Supporting Students with Disabilities in Behavior Learning

School and district teams have many options for providing proactive and positive behavior support for students with disabilities who are eligible for an IEP or 504 Plan. This section will describe these options, including:

Requirements that districts must follow so that students with disabilities can access and benefit from those supports
Specific IEP and 504 processes to address a student’s behavioral needs in ways that are both positive and student-centered

Foundational Requirements and Considerations

IDEA Child Find and 504 Identification

Both the IDEA and Section 504 require districts to continually seek out, identify, and evaluate children with disabilities living within the district’s boundaries. This requirement is referred to as child find. Districts must act on their child find obligation as soon as there is reason to suspect or believe a student may have a disability. Waiting to evaluate a student suspected of having a disability for any reason – such as waiting for the parent to request an evaluation or imposing prerequisite steps such as insisting the parent produce a medical diagnosis – violates the child find requirement.

As discussed in Section 4, interfering behaviors are an indication the student’s needs are not yet met. In some (though not all) cases, this may be due to a disability. Refer to the box in Section 5: Interfering Behavior and Disability, for patterns of behavior that may prompt school staff to consider whether the student may also have a disability and need to be evaluated to determine if they are eligible for special education.

Free Appropriate Public Education: IDEA and 504

All students with disabilities who qualify for services under the IDEA and/or Section 504 are entitled to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). Any student, whether or not they have a disability, can receive positive behavioral interventions and supports, including with a behavioral intervention plan (BIP). Additionally, for students eligible for special education services whose behaviors interfere with learning, these interventions and supports are explicitly required to be considered as part of the district’s offer of FAPE in the IEP.

The IDEA and its implementing regulations require IEP Teams to follow certain procedures to ensure that IEPs meet the individualized needs, including the behavioral needs, of students with disabilities….For any eligible student with a disability whose behavior impedes their own learning or the learning of others, the IDEA specifically requires that IEP Teams consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies, to address the behavior, including behaviors that may not be caused by or related to a child’s disability. IEP Teams can utilize FBAs to gain a better understanding of a student’s behavioral needs and to determine the positive behavioral interventions and supports needed to provide FAPE to a student with a disability.¹⁰⁰

IEP teams must always consider the student’s right to access a FAPE when considering a student’s need for positive, proactive, and teaching-focused supports for social/emotional/behavioral learning in the IEP. If the IEP team does not consider and provide any necessary positive behavioral supports in the IEP of a student whose behavior interferes with learning, the IEP may not appropriately provide the student with FAPE in their LRE.¹⁰¹

Interfering Behavior and Disability

As discussed in Section 4, interfering behaviors are an indication the student’s needs are not yet met. In some (though not all) cases, this may be due to a disability. The following sorts of behavior patterns may indicate a student’s disability-related needs are not being met:

The student is subjected to disciplinary removals that occur frequently and/or are becoming more frequent over time
The student frequently misses school and/or skips classes for reasons that may be related to a possible disability
The student is frequently “in trouble” for concerns related to:
- Executive functioning, including attending to instruction, turning in work on time, starting and completing complex tasks, and organizing materials
- Social interactions, including navigating disagreements and conflicts, interacting in age-appropriate ways with peers, following social cues, and self-monitoring socially expected nonverbal behavior like voice volume or personal space
- Self-regulation, including coping with emotions like anger or disappointment, responding appropriately to criticism, and handling frustrating situations
The student engages in interfering behaviors related to avoidance of specific academic tasks, sensory stimuli, social interactions, etc.
The student has been repeatedly restrained and/or isolated by staff for interfering behavior that poses an imminent likelihood of serious harm to the student or others
The student continues to engage in interfering behaviors even with consistently implemented positive behavior support interventions
The student’s parent/guardian has expressed concern that the student may have a disability and/or requested an evaluation for special education and related services

For a student already eligible for special education or 504 services, any of these behavior patterns may indicate the student needs additional support through their IEP or 504 Plan. For a student who is not eligible, teams 1) should examine and consider enhancing the positive supports available to a student, and 2) may consider whether the student may also have a disability and need to be evaluated to determine if they are eligible for these services.

