Dickson County School Board Approves ABA Therapy Policy After Parents Raise Concerns

Dickson, TN — The Dickson County Board of Education approved a new policy governing privately paid Applied Behavior Analysis therapy in county schools Thursday night, but not before parents and board members raised concerns about how a “zero disruption” standard could affect students receiving the services.

The policy, identified as Policy 6.4053, Outside Applied Behavior Analysis Therapy, establishes rules for private providers who enter schools to provide ABA services to students.

The board ultimately approved the policy after making several changes during an extended discussion. Two board members voted against the final measure.

Family Raises Concerns

The issue drew public comments from one parent, whose son currently receives ABA therapy in the classroom.

That parent told board members the therapy has been “hugely beneficial” for his son and said he understood the need for the district to establish a framework following changes in state law.

His concern centered on language dealing with disruptions caused by outside providers.

He questioned how the district would determine what constitutes a disruption and how many incidents could lead to a provider losing access to a classroom.

Other requirements, such as proper licensing and background checks, appeared more straightforward, he said. Determining whether someone is disrupting a classroom could be much more subjective.

His son's grandfather, who is a former Dickson County educator, raised a similar concern.

He told the board that what one teacher considers disruptive could be very different from what another teacher considers disruptive.

He also stressed the importance of the therapy to his grandson.

“This therapy has been great for my grandson,” Schaefer told the board. “I don't know what we would have done without it.”

He encouraged the district to more clearly define disruptive behavior rather than potentially allowing a single incident to result in a provider being removed.

Board Debates 'Zero Disruption'

Those concerns became a major part of the board's later discussion of the policy.

One board member specifically questioned language establishing a “zero disruption standard” and asked whether the policy could be written to allow a conversation before an outside provider was no longer permitted to work in a school.

The board's attorney explained that the ‘zero disruption’ language was based on the state's framework. During the discussion, officials pointed to a sample memorandum of understanding from the state that included language dealing with disruption to classroom instruction and school operations.

At the same time, the proposed district policy gave administrators discretion in determining whether a provider should actually be suspended or removed.

The board discussed whether that combination effectively means the district's expectation is no disruption while still allowing administrators to consider the circumstances of individual incidents.

District Says Outside Providers Already Work in Schools

District officials emphasized that allowing private providers into Dickson County classrooms isn't new.

Dr. Johnson told the board that approximately 15 to 20 outside service providers have worked in district schools during each of the past two years.

The district conducts an extensive onboarding process with providers and establishes expectations for their work inside classrooms.

Only a small number of problems have occurred.

Johnson said there had been approximately two or three instances requiring a follow-up meeting with an outside agency and two cases in which the district requested that an agency provide a different individual.

The replacement providers then went through the same onboarding process.

District officials said outside services must supplement the student's education rather than interfere with the district's responsibility to provide an appropriate education.

At the same time, Johnson said the district recognizes the benefits that can come from coordinating services between schools, families and outside providers.

She gave the example of a student working on a potty training protocol. A strategy used at home or in a clinical setting may need to be adapted for school, but using familiar visual schedules or similar techniques across environments could help the student make progress more quickly.

The goal, she said, is greater consistency for the child while recognizing that a classroom is different from a home or clinical environment.

Appeals Process Included

The policy also establishes an administrative appeals process for families.

Board members discussed the importance of that provision as another safeguard if an outside provider is removed or restricted.

Officials said the process gives families an opportunity to present their side and allows administrators to collect additional information about what occurred before reaching a decision.

The board also questioned whether the private ABA provider itself should have rights under that appeals process.

Members ultimately determined that the appeal belongs to the parent or legal guardian, rather than the private provider.

That led to amendments removing references to the private-pay provider from portions of the appeals language.

Board Changes Policy Before Vote

The board made three specific changes before adopting the policy.

On the first page, language referring to parental “consent” was changed to parental “request,” reflecting that the process begins when a parent asks for an outside ABA provider to work with the student.

On the third page, the board removed “private pay provider” from one portion of the administrative appeals process and removed another reference to the “provider” elsewhere in that section.

The discussion also clarified that a parental request does not necessarily guarantee that an outside provider will be allowed into the classroom. District officials indicated those requests must be considered in relation to the student's educational program and the district's responsibilities.

The board then voted to adopt the policy on first reading while waiving the normal second reading so it could take effect for the new school year.

The motion passed, with two board members voting no.

Balancing Therapy and Classroom Instruction

The debate highlighted the balance Dickson County Schools will have to maintain as the new policy is implemented: allowing students to continue benefiting from privately provided behavioral therapy while protecting classroom instruction for all students.

Board members acknowledged the concerns raised by the family but also expressed confidence that administrators would use discretion rather than automatically removing a provider following a minor incident.

District officials similarly stressed that their experience over the past several years has generally been collaborative.

For families whose children receive ABA services, the practical impact of the policy will depend heavily on how administrators interpret the disruption standard when problems arise.

The district now has formal authority and procedures for addressing those situations, while parents have an administrative avenue to challenge decisions they believe are inappropriate.

The policy takes effect as Dickson County Schools begins the 2026-27 school year.