Which statement accurately reflects how a manifestation determination review informs disciplinary decisions when behavior is or isn’t linked to a disability?

• A. If linked, the IEP’s behavioral supports are used; if not linked, discipline proceeds with protections.
• B. The IEP is automatically revised to address the behavior.
• C. The MDT is not used in such cases.
• D. Discipline is always halted during MDT proceedings.

Answer: (A)

When a student with a disability faces disciplinary action, a manifestation determination review decides whether the behavior in question is a manifestation of the disability. That determination shapes how discipline is handled.

If the behavior is linked to the disability, the IEP team uses the current IEP’s supports and typically revises the plan to address the behavior, often through a functional behavioral assessment and a behavioral intervention plan. The focus shifts from punishment to strengthening supports so the student can stay in a free appropriate public education environment.

If the behavior is not linked to the disability, the school can proceed with disciplinary actions in the same way it would for students without disabilities, while still ensuring the student receives appropriate services as required by IDEA. The MDR process has determined that the behavior is not connected, so normal disciplinary procedures apply, with protections in place to maintain the student’s right to FAPE.

The other options don’t fit because the IEP isn’t automatically revised in every case, the MDT is indeed used to determine linkage, and discipline isn’t always halted during the process.