On September 24, 2024, 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 this complaint. The issue identified is whether the district, beginning September 24, 2023, properly developed the individualized education program (IEP) of a student with a disability regarding placement in the least restrictive environment and specially designed transportation; and properly provided the student’s parents a meaningful opportunity to participate in the development of the IEP.
Whether the district properly developed the IEP of a student with a disability regarding placement in the least restrictive environment and specially designed transportation.
School districts must provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to each student with a disability by developing an IEP that meets the student's unique needs and by implementing special education and related services in accordance with the student's IEP. 34 CFR §§ 300.323(c)(2) & 300.324. Each student’s IEP must address the student's needs that result from the student's disability in order to enable the student to be involved and make appropriate progress in the general education curriculum and toward their IEP goals and meet the student's other educational needs that result from the student's disability. The IEP must include a statement of the special education services to be provided to the student. 34 CFR §§300.320(a), 300.324(a). The district must ensure that the student's IEP is accessible to each regular education teacher, special education teacher, related services provider, and any other service provider who is responsible for its implementation and that they are informed of their specific responsibilities. 34 CFR § 300.323(d).
School districts meet their obligation to provide FAPE to each student with a disability, in part, by implementing each student's IEP as it is written. Staff responsible for implementing the student's IEP must be informed of their specific responsibilities. 34 CFR §300.323 and Wis. Stat. §115.787. The IEP must include a statement of the special education services to be provided to the student. Specialized transportation is considered a related service. Each student's 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 who is subject of the complaint is in sixth grade and receives special education services for intellectual, hearing, and speech language disabilities. Due to the student’s significant hearing loss, the student communicates through a sign language interpreter. The student currently has annual IEP goals in the areas of American Sign Language (ASL), reading, math, writing, and self-advocacy related to the student’s hearing device. The student also receives a number of supplementary aids and services as well as related services in the areas of transportation to and from school daily, nursing services, and audiological services.
The IEP team began discussing possible placement for the student at the Wisconsin School for the Deaf (WSD) in spring of 2023, however it was decided to postpone the discussion until fall as they did not feel the student was ready to live in the dorms. WSD is a school authorized under Wisconsin law that serves students from around the state and is operated by the department. WSD’s mission includes supporting students and families in a collaborative inclusive partnership; and fostering a language-rich bilingual communication environment that focuses on individual student success. When an IEP team is considering placing a student at WSD, the student’s resident school district notifies WSD about the student and informs them whether they are considering the student for day school or residential placement at WSD. The student’s IEP team meets to document the placement decision, and the student participates in a 45-day trial at WSD to ensure the placement is appropriate and aligned to meet the student’s needs. Students whose homes are outside of a 45-mile radius of WSD generally reside at the school in onsite dormitories during the week. Transportation to and from the student’s home to WSD is provided daily for commuting students and weekly for residential students by their resident district at no cost to the student’s family. Wis. Stat. § 115.53(6).
At the IEP team meetings on March 8, 2024, and April 2, 2024, part of the meetings’ purpose was to discuss placing the student at WSD for the fall semester. During the meetings, the IEP team discussed that the student demonstrates appropriate behavior, though sometimes struggles with attention. The team discussed the student’s medical needs, including that the student has seizures and takes daily medication to prevent them. The IEP team described the student as sometimes having difficulty communicating when not feeling well and is still learning independent living skills with the support of their family. The team discussed pros and cons of placement at WSD versus remaining at the district. Generally, school members of the IEP team supported the student’s placement at WSD as it would provide the student access to peers in the deaf community with whom the student would communicate through ASL. The team noted the student is “doing great academically [and] growing in all ways” at district school, but that they lacked opportunities to communicate using ASL with peers outside participating in the sign club. The family shared their concerns about the student living in the dorms and expressed their strong preference to have their child start at WSD as a day student, and for the team to reconsider the student’s readiness for the dorms at a later date. Other IEP team members raised concerns about the potential for the student to become fatigued given that the daily commute to the school would be 60-90 minutes each way. Staff additionally noted that “getting reliable transportation for [up to] four hours daily would be a challenge.” School staff and the student’s parents could not come to a consensus around the student’s placement for fall and agreed to meet later for further discussion.