IDEA and the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)

Students eligible for special education services have the right under state and federal regulations to be educated in their LRE. Teams are not permitted to remove a student from education in age-appropriate general classrooms solely because of needed modifications in general education.¹⁰² Removal of students eligible for special education services from the general educational environment is only permitted if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in general education classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily.¹⁰³

LRE must be thoughtfully considered for a student with behavior support needs. Limiting the student’s LRE solely for safety is rarely, if ever, appropriate. An IEP with appropriately ambitious goals for learning prosocial alternatives to interfering behavior typically cannot and should not be implemented in isolated settings alone. Since most interfering behavior is related to avoiding/escaping difficult demands and/or obtaining social responses/attention from others, IEPs with meaningful annual goals that address those behaviors typically require teaching and learning in settings with access to the general curriculum and same-age peers without disabilities. For additional considerations that relate to placement of a student who engages in interfering behavior, see the corresponding section below.

Evaluation of a Student’s Behavior-Related Needs

Evaluations, whether for special education eligibility and IEP development or for 504 eligibility and 504 Plan development, must be individualized. Each special education evaluation must be comprehensive and address all areas of suspected disability, including those areas which may or may not be directly related to the suspected eligibility category. This means the district may not restrict assessments that might relate to a student’s behavior support needs (for instance, measures that evaluate a student’s social, emotional, behavioral, communication, and/or sensory needs) to students who are being evaluated for eligibility in a particular category. Any student, regardless of eligibility category, may have needs related to behavior – and those needs, when present, must be addressed in the evaluation.

Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBAs)

As described in Section 4, a functional behavioral assessment (FBA) is a process of structured information gathering about a student’s behavior that interferes with their learning, social relationships, or other participation in their school and community. The FBA assists a school team to determine the underlying need (or function) that behavior is currently meeting for the student.

Information gathered in an FBA is best used to design a positive, supportive, and cohesive set of function-based individualized interventions referred to as a behavioral intervention plan (BIP). The process for developing an effective BIP is described in Section 4. Information gathered in the FBA should also inform other parts of the IEP, such as:

Special factors
Strength-based present levels of academic achievement and functional performance
Annual goals
Services
Placement

Other Evaluation Areas

District staff should keep in mind that evaluations can support the team in understanding the reason(s) for a student’s interfering behavior, not merely demonstrating that the interfering behavior is present. A student with interfering behavior likely has unmet needs––in areas like academic learning, communication, social and emotional skills, health, and/or sensory input–– underlying those behaviors. The evaluation can be used to understand the scope and nature of these needs so any root causes of interfering behavior can be addressed in the IEP or 504 Plan.

Student and Family Participation in IEP and 504 Teams

Parents are key partners in IEP and 504 teams, and their participation is critical for writing effective IEPs and 504 Plans. State and federal regulations require that parents are afforded the opportunity to participate in IEP team meetings and decisions.¹⁰⁴ Students are also key participants and must be invited to IEP team meetings in which postsecondary goals and transition services are discussed.

Furthermore, OSPI guidance recommends¹⁰⁵ that IEP teams conduct an initial collaborative conversation with the family (including the student whenever possible) at the start of each school year to learn about the student and family’s long-term vision and priorities. This allows the whole family to fully participate in the development of a strengths-based, ambitious, and meaningful IEP.

For a student with behavior support needs, it is essential that school team members prioritize family engagement and partnership. Parents are often experienced in addressing their child’s interfering behavior and can provide valuable insight as team members. Centering student and family voice builds a foundation for mutual collaboration, trust, and respect¹⁰⁶ – all of which are vital in developing and implementing successful positive behavior supports for a student.

Guiding Questions to Ask a Parent About Their Student’s Behavior Support Needs

When developing an IEP or 504 Plan for a student with interfering behavior, the team may consider asking the parent any of the following questions to learn more about the student’s needs for positive behavior supports:

When do you see your child happy, relaxed, and engaged?
- What is your child doing when they feel that way, and who are they doing it with (if anyone)?
- Are there particular ways the environment is set up so they feel comfortable?
How does your child communicate their preferences, interests, feelings, and needs?
What are the early signs that your child is uncomfortable or stressed?
- How do you respond when you notice those signs?
- Is your child able to communicate their distress in any ways other than interfering behavior?
When you ask your child to do something you know they will find difficult, what supports do you provide for them to be successful?
What circumstances typically result in your child engaging in interfering behavior?
- Why do you think these behaviors occur?
- What do you believe your child is trying to communicate with these behaviors?
- Are there strategies that you’ve found to help prevent the interfering behavior?
What are the most effective ways to respond to your child’s interfering behavior?
What would you like to see your child do instead of the interfering behavior?
What strategies don’t work that we should know about?

