IDEA Complaint Decision 24-111

On September 30, 2024 (form dated September 26, 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 that complaint. The issue is whether the district, beginning September 30, 2023, properly developed and implemented the individualized education program (IEP) of a student with a disability regarding adult supervision and safety concerns.

 

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 FAPE to each student with a disability, in part, by developing an IEP based on the student’s unique, disability-related needs that is reasonably calculated to enable the student to make progress appropriate in light of the student’s circumstances, documenting that program in the IEP, and implementing the program as articulated in the IEP. For most students, the IEP must be designed to allow the student to progress from grade to grade, but if that is not possible, the IEP should be appropriately ambitious in light of the student’s circumstances. 34 CFR §§ 300.320-300.324; Wis. Stat. § 115.78[2]; Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, 137 S.Ct. 988. Each student's IEP must include a statement of the special education, related services, and supplementary aids and services to be provided to the student, 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 IEP must be written in a manner that clearly describes the school district’s commitment of resources to the parent and all involved in developing and implementing the IEP. The IEP must be accessible to staff responsible for implementing the student’s IEP, and they must be informed of their specific responsibilities. IEPs must be implemented as written. (34 CFR § 300.323; Wis. Stat. § 115.787).

 

The student who is the subject of this complaint had previously attended the district but attended school in another district for the beginning of the 2023-24 school year. The student re-enrolled in the district on February 12, 2024, and began attending school on February 19, 2024. The district held an IEP team meeting on March 13, 2024. At that meeting, the family requested that the student have a one-to-one aide. District members of the IEP team did not feel they had sufficient data to determine whether the student required one-to-one support from an adult. However, the IEP team determined the student would receive “adult support” during nine specific activities during the school day. One of these was “lunch and recess/daily” with the additional requirement that the adult should “monitor for elopement and safety on equipment.” It was unclear to the parent as to whether this was one-to-one adult support.

 

On April 19, 2024, during recess, a staff member was assigned to monitor the student and one other student. While the staff member’s attention was directed toward the other student, the student ran toward a retention pond near the playground. Two other staff members saw the student leave, called their name, and followed behind them. The staff members did not reach the student in time to prevent them from entering the pond. The staff members who had followed the student pulled the student out of the pond. District staff contacted the student’s parents, and the student went home for the rest of the day. Because the staff assigned to the student was also responsible for a second student, they were unable to monitor the student for elopement as required by the student’s IEP. The district did not properly implement the student’s IEP on April 19, 2024, regarding adult supervision and safety concerns.

 

The student’s IEP team reconvened on Monday, April 22, 2024, to discuss the IEP in light of the elopement incident. During this meeting, the family again requested the district provide the student one-to-one adult support throughout the school day. District staff did not change the IEP to reflect one-to-one adult support but added the requirement that when monitoring for elopement and safety on equipment, the adult support must be within an arm’s reach of the student at all times. The IEP also references a recess plan which states in part, “Stay within an arm's reach at all times - walking and following … [the student] around the playground area.” During the investigation, the student’s family told department staff they understood that this adjustment to the IEP meant the district was providing the student one-to-one support. District staff explained that although the student had increased support during recess following this IEP team meeting, the district was not providing the student one-to-one adult support, including at recess.

 

The student’s IEP team met again on June 12, 2024, to plan for the 2024-25 school year. The IEP team did not change the description of the service of “adult support” in the IEP as a result of this meeting. However, the district is now providing the student one-to-one adult support throughout their school day.

 

The three IEPs in effect for the student during the time period relevant to this IEP do not include clear descriptions of the level of adult support provided to the student. Interviews with the student’s family and district staff demonstrate they had different understandings of the meaning of the language in the IEP, and the district did not change the description of the adult support in the IEP when it changed the actual support provided to the student. The district did not properly develop the student’s IEP with regard to adult supervision and safety concerns.

 

Within 30 days of the date of this decision, the district must reconvene the student’s IEP team to determine the level of adult support the student needs throughout their day and to revise the IEP so that there is a clear understanding of the level of support the student will receive and that the district’s commitment of resources is clear. The district must submit a copy of the revised IEP to the department within 10 days of the IEP team meeting.

 

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 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 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.