Syllabus of Guidance on Behavior-Related Issues
The syllabus has been constructed in response to the requirements of Assembly Bill 110, Chapter 20, Statutes of 2013. It lists both federal and private-sector publications that may be of assistance to educators looking for information following the repeal of Title 5, California Code of Regulations, Section 3001(d), (e), (f), (g), and (ab) and Section 3052, formerly known as the “Hughes Bill” regulations.
Frequently Asked Questions
- Questions and Answers on Discipline Procedures
, U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS). Individuals with Disabilities Education Law Report (IDELR), Volume 52, Citation #231 (June 1, 2009), Question E-2.
This is one of a series of question and answer (Q&A) documents prepared by OSERS to address some of the most important issues raised by requests for clarification on a variety of high-interest topics. Generally, the questions, and corresponding answers, presented in this Q&A document required interpretation of the IDEA and its implementing regulations and the answers are not simply a restatement of the statutory or regulatory requirements. The responses presented in this document generally are informal guidance representing the interpretation of the Department of the applicable statutory or regulatory requirements in the context of the specific facts presented and are not legally binding.
This Web site publishes frequently asked questions (FAQs) for people just learning about positive behavioral interventions and supports. It also publishes FAQs for schools using these interventions and supports at theprimary , secondary , and tertiary levels .
for people just learning about positive behavioral interventions and supports. It also publishes FAQs for schools using these interventions and supports at theprimary , secondary , and tertiary levels .See more information about this Web site below.
Federal Register
- Federal Register, Volume 71, No. 156, Monday, August 14, 2006 (PDF; 1MB), “Development, Review, and Revision of [the Individualized Education Program] IEP” (Title 34, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 300.324), pages 46682–46687 (will need to scroll through document to identify the specific pages). This section of the Analysis of Comments and Changes to the federal regulations, discusses the rationale for each of the changes made to the regulations pertaining to the development, review, and revision of the IEP. Of specific interest, this section discusses the role of IEP team members in considering and developing positive behavioral interventions and supports.
- Federal Register, Volume 71, No. 156, Monday, August 14, 2006 (PDF; 1MB), “Discipline Procedures” (Title 34, Code of Federal Regulations, sections 300.324), pages 46713-46730 (will need to scroll through document to identify the specific pages). This section of the Analysis of Comments and Changes to the federal regulations, discusses the rationale for each of the changes made to the regulations pertaining to the discipline procedures. Among the topics discussed in this section are the authority of school personnel, the provision of services, manifestation determinations, parental notification, placement issues, the appeal process, protections of children not determined eligible for special education and related services, and referral to and action by law enforcement and judicial authorities.
- Federal Register, Volume 73, No. 231, Monday, December 1, 2008 (PDF), “Parental Revocation of Consent for Special Education Services” (Title 34, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 300.300), page 73012 (will need to scroll through document to identify the specific page). This section of the Analysis of Comments and Changes to the federal regulations, discusses the rationale for each of the changes made to the regulations pertaining to revocation of consent. Of specific interest, page 73012 contains a discussion on parental revocation of consent and discipline protections.
Letters from the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
- Letter to Trader , U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), October 19, 2006 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter). This letter clarifies that the IDEA, while requiring the individualized education program team (IEP team) to consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, does not include a prohibition on the use of aversive behavioral interventions and that the decision whether to allow IEP teams to consider the use of such interventions is a decision left to each state.
- Letter to Christiansen , U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), February 9, 2007 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter).
This letter concerns whether a functional behavioral assessment (FBA) triggers the procedural safeguards applicable to an evaluation or an independent educational evaluation and whether parent consent is required prior to conducting an FBA. - Letter to Heufner , U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), March 8, 2007 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter). This letter pertains to when a parent or an LEA may request an expedited due process hearing and the child’s placement during an appeal pending a manifestation determination.
- Letter to Sarzynski , U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), May 6, 2008 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter). This letter clarifies that public agencies must obtain parental consent before conducting evaluations to determine whether services should be increased or decreased and to determine a child's continued eligibility for services or changes to services.
- Letter to Janssen , U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), June 5, 2008 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter). This letter concerns requirements for FBAs, state personnel qualifications for individuals who conduct FBAs, and use of funds from Part B of the IDEA to assist LEAs in providing FBAs.
- Letter to Owoh , U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), August 21, 2009 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter). This letter clarifies when an LEA is required to conduct a manifestation determination review prior to a short-term disciplinary removal of a child with a disability.
- Letter to Anonymous (to individual; personally identifiable information redacted), U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), April 9, 2012 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter). In part, this letter pertains to providing prior written notice when proposing an FBA and the evaluation of students transferring from one state to another.
- Letter to Gallo , U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), April 2, 2013 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter). This letter expands on the guidance issued in the February 9, 2007, Letter to Christiansen regarding consent for FBAs and on OSER’s Questions and Answers on Discipline Procedures.
Letters from the Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan
On July 31, 2009; December 8, 2009; and January 26, 2010; Secretary of Education Arne Duncan released letters about the use of aversive procedures. Although the legislative initiatives to which Secretary Duncan referred in his letter of January 26, 2010, did not become law, this series of letters provides the federal Department of Education’s perspective on the use of seclusion and restraint:
- A letter to Chief State School Officers , July 31, 2009 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter)
- A letter to Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Representative George Miller, and Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers, December 8, 2009 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter)
- National Leadership Consortium on Developmental Disabilities representative Nancy R. Weiss , January 26, 2010 (will need to scroll down the web page in order to identify this specific letter)
Web Sites
- The OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports
The Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) was established by the Office of Special Education Programs, US Department of Education, to give schools capacity-building information and technical assistance for identifying, adapting, and sustaining effective school-wide disciplinary practices. The site provides information about PBIS in schools at the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels; within communities; and in families. It also publishes issue briefs, outlines of research on behavior-related topics, and coach and trainer resources. - CalSTAT Technical Assistance and Training
CalSTAT (California Services for Technical Assistance and Training) is a special project of the California Department of Education, Special Education Division, located at Napa County Office of Education. It is funded through the Special Education Division and the California State Personnel Development Grant (SPDG). The SPDG, a federal grant, supports and develops partnerships with schools and families by providing training, technical assistance, and resources to both special education and general education. The CalSTAT Web site provides information resources, links to Web sites and a “Core Message Area” that all focus on PBIS. - Positive Environments, Network of Trainers (PENT)
This Web site is maintained by the California Department of Education, Diagnostic Center, Los Angeles. It is a California Positive Behavior Initiative designed to provide information and resources for educators striving to achieve high educational outcomes through the use of proactive positive strategies. Evidence-based positive practices and helpful information is disseminated statewide through this Web site. This site is being updated to reflect the repeal of Title 5, California Code of Regulations, Section 3001(d), (e), (f), (g), and (ab) and Section 3052, formerly known as the “Hughes Bill” regulations.
Questions: Allison Smith | asmith@cde.ca.gov | 916-319-0377