The team met to review and revise the student’s IEP on June 4, 2024, to continue the discussion about transportation options to and from WSD. The team considered providing the student daily transportation to and from WSD, but all team members except the student’s parents rejected this option. Some members of the team did not think it was in the student’s best interest to travel back and forth daily “due to possible fatigue, and attendance could become a factor.” The team noted that attendance records during the 2023-24 school year indicated that that student was absent during a portion of the school day 35 times due to illness, medical appointments, and parent excusal. Though the team could not come to full agreement, the IEP team settled upon the option of having the student start attendance at WSD in fall, as part of the 45-day trial period, with the student staying in the dorms on Sunday and Monday evenings. The district would provide the student transportation home from WSD on Tuesdays after school, and back to WSD on Wednesday mornings. The student would then stay at the dorms on Wednesday and Thursday nights. The IEP team determined they would meet to evaluate the success of the plan in 45 days.
The parents initiated another IEP meeting on September 5, 2024, to address their ongoing concerns regarding the residential component of the placement and to introduce additional input regarding the student’s needs related to personal care from a report provided by the student’s neuropsychologist. The parents shared that the student had attended an overnight summer camp at WSD, and expressed concern that the student was not able to independently self-manage their personal care. The team revisited their discussion of the student being transported to and from WSD daily and reviewed the information from the neuropsychologist. The team, with the exception of the parents, felt that the student would be able to reside in the dorms as WSD staff have provided care to students with cognitive and behavioral needs similar to the student in the past. Based upon this conversation, most of the IEP team rejected the option of providing daily transportation and affirmed their original placement and transportation arrangement as delineated in the June 4, 2024, meeting. The parents continued to voice their disagreement about the appropriateness of the student staying in the dorms.
Beginning the 2024-25 school year, the student attended WSD for 11 days, utilizing the transportation provided by the district on Tuesday and Friday afternoons and Wednesday mornings. As the student’s parents were not comfortable with the student staying overnight at the dorms, the parent drove the student to and from school on Monday mornings and afternoons, Tuesday mornings, Wednesday afternoons, Thursday mornings and afternoons, and Friday mornings. The student had no attendance issues until the parents’ car began having troubles. However, the student’s parents found it difficult to provide the student daily transportation and again asked the district to reconvene the IEP team to discuss the option of the district transporting the student.
The team convened on September 16, 2024. The team, with the exception of the parents, reaffirmed that they believed the residential staff could meet the student’s personal care needs and thus rejected the provision of daily transportation to and from WSD. The team reconvened at the request of the family on October 2, 2024. During the meeting, the family indicated that they could no longer transport the student back and forth to WSD due to financial hardship and the family car breaking down, and the family requested the student return to their neighborhood school. The IEP team revised the IEP to reflect the student’s placement at the neighborhood school in the resident school district.
The IEP team discussed a variety of options for the student’s residential placement and transportation, considered the parent’s concerns and information from the student’s neuropsychologist, and determined that the student’s needs could be met in the dorm setting. It was reasonable for staff to conclude that 2-3 hours of transportation each day would be fatiguing for the student on a long-term basis, and that absences from the previous year were concerning. Placement at WSD was offered to the parent for a 45-day trial period, which the parent rejected, and the student returned to their neighborhood school.
Parents are important members of the IEP team. Here, the parents felt strongly the student was not ready for a dorm setting. Though there was disagreement between district members and parent members of the IEP team, full IEP team consensus is not required. The IEP team, with the exception of the parents, determined that the student’s needs could be met in the dorm setting. The district properly developed the IEP regarding placement in the least restrictive environment and specially designed transportation.
Whether the district properly provided the student’s parents a meaningful opportunity to participate in the development of the IEP.
In developing each student’s IEP, the IEP team must consider the concerns of the parents for enhancing the education of their student. LEAs must take steps to ensure that one or both parents of a student with a disability are present at each IEP team meeting or are afforded the opportunity to participate. 34 CFR § 300.321(a). An IEP team meeting may be conducted without a parent in attendance if the public agency is unable to convince the parents that they should attend. 34 CFR § 300.322. While the IEP team (which includes the student’s parents) must work toward consensus, the district is ultimately responsible for ensuring such decisions are made in conformity with the requirements of state and federal special education law to ensure the student receives FAPE. Wis. Stat. § 115.79; 34 CFR § 300.116.
District staff confirmed that the student’s parents had an opportunity to verbally share their concerns at the IEP meetings and the district documented the parents’ concerns in the IEPs. Further, the team addressed the information provided by the neuropsychologist, and determined the residential setting would be appropriate. Although the parent had concerns about the student’s previous experience at a summer camp, including her ability to function independently, the IEP team, in considering all of the information provided, determined that the needs of the student could be met, and offered a trial placement. The district properly provided the student’s parents a meaningful opportunity to participate in the development of the IEP.
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.
For questions about this information, contact dpispeddata@dpi.wi.gov (608) 266-1781