Behavior Supports and the IEP

In 2017, the United States Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District clarifying the requirement for IEPs to promote meaningful, rather than minimal, progress. The ruling requires that each student’s IEP is “reasonably calculated to enable a [student] to make progress appropriate in light of the [student]’s circumstances.”¹⁰⁷ Behaviors that interfere with the student’s progress must be considered in the IEP.¹⁰⁸

For IEP teams, the message is clear. If a student eligible for special education services engages in behaviors that interfere with their progress, impact their access to a FAPE, and/or are related to their disability, their IEP must address those behaviors. This is the case regardless of the student’s disability eligibility category.

Special Factors

The IEP team must consider the presence of each of five special factors¹⁰⁹ when creating an IEP. Special factors can limit the student’s progress in their IEP goals overall and may also limit the student’s access to a FAPE in their LRE. A student’s need for positive behavior support to address interfering behavior is one of these special factors the team is required to consider, regardless of the student’s disability category. The presence of this special factor may influence many areas of the IEP as it is developed, including:

Assessment data (including FBA data) and other information presented in the present levels of academic achievement and functional performance (PLAAFP)
Measurable and meaningful annual goals to address social/emotional/behavioral skills and, if needed, academic skills (e.g., skill gaps leading to avoidance or other interfering behavior)
Specially designed instruction (SDI) and/or related services that may be needed to support the student in managing interfering behaviors and learning alternative behaviors
Placement that allows the student to access the general curriculum in their LRE, make progress on their annual goals, and have adequate opportunities to practice necessary social/emotional/behavioral skills with peers without disabilities

The IEP team should not restrict their consideration of this special factor to students eligible in a particular disability category. It is also important to consider how a student’s disability impacts their behavior and determine how those disability-related needs can be addressed in the IEP. For instance, a student whose disability impacts communication may have learned to use interfering behavior to communicate their needs. In this case, the team should also consider communication (and, potentially, the need for assistive technology) as a special factor, and should ensure that the student’s communication needs relating to behavior have been specifically addressed in the IEP.

Strength-Based Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance

All IEPs must contain a statement of present levels of academic achievement and functional performance (PLAAFP).¹¹⁰ Consistent with current OSPI guidance¹¹¹ and best practice, teams are advised to ensure their PLAAFP statements are also strengths-based. This means that, for a student with an IEP and interfering behavior, the PLAAFP will reflect the following:

Connection to the student and family’s valued life outcomes and priorities for the student
Evidence of high expectations, facilitating IEP decisions that presume the student’s competence, honor the student’s belonging in general education settings, and develop skills that support the student’s increasing social/emotional/behavioral wellbeing
A person-centered approach that considers the individual student and their inherent worth, not just their disability category or level of interfering behavior
Explicit focus on student strengths, first describing the skills, strengths, and preferences of the student (including those that relate to social/emotional/behavioral skills), and then identifying what needs remain
Awareness of the whole child across the whole day, leading to goals that increase, maintain, and generalize meaningful skills the student can use in multiple facets of life

IEP Goals for Positive Behavior Support

Each annual IEP goal must be measurable and include three components: the condition in which the skill is needed, the skill being taught, and the criterion to determine when the goal has been mastered. All parts of the goal must reflect the Endrew F. standard described on page 71. In other words, the goal should reflect an “appropriately ambitious” expectation for what the student could achieve in a year with the special education and related services described in the IEP.

Further, OSPI recommends that IEP goals are also meaningful. Meaningful goals are broad, rich, varied, and written with implementation in general education settings in mind. For more on developing meaningful IEP goals, refer to pages 20–21 of Comprehensive Inclusive Education in Washington.

RREI Demonstration Site Finding: Align IEP Goals to State Standards

Every student is a general education student. For students who are also eligible for special education services, their educational program has three parts:

The general education curriculum
The school’s routines and activities
The IEP

Aligning IEP goals to state standards is essential. This supports instruction in general education settings and ensuring strong relational connection and a sense of belonging for each student. These are protective factors that make interfering behavior less likely.

To develop the PLAAFP for a student who engages in interfering behavior, data sources might include observation notes, discipline referrals, attendance records, and evaluation or re-evaluation data. If the team has completed an FBA for the student, information from the FBA should also be included in the PLAAFP (e.g., the interfering behavior’s function, antecedents, and consequences). An effective PLAAFP includes a baseline measurement of the interfering behavior, where/when/with whom it typically occurs, what the function might be, and in what circumstances the student engages in socially expected behavior instead.

Best Practices for Developing Measurable IEP Goals for Positive Behavior Support

The IEP team can consider the following best practices when developing measurable IEP goals that address a student’s interfering behavior.

