Abstract
Exemplifying the insufficient treatment of legal issues in refereed journals in special education and related fields, the limited legal coverage of functional behavioral assessments (FBAs) and behavior intervention plans (BIPs) tends to view the applicable case law through normative lenses. This skewed view characterizes the case law as requiring FBAs and BIPs rather broadly in terms of entitlement and rather rigorously in terms of appropriateness. In stark contrast, this systematic analysis of 91 recent judicial rulings concerning FBAs and BIPs reveals that, aligned with the trajectory of previous court decisions, the outcomes favor the defendant districts on almost a 7:1 ratio and that the pronounced prodistrict trend applies to entitlement as well as appropriateness. Special education professionals need careful differentiation of legal requirements from professional norms to make informed choices about FBAs and BIPs that balance the individual interests and the competing priorities within limited resources of school districts.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
