Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education Aba Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves visitors policy on first reading after heated debate over in-class ABA therapy
Summary
The Manhattan-Ogden USD 383 Board of Education approved revisions to its visitors-to-school policy on first reading following public testimony from parents and a student urging the district to allow in-class Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) therapy; the motion passed 4-3 and will return for a second reading.
The Manhattan-Ogden USD 383 Board of Education approved on first reading revised language governing visitors to schools after a two-hour discussion that focused on whether third‑party Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) therapists should be permitted in general education classrooms. The motion passed on first reading 4-3; the board scheduled further consideration at its next meeting.
The parents of a student who receives ABA therapy urged the board to allow medically prescribed ABA services inside classrooms. Amanda Grama, a parent, told the board that ABA is "a medical treatment that is prescribed only after a child is diagnosed with autism" and said it had been "life changing" for her daughter: "She is now starting to make progress on goals that have been in her IEP since kindergarten. The ABA team was able to work with the school team." Fifth‑grade student Taylor Roberts also spoke in support, saying that her classroom "was not distracted in any way when Ruby and her helper were in the classroom" and that friendships and understanding grew from inclusion.
Board members acknowledged the therapy's value but said they must balance legal, operational and equity concerns. Several trustees said they want to preserve the district's authority to enforce school rules, protect student privacy, and ensure staff safety and consistency across buildings. Board discussion repeatedly referenced the possibility of memorandum(s) of understanding (MOUs) as a way to permit outside providers while setting training, supervision and liability conditions.
Superintendent Eric Downes and district staff briefed the board earlier in the meeting that the draft policy language includes a statement that "outside agencies are not permitted to provide services in the classroom during the school day" while also committing the district to "collaborate with community organizations and agencies to support the well‑being of students." Several board members, including Jamie and Kurt, said they would prefer rewritten language allowing classroom services on a case‑by‑case basis with formal MOUs; others expressed caution about opening classrooms to third‑party providers without more legal and operational guardrails.
Board member Greg (Board member) moved to adopt the revised visitors policy on first reading; Kurt seconded. The vote was 4 in favor, 3 opposed. Several trustees and staff invited families and providers to continue working with the administration to draft MOU templates and operational procedures for later consideration.
The policy will return for further board action at the next meeting; families and providers said they expect continued district‑level work to define allowable in‑class services, supervision requirements, and background checks or training for outside therapists.
Ending: The first‑reading approval provides an interim policy that restricts outside agency presence in classrooms while directing staff to work with community partners on alternative delivery models. Parents and some trustees said they will push the district to create MOU pathways so medically prescribed ABA services can continue to be delivered in classrooms for students who need them.