To write the condition:

Consider routines, activities, situations, and/or times of day when the student is likely to benefit from the desired skill and/or may engage in the interfering behavior
Identify opportunities to teach the student to use the desired skill in their least restrictive environment, keeping in mind the following:
- New behaviors are best learned in setting(s) in which they are necessary, so the condition should represent routines, activities, or settings with many natural opportunities for the student to use the target skill/behavior
- It is generally not best practice or effective to teach replacement behaviors in isolation unless that teaching strategy is strongly indicated by student data (e.g., assessments, PLAAFP) as the way the student learns best

To select and describe the skill:

Reducing the occurrence of the interfering behavior must not be the sole focus of an IEP goal; however, the team may choose to include this as a secondary focus so long as the primary focus is teaching an alternative or replacement behavior
When selecting the skill to teach, teams are strongly advised to select a replacement behavior that matches the function of the interfering behavior, as determined by an FBA
The skill should be age-appropriate, relevant to the student’s needs, and socially acceptable (i.e., it should not stigmatize or create additional barriers for the student)

To establish the criterion:

Consider measuring frequency or duration of behavior or skill use, percent of opportunities in which a behavior or skill was used, and/or a rating scale (such as the Direct Behavior Rating¹¹² scale) corresponding to specific patterns of behavior
Data measuring the behavior or skill should be graphed (using a line or bar graph of daily and/or weekly behavior data) for the most effective support and team decision making
For goals related to changing an interfering behavior, the criterion might measure the student engaging in the alternative or replacement behavior more frequently, more independently, in more difficult situations, or across a wider range of settings
The criterion should facilitate rapid and reliable measures of the skill (e.g., a lightweight daily measure) rather than time-consuming measure(s) collected monthly or quarterly
- A criterion that facilitates daily data collection should be considered for intensive behavior support
Behavioral data collection should be preplanned and not on an “as needed” basis, as that can produce serious systematic errors and bias in data collection and interpretation

Services

All IEPs must include specially designed instruction (SDI).¹¹³ Some students may also have related services and/or supplementary aids and services (SAS) included in the IEP. Each of these types of services should support the student in making progress in the general education curriculum and grade-level standards as well as attaining the annual goals in their IEP.

Students with behavior support needs may benefit from a variety of services to address their learning needs. Teams are advised to determine the function of the individual student’s interfering behavior to best guide decisions about services. For instance, for a student whose interfering behavior relates to difficulty communicating when stressed, it may be important to incorporate communication and/or self-advocacy skills into the IEP’s goals and associated services. On the other hand, if the student’s interfering behavior arises from peer conflict, goals and services might instead address the student’s social/emotional/behavioral skills during routines and activities with the most peer interaction (e.g., group activities, lunch, and recess).

RREI Demonstration Site Finding: General Education Staff Should Assist with the Provision of SDI

Multiple demonstration sites reported that general education teachers were key partners in improving services and relationships with students with disabilities whose behaviors interfered with learning. General education teachers must be valued and empowered members of the team assisting with the provision of SDI. This builds the student’s sense of belonging and relationships in the general education setting, leading to improved behavior.

When considering how and where services will be provided, special education services must be provided in the student’s LRE, and, to the maximum extent appropriate, in the general education environment. This includes services for positive behavior support. School teams cannot decide to remove a student from age-appropriate general education settings solely because of needed modifications in the general education curriculum.¹¹⁴ Special education services should only be delivered in a separate setting when absolutely necessary. Both students and staff benefit when behavior support services are coordinated with the schoolwide schedule and designed for shared implementation across the school team, rather than provided by a single teacher or paraeducator.

IEP Related Services and Mental Health Support

The purpose of related services in the IEP is to provide the student with any necessary services to ensure they can benefit from special education. IEP teams sometimes overlook school-based mental health related services when considering the student’s individual needs.¹¹⁵ However, the non-exhaustive list of related services provided in WAC 392-172A-01155 includes counseling, psychological services, therapeutic recreation, and social work services. For some students with behavior support needs, underlying mental health concerns may be a significant factor.

Students with disabilities experience mental health needs at far greater rates than their classmates without disabilities.¹¹⁶ In some cases, students with disabilities who engage in interfering behavior may also experience symptoms of mental health concerns, like self-harming behaviors, repetitive or ritualized behaviors, or indications of suicidal ideation. These symptoms can pose a barrier for the student with a disability to access a FAPE (for example, if the student’s mental health difficulties contribute to chronic absenteeism or refusal to attend certain classes).

