Five Words Special Education Directors Fear: “Something ... - IAASE

student’s behavior on the bus, and required the district to assign a trained
paraprofessional to accompany the student on the bus.
2. The IHO found that the use of physical restraint on the bus was permissible. The
teacher assigned to ride the bus with the student was certified in crisis prevention
intervention and trained in the use of de-escalation techniques. The IHO
concluded that the teacher was sufficiently qualified to accompany the student on
the bus until the district trained a paraprofessional to take her place.
15. Are accommodations such as use of helmets and harnesses on the bus an IEP team decision?
Or can school personnel unilaterally require their use to ensure a student’s safety?
I advise clients that the IEP team must make the decision
A. Currently, there is some disagreement about aspects of transportation that have an impact
on the health, safety or welfare of a student.
B. For example, let’s assume that a harness is not listed on the student’s IEP summary, the
student is wreaking havoc on the bus and parents will not agree to the use of a harness. Is
this an IEP team decision (that requires notice to parent and an opportunity to file for due
process, thus invoking “stay-put”) or is this a unilateral decision that can be made by a
school district? Conservative advice is that adding a harness, etc., is an IEP change that
requires advance notice, allowing parents to invoke the student’s stay-put placement.
C. Savannah R-III School District, 108 LRP 48864 (SEA Missouri 2008)
1. The student (diagnosed with Autism) was six feet one inches tall and weighed
two hundred seventy four pounds. “An uninformed observer might believe that
the Student was a prototypical high school football defensive tackle if he was
seen walking down the street or in the school hallway…. the Student's size and
strength is a factor when it viewed in the context of his recurrent, self-injurious,
head-banging behaviors.”
2. The student’s IEP team recommended that the student wear a helmet at school
and on the bus. Student’s Mother refused mostly because she did not want her
son to look different from his peers. She also reported that the head banging
behavior was a recurring behavior that went away when ignored and that it only
occurred when the student was bored.
3. The student’s IEP team discussed strategies to deal with the head banging
behaviors, including the use of headphones, joint compressions, a full-time bus
monitor, the use of a behavior chart and taking walks with his paraprofessional.
They also developed a Behavior Intervention Plan which addressed his
propensity to bang his head. The IHO held fully in favor of the school district.
16. Must goals/objectives be developed regarding the use of accommodations or related services
on the bus, e.g., harness, air conditioning, medication administration, etc.?
Generally, no
A. Letter to Hayden, 22 IDELR 501 (OSEP 1994)
Page 14 of 22
900934.1