one to one adult assistance, nor does the IEP call for restrictions on the student’s use of the Chromebook. The department’s investigator reviewed the student’s IEP and interviewed district staff responsible for implementing the student’s IEP. District staff were able to consistently explain how they implemented the adult support specified in the IEP. District staff recalled occasions where they noticed the student using the Chromebook for purposes outside of schoolwork and provided the student cues to focus. District staff also reported that the student does not, and has not in the past, required assistance in passing between classes or assistance in finding the restroom. The district has, in response to the parent’s concerns, electronically restricted the student’s Chromebook access only to school-related topics. The district appropriately implemented the student’s IEP. However, the department recommends the student’s IEP team meet as soon as possible to discuss the student’s current performance and revise the student’s IEP as appropriate.

 

Properly provided the student’s parent a copy of the IEP prior to its implementation.

 

A student’s parents must be provided with a copy of the student’s IEP prior to the implementation of the IEP. 34 CFR § 300.503(a).

 

The complainant asserts they did not receive a copy of the student’s IEP prior to its implementation. The district contends that staff provided the parent a copy of the IEP prior to its implementation but concedes it does not have documentation to show the IEP was provided in a timely manner. The complainant has received a copy of the student’s IEP. Within 30 days, the district shall submit to the department a corrective action plan outlining the steps it will take to ensure staff at the student’s school provide IEPs to parents prior to implementation and appropriately document timely provision of the IEPs.

 

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. This decision is final for the IDEA State Complaint process. These issues may be addressed through other dispute resolutions, including mediation and due process hearings. For more information, visit the department’s website at http://dpi.wi.gov/sped/dispute-resolution or contact the special education team at (608) 266-1781.