While a BIP can address environmental factors contributing to interfering behaviors, teach more appropriate replacement behaviors, and provide reinforcement to strengthen those behaviors, it cannot treat any underlying mental health concern (e.g., anxiety or depression) contributing to the use of interfering behaviors. If the team believes a student is experiencing mental health needs, it is unethical to attempt to address those needs with a BIP alone. In these cases, the team should determine what school-based mental health related services are appropriate to support the student, consider making changes to the IEP (including related services as described above), and identify any other necessary supports to ensure the student has access to a FAPE.

Placement

A student’s placement must be determined by the IEP team, which includes the parent, and must be based on all of the following:¹¹⁷

The student’s IEP,
The student’s least restrictive environment (LRE),
The placement option(s) provides a reasonably high probability of supporting the student to reach their IEP goals, and
A consideration of any potential harmful effect the placement may have on the student or on the quality of services they need

A student’s placement is determined after the IEP is developed so these factors can be considered. Predetermination of placement – including determining goals or services based on what is available in a pre-selected school or classroom or based on a bell schedule – is not permitted. As noted on page 68, teams cannot remove a student from education in age-appropriate general classrooms solely because of needed modifications in general education.¹¹⁸

For a student who engages in interfering behavior (as well as any other student), the placement decision must provide the student with opportunities and services to access and progress in the general education curriculum, reach their IEP goals, and receive social, emotional, and behavioral support. As described above, IEP goals for a student with interfering behavior should focus on meaningful and function-based alternative behaviors, such as skills for age-appropriate peer interaction, teamwork, communication, and stress tolerance. It is neither effective nor evidence-based to limit access to general education instruction and social opportunities to teach these skills; in fact, practice in natural contexts is usually necessary for students to progress in these goals.

For these reasons, IEP teams must not determine placement based solely on the amount of support a student needs. It would not be appropriate, for example, for the IEP team to place a student with behavior support needs who is on/above grade level academically in a “life skills” classroom (that does not provide the academic instruction the student requires) for staffing reasons. Regardless of a student’s need for behavior support, they are entitled to the same rights, individualized determinations of FAPE and LRE, and access to general education instruction and nonacademic/extracurricular activities as any other student eligible for special education services.

Can Districts Require Students to “Earn Their Way” To Less Restrictive Placements?

No, districts may not place the burden on the student to earn time in a less restrictive placement – it is contrary to the IDEA to require a student to earn time in general education. Students who receive special education services should be allowed to participate in a district’s educational programs and services to the same extent as their non-disabled peers. It would be even more concerning if access was restricted as the district’s way of responding to behavioral needs that might be related to the student’s disability. Any decision to limit or restrict a student’s access to and participation in general education settings, including decisions made due to the student’s interfering behavior, must be made by the IEP team based solely on any adjustments necessary due to their disability and/or unique needs.

Districts should not use a more restrictive placement or shortened school day as a form of punishment or as a substitute for positive behavior strategies and supports or a BIP. Instead, the IEP team should ensure the IEP includes positive behavior supports, including (if appropriate) IEP goals and a BIP that describes the use of positive behavioral interventions, supports, and strategies reasonably calculated to address the student’s behavioral needs and enable the student to participate in the full school day in their LRE.

While there may be rare cases in which a student’s disability-related needs necessitate a shortened school day or a more restrictive placement, it is the district’s responsibility to demonstrate how the student’s IEP is reasonably calculated to provide the student with the level of support (for instance, social/emotional/behavioral support as part of the IEP and/or a BIP if appropriate) needed to enable the student to participate in a full school day and access general education. To facilitate this, the district may consider a reevaluation (for instance, by conducting an FBA) to determine the student’s needs and how best to address them so the student can achieve meaningful educational benefit consistent with their rights under the IDEA.

Behavioral Intervention Plan (BIP)

When behavior is identified as a need by the IEP team (for instance, in the special factors described on page 71), the team must consider use of positive behavioral interventions and supports to address behavior that interferes with learning. This should include consideration of whether or not the IEP team will develop a BIP. The purpose of a BIP is to describe the positive behavioral interventions and supports the team will use to reduce the student’s use of the interfering behavior by teaching the student prosocial alternative behaviors. A BIP must, at minimum, include a description of the skills that will be taught and monitored by school staff as alternatives to the interfering behavior. When a student eligible for special education services has a BIP, it becomes part of their IEP and thus must be followed by the school team implementing it.

