A Douglas County parent told the school board that her ninth‑grade son was placed on a Behavioral Intervention Plan after a single incident without a functional behavioral assessment, without an IEP team meeting and despite her explicit refusal to participate.

Janice Howard said school administrators told her an FBA had not been performed and that the district implemented the BIP "without parental consent and without evaluation and without an IEP process," which she described as a denial of her son’s rights under IDEA and Section 504 and a violation of Nevada Administrative Code requirements for behavioral plans. Howard asked the board to review how BIPs are implemented districtwide, retrain staff on FBA and IDEA requirements, and confirm no other students are placed under a BIP without lawful process.

John Gunter, who spoke after Howard, said the district has a prior finding under a state education complaint (he cited a 2023 case number 2307) and referenced an October 2024 OCR docket (8241182) that he said required the district to "cease all informal enforcement of BIPs without written parental consent." Gunter warned that if an allegedly unlawful BIP remained in place he would file a new state complaint and consider federal civil‑rights litigation.

Board members did not take an immediate formal action during public comment; trustees acknowledged the concerns and asked staff to follow up. The presenters at the meeting did not provide a detailed operational response on the record during public comment.

What happens next: Howard asked the board to review districtwide BIP practice and to ensure staff are trained on required procedures. The parents’ speakers explicitly requested the district remove the BIP unless lawful process is followed and asked for public transparency about next steps.