Utah's Least Restrictive Behavioral Interventions Guidelines

XII. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Frequently Asked Questions
Questions
What authority do the school and
district have when disciplining a
student who has a disability?
What is Manifestation Determination
Review (MDR), and when must a
school conduct MDR?
Answers
The federal statute indicates that school personnel may suspend
a child with a disability from his/her current placement for
violation of the student code of conduct for up to 10 school days
per school year, as long as the length of the removal is the same
that non-disabled students would receive. The 10 allowable days
have been called “FAPE-free” days, meaning that schools may
remove the student without providing special education services
for up to 10 days. However, following the 10 “free” days,
schools must provide a continuation of FAPE for the student with
a disability. This means that the school is responsible for
providing the student with the services included in his/her IEP
(including BIP) to the extent necessary to allow him to progress
on the goals, and have access to and make progress in the
general education curriculum. When a school exceeds the 10
school days allowable by law, a further removal constitutes a
change of placement. This change of placement triggers IDEA
2004 disciplinary procedures.
In the publication The Complete OSEP Handbook, Manifestation
Determination is defined as “a review of the relationship between
the child’s disability and the behavior subject to the disciplinary
action (Section 10:19).” The MDR procedure has been greatly
simplified from previous authorizations of IDEA. Under the IDEA
2004, within 10 days of any decision to change a student’s
education placement for disciplinary reasons, the school district,
the parent, and relevant members of the IEP team must review
all relevant information in the student file, IEP (including BIP),
teacher observations, and other relevant information provided by
the parent to determine the answer to two questions:
1. Whether the conduct in question was caused by, or had
a direct and substantial relationship to, the child’s
disability; and/or
2. Whether the conduct in question was the direct result of
the school district’s failure to implement the IEP
(remember the Behavior Intervention Plan is part of the
IEP).
If the answer to question (1) and/or (2) is YES, the student’s
conduct shall be determined to be a manifestation of the child’s
disability. Conversely, if the answer to both questions is NO, the
student’s conduct shall not be determined to be a manifestation
of the child’s disability.
116