IDEA Complaint Decision 24-121

On October 21, 2024 (form dated October 20, 2024), the Department of Public Instruction (department) received a complaint under state and federal special education law from #### (parent) against the #### (district). This is the department’s decision regarding that complaint. The issue identified is whether the district, beginning October 21, 2023, properly developed and implemented the individualized education program (IEP) of a student with a disability to enable the student to participate in extracurricular activities.

 

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 developing an IEP, documenting that program clearly in the IEP, and implementing the program. Each IEP must include a statement of the child's present level of academic achievement and functional performance, including how the child's disability affects the child's involvement and progress in the general curriculum. 34 CFR §§ 300.320-300.324; Wis. Stat. § 115.78(2). In providing or arranging for the provision of nonacademic and extracurricular activities each public agency must ensure that each child with a disability participates with nondisabled children in these activities to the maximum extent appropriate given the needs of that child. Each student's IEP team must determine whether the student needs supplementary aids and services in order to participate. 34 CFR § 300.117.

 

The student who is the subject of this complaint is enrolled in a district middle school and has been identified as having an intellectual disability. As a result, the student has delays in expressive and receptive language development, adaptive skills and intellectual ability. The student has disability-related needs in communication, self-advocacy, and self-help skills. According to the parent, the student enjoys singing, dancing and acting, and the parent believed the student’s involvement in an extracurricular activity, the middle school musical, would be a positive social-emotional experience.

 

The parent was invited to and attended an IEP meeting on September 18, 2024, in part to discuss the support the student may need to participate in the school musical. According to district staff, the rehearsals for the musical took place several times each week after school for approximately 1.5 to 3 hours. The parent planned to pick up the student from school after the rehearsal ended. In the complaint, the parent noted that the staffing level of 50 students to one or two adults at rehearsals created an unsafe environment for the student as the student had difficulty conveying their wants and needs due to self-help and self-advocacy challenges.

 

Although the parent wanted a paraprofessional to assist the student during the musical rehearsals, the other members of the IEP team did not believe the student needed that level of support. The team documented that the student would benefit from the independence and had demonstrated their ability to follow along well in choir class without additional support. District staff explained that high school students were serving as volunteers to assist all the middle school students at rehearsals, and they felt the student would not require extra support beyond what was provided to all the participants.

 

On October 4, 2024, the student’s parent misread a message from the choir director about the time a rehearsal ended and came late to pick up the student. The student waited outside the building alone for twenty minutes but was able to contact their parent on a smartwatch. The parent was concerned this created an unsafe situation and asked for another IEP meeting to discuss paraprofessional support. On October 8, 2024, the IEP team met again. The student’s parent attended the meeting. At the IEP meeting, the district staff discussed the parent’s concerns and determined that after each rehearsal, rather than releasing the student to leave by themself, staff would keep the student in the rehearsal space and the parent would meet them there upon their arrival.

 

Following the meeting, the district sent the student’s parent a written notice of their denial of the parent’s request to have a paraprofessional assist the student. The notice informed the parent of the district’s decision, and explained several reasons why they felt the student did not need paraprofessional support in that setting. The reasons included the student’s current success at rehearsals, the fact that the rehearsals were well structured, so the student knew what to expect, and staff and volunteers regularly checked in with them. The notice also explained that the student’s significant level of participation with peers during rehearsals was a good experience for them. The notice also cites that the student does not require adult assistance at all times during the school day, and that introducing a paraprofessional into the rehearsals could lead to distancing the student from their peers.

 

Given that the district held IEP team meetings to address the parent’s concerns, adjusted plans after an unexpected incident occurred, and properly provided prior written notice of their denial of the parent’s request, the district properly developed and implemented the student’s IEP to enable them to participate in extracurricular activities.

 

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.