IDEA Complaint Decision 24-131

On November 8, 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 this complaint. The issues identified are whether the district, during the 2024-25 school year, properly implemented the individualized education programs (IEPs) of two students with disabilities regarding specialized transportation.

 

School districts must provide each student with a disability 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. 34 CFR §§ 300.320-300.324; Wis. Stat. § 115.78(2). Specialized transportation is considered a related service. The student’s IEP team determines, based on the student's unique, disability-related needs, whether the student needs specialized transportation and, if so, how specialized transportation services will be provided. 34 CFR § 300.107.

 

The students who are the subject of this complaint are siblings and attend a district elementary school. As a result of their disabilities, the students have delays in their social language skills and exhibit limited safety awareness. Each student requires constant adult supervision. Each has an IEP that includes specialized transportation. The IEPs indicate that transportation will be provided from the students’ home to school and back on Monday-Friday.

In their complaint, the students’ parent alleged that the district, through their contracted service provider, was not providing specialized transportation as required by the students’ IEPs. One of the drivers played music while transporting the students that included explicit language, which upset the students. The parent was also concerned that the transportation the district was providing did not provide door-to-door service. The family resides in an apartment building, and the front door of the building labeled with the address faces a small parking area, which is where the parent believes the students should be picked up and dropped off. However, the parking area does not have a double entry and is not large enough to allow the vehicles operated by the district’s provider to turn around without putting the vehicle in reverse. According to district staff, these conditions mean that pulling into the parking area is not consistent with the provider’s safety requirements and practices for drivers. As a result, the vehicles often park on the street outside the building, which can be seen from the inside of the family residence. This means that to access the vehicle, the students must exit the building through the front door and walk to the vehicle, which involves them walking out of the parent’s or driver’s sight momentarily. Otherwise, the students can exit the residence from a sliding patio door, and walk a much shorter distance around a grassy area allowing the driver, and the parent to watch the students the entire walk to and from the vehicle. The parent believes this arrangement is not safe as the grass creates a potential safety issue during wet or snowy conditions.

 

The parent also provided several photos of occasions when the vehicles picked the student up in different locations on the street, at times stopping at a distance from the apartment building such that the vehicle was not visible from inside the students’ residence. Additionally, the vehicles have on occasion stopped in the center of the street, rather than pulling up to the curb in front of the students’ home. Other vehicles are often parked on the street, meaning a consistent spot to pull up is not available.

 

According to district records, the students’ designated pick-up time is 6:55 a.m. The daily school schedule includes a “soft landing” start at 7:20 a.m., and an official start time of 7:35 a.m. The students’ parent explained that the morning pick-up times have been unreliable, varying from 6:45-7:16 a.m. The district and the parent have provided the students other means of transportation, when possible, but there have been times the students were absent for the entire day or missed morning activities such as breakfast as a result of the inconsistent pick-up times.

 

The students’ parent has had multiple conversations with district staff members, and the transportation provider regarding their concerns. The district has been in communication with the provider to encourage more consistent pick up locations and times, and has even conducted visits to the students’ home to assess the safety of the location where the vehicles are picking up the students and arrange an agreement as to where the best spot is for the vehicle to stop for morning pick up. However, the district cannot reasonably guarantee that pick-up times or exact locations in front of the students’ residence will always be totally consistent. District staff maintain that the transportation being provided meets the requirements of the students’ IEPs. Given that they include home to school specialized transportation without specifying further requirements, the department finds that the district is properly implementing the students’ IEPs regarding specialized transportation.

 

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 resolution options, 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.