On May 8, 2025, 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 issues are identified below and refer to the 2024-25 school year.
The student who is the subject of this complaint was in fourth grade during the 2024-25 school year. During the time period relevant to this complaint, the student’s individualized education program (IEP) team met on September 12, 2024, October 10, 2024, October 31, 2024, December 19, 2024, February 3, 2025, March 5, 2025, and April 30. 2025. The team consistently identified the student’s disability related needs as self-regulation, self-help, and oral expression. Over the course of the school year, the IEP team changed the student’s placement several times, ranging from a half day of instruction to full day instruction, with various proportions of time in and out of the general education environment.
Whether the district properly implemented the IEP of a student with a disability regarding specially designed instruction, removal from educational settings, and adult supervision.
School districts must provide each student with a disability with a free appropriate public education (FAPE). 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 specially designed instruction (SDI) in the student’s September IEP was described as instruction in social skills five times per week for 180 minutes. In October 2024, SDI in social skills instruction was adjusted to one 30-minute session per day, and increased to three times per day for 30 minutes in December 2024. The description of the SDI was revised in April 2025 to one 90-minute session per day. The student’s parents are concerned that the student did not receive the SDI minutes specified in the IEP as they were told by district staff that the student frequently refused to participate in the instruction. District staff confirmed that the student often refused to participate in the instruction despite the fact that the instruction was offered to the student as specified in the IEP. The district properly implemented the student’s IEP with respect to SDI minutes.
The IEP team identified the student’s behavior as a factor adversely impacting the student’s learning and that of other students. The student has a behavior intervention plan in place and several positive behavior supports and interventions are included in the student’s IEP. Some of the supports allow the student to use a variety of calming spaces when they become dysregulated. Evidence reviewed by the department demonstrates that the student made extensive use of the calming spaces on their own volition, sometimes remaining there for several hours at a time. The student’s parents are concerned that the district has used the calming space as a form of discipline, and that the student has become convinced they do not belong in the classroom with other students and does not feel free to return to the classroom when they feel they are properly regulated. The evidence shows no reason to question the student perception, however evidence reviewed by the department also shows that district staff did not require the student to use the calming spaces, or prevent the student from returning to the classroom. District staff would offer to have the student return to the classroom, which the student frequently refused to do. The district did not remove the student from the education settings as specified in the IEP.
The student’s IEP specifies adult assistance for safety 330 minutes per week, and that the student will be next to an adult during drills and evacuations. The parents are concerned that when the student made use of the calming spaces, they were in a location that presented a danger to their safety. The evidence reviewed by the department shows that the calming space itself did not present a danger to the student and that district staff appropriately monitored the student’s safety when the student was using calming spaces.
Whether the district properly developed the student’s IEP to address lack of progress, including developing measurable annual goals.
At the beginning of each school year, a district must have in effect an IEP for each child with a disability. 34 CFR § 300.323(a). The IEP must be individualized and developed based on the unique, disability-related needs of the student. The IEP must be reasonably calculated to allow the student to make appropriate progress, both in the general education curriculum and toward their IEP goals. 34 CFR § 300.320(a)(4). Each student’s IEP team must develop a statement of annual goals for the student designed to meet the student’s needs to enable the student to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum. Annual goals must be measurable and designed to address the student's disability-related needs. Each goal must contain a baseline from which the student’s progress can be measured and a measurable expected level of attainment. Each annual goal must also include a statement of how the student's progress toward achieving the goal will be measured. 34 CFR §300.320(a), Wis. Stats. § 115.782(2)(b). A student’s IEP goals must be reviewed and revised at least annually to determine whether the goals are being achieved and revise the goals as appropriate to address any lack of expected progress towards achievement of the goals. 34 CFR § 300.324(b).
The district and the student’s parents agree that the student’s behavior interferes with their own learning. Over the course of the 2024-25 school year the IEP team met frequently to discuss the student’s status, and the team made adjustments to the student’s IEP including their educational environment and services to address the student’s needs. Unfortunately, despite progress in the first semester of the school year, the student’s behavior worsened in the second semester of the school year which resulted in less instructional time for the student, and a consequent reduction in the student’s academic achievement which had not previously been a concern. The evidence shows that the IEP team has made a good faith effort to address the unique needs of the student and allow the student to make appropriate progress. However, it appears that the IEP team has not yet fully developed a plan to effectively deal with the student’s refusal to engage in instruction or return to instruction after accessing the calming space. Within 30 days of the date of this decision, the district shall convene the student’s IEP team to clarify the appropriate positive behavior supports and interventions to be used when the student refuses to participate in instruction or refuses to return to instruction while using the calming space. The district shall provide the department with a copy of the student’s revised IEP within 10 days of the meeting.
The student’s IEP in effect at the beginning of the 2024-25 school year contained four annual goals.
1. The student will be able to demonstrate a variety of strategies to manage strong emotions (baseline 1 of 3 opportunities, level of attainment 2 of 3 opportunities).
2. The student will be able to demonstrate positive behaviors when starting and completing a non-preferred task with two or less prompts (baseline 1 of 3 opportunities, level of attainment 3 of 3 opportunities).
3. The student will independently adapt to behavior based on peer feedback and environment cues (baseline 0 of 5 opportunities, level of attainment 4 of 5 opportunities).
4. The student will demonstrate appropriate turn-taking with question and response to peers and staff (baseline 2-4 of 5 opportunities, level of attainment 4 of 5 opportunities.
The student’s IEP team reviewed the student’s progress towards their goals at the October 31, 2024, IEP team meeting. The IEP team found that the student had not met the first annual goal as the student had only been using strategies 43 percent of the time. The IEP team continued to include the goal in the revised IEP as the student had made progress from the original baseline. The team determined the student did not meet the second goal as the student was performing below the original baseline. The IEP also continued to include this goal in the revised IEP with an updated baseline and level of attainment. The IEP team also determined the student did not meet their third goal as they demonstrated the skill only 34 percent of the time. Finally, the team determined the student had not met the fourth goal as the student was only able to meet the level of attainment when they were feeling regulated. The IEP team chose to replace goals 3 and 4 with a new annual goal:
The student will demonstrate an understanding or interpretation of social situations, including situations involving social triggers, sarcasm, idioms, and figurative language with 80% accuracy (baseline 70 percent for language/idioms, 63 percent sarcasm).
The student’s goals remained the same for the remainder of the school year. Evidence reviewed by the department demonstrates that the IEP team has developed measurable goals in line with the student’s disability related needs, has carefully tracked the student’s progress and has made adjustments to the goals in light of the student’s lack of progress at least annually. The district properly developed measurable annual goals for the student.
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.
For questions about this information, contact dpispeddata@dpi.wi.gov (608) 266-1781