The process for developing an effective BIP for any student is described in Section 4. It is important to note that the process for developing a BIP (and integrating information obtained with an FBA into the BIP) should be the same regardless of whether or not a student is eligible for special education services or a 504 Plan. Districts should not have separate processes for BIP development based on whether or not a student has a disability.

Emergency Response Protocol

An emergency response protocol (ERP) must be developed, following the requirements in WAC 392-172A-02105, if the parent and the school district determine that a student requires advanced educational planning. The ERP describes the response to be used in the case of emergencies that pose an imminent likelihood of serious harm. The district must obtain parent consent in advance for the ERP.

The district may not develop an ERP that violates the requirements in RCW 28A.600.485, regardless of whether or not the parent has provided consent. This means the ERP must not contain, for instance:

Language that suggests restraint and/or isolation will be used as a punishment for a specific predetermined behavior, irrespective of whether or not the student’s use of that behavior poses an imminent likelihood of serious harm in a given instance
Conditions for using restraint and/or isolation for behaviors that do not pose an imminent likelihood of serious harm
A predetermined duration for restraint and/or isolation
An exit criteria for restraint and/or isolation that extends the use of these practices past the requirement in RCW 28A.600.485(3)(b) that restraint and isolation “must be discontinued as soon as the likelihood of serious harm has dissipated.”

An ERP is not a substitute for a collaboratively developed BIP. Developing an ERP does not fulfill the team’s requirement under state and federal regulations to provide an appropriate offer of FAPE in the IEP, including (if applicable) using positive behavioral interventions and supports to address the student’s interfering behaviors and supporting the student to learn alternative behaviors. Districts are strongly encouraged to follow the recommendations in Section 4 for developing BIPs.

Behavior Supports and the 504 Plan

When preparing to develop a 504 Plan for a student who engages in interfering behavior, the team should review information provided for the evaluation, including relevant assessments and any other data collected about the student’s disability-related needs, to identify the individualized services the student requires to access a FAPE. This information might include:

Notes and other documentation relating to previous behavior interventions
Observations of the student engaging in the interfering behavior(s)
Documentation from the school’s MTSS team
Discipline records relevant to the interfering behavior(s)
Medical or psychological records
Results of an FBA

When the team meets to develop a 504 Plan for a student who engages in interfering behavior related to their disability, the team “must identify individualized services, such as behavioral supports, to meet the student’s educational needs.”¹¹⁹ 504 Plans are not required to be put in writing, but teams are strongly encouraged to do so for shared team understanding about roles, responsibilities, and implementation. Services and decisions that relate to the student with a disability must be individualized and cannot be “based on stereotypes, generalizations, or assumptions about the student based on their disability or about individuals with disabilities generally.”¹²⁰

While it is not mandatory to include a BIP for a student served under Section 504 who engages in interfering behavior, the team should thoughtfully consider developing one consistent with the best practices outlined in Section 4. In its 2022 guidance for supporting students with behavioral needs under Section 504, the federal Office for Civil Rights (OCR) notes that, “if a Section 504 team chooses to use a behavioral assessment to develop a BIP, and that assessment identifies specific behavioral supports needed to ensure FAPE, the Section 504 team would need to develop the BIP with such supports, and the school would need to implement it, as part of the student’s Section 504 plan for providing FAPE.” Regardless of whether or not the team determines that a BIP will be developed, the student’s 504 Plan must still include any other individualized services necessary to support the student in learning more prosocial behaviors and accessing a FAPE.

For more information about 504 Plan requirements, refer to:

¹⁰⁰ OSERS & OESE (2024). Using functional behavioral assessments to create supportive learning environments.

¹⁰¹ OSERS (2022). Questions and answers: Addressing the needs of children with disabilities and IDEA’s discipline provisions

¹⁰² WAC 392-172A-02060(4).

¹⁰³ WAC 392-172A-02050.

¹⁰⁴ WAC 392-172A-05001.

¹⁰⁵ OSPI (2024). Comprehensive inclusive education in Washington - Step 1: Collaborative conversations.

¹⁰⁶ OSPI (2021) Family Engagement Framework Workgroup: 2021 report to the Legislature.

¹⁰⁷ Endrew F. v. Douglas County Sch. Dist. Re-1, 69 IDELR 174 (2017).

¹⁰⁸ U.S. Department of Education. (2017). Questions and Answers on U. S. Supreme Court Case Decision Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1 (page 5).

¹⁰⁹ WAC 392-172A-03110(2).

¹¹⁰ WAC 392-172A-03090(1)(a).