Estimated reading time: 20 minutes
A behavior intervention plan (BIP) is a written plan that tells every adult who works with a student how to prevent a behavior that interferes with learning, teach a replacement behavior that meets the same need, respond when the behavior happens, and check whether the plan is working. It is built on a functional behavior assessment (FBA). IDEA uses the term “behavioral intervention plan” and requires one in some disciplinary situations, but never defines it. This guide covers when a BIP is required, its components, two example BIPs, a template, implementation and review. It describes federal and state rules, not legal advice: check your state’s rules and consult district counsel on decisions with legal consequences.
Table of contents
Executive Summary
In 2023-24, students served under IDEA made up 15% of K-12 enrollment but 73% of students physically restrained and 68% of students placed in seclusion, according to the Office for Civil Rights (OCR). A behavior intervention plan is where a team decides, in advance, how adults will prevent a behavior and respond to it, so that an emergency response does not become the plan by default.
Writing the plan is the easier half. The IRIS Center at Vanderbilt University warns that interventions might not work as expected when critical elements are changed or omitted, and that implementation problems should be fixed before anyone changes the plan.
Key Takeaways
- IDEA names the BIP without defining it: a plan is required when conduct behind a disciplinary change of placement is a manifestation of the disability (34 CFR 300.530(f)).
- When behavior impedes learning, the IEP team must consider positive behavioral interventions and supports (34 CFR 300.324(a)(2)(i)).
- A BIP starts from the function found in the FBA and teaches a replacement behavior that meets the same need.
- Most of a BIP describes what adults do: prevention, teaching, reinforcement, responses and, only where needed, a safety plan.
- States add rules: New York bars physical restraint as a planned intervention, and Texas requires at least annual review.
- Check fidelity before revising: a plan not carried out as written has not been tested.
What Is a Behavior Intervention Plan?
A behavior intervention plan is an individualized written plan, based on an FBA, that describes a student’s interfering behavior and its likely function, and the positive strategies adults will use to prevent it, teach and reinforce a replacement behavior, and measure progress.
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), in its July 2022 Q&A on discipline, says a BIP is “generally understood to mean a component of a child’s educational program” that addresses behaviors interfering with learning and describes the positive interventions that will reinforce positive behavior. Some schools call it a behavioral support plan (BSP); Texas rules also say “behavior improvement plan.”
The IRIS Center notes that “most of the information is guidance for educators.” The plan follows the assessment that explains why the behavior happens, covered in our guide to the functional behavior assessment.
How a BIP Relates to the FBA and Behavior IEP Goals
The FBA explains why the behavior happens, the BIP sets out what adults will do, and the IEP goal states what the student will learn to do instead; examples are in behavior IEP goals. The Department of Education’s November 2024 guidance on FBAs, issued by the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) and the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, adds that FBA and BIP data can inform present levels, goals, services and accommodations. Use one behavior definition and one data set across all three.
When Is a Behavior Intervention Plan Required?
| Situation | Rule | What it requires |
|---|---|---|
| Conduct behind a disciplinary change of placement is a manifestation of the disability | 34 CFR 300.530(f) | An FBA, unless one was done before the behavior, and a BIP; or a review and modification of the existing BIP |
| Not a manifestation, with a long-term removal, or a 45-day interim setting for weapons, drugs or serious bodily injury | 34 CFR 300.530(d)(1)(ii) | As appropriate, an FBA and “behavioral intervention services and modifications” so the behavior does not recur |
| Behavior impedes the student’s learning or that of others | 34 CFR 300.324(a)(2)(i) | The team must consider positive behavioral supports; OSEP says a BIP the team finds appropriate goes in the IEP |
| New York: persistent behavior despite consistent schoolwide or classwide interventions, a risk of harm, or a more restrictive placement under consideration | 8 NYCRR 200.22(b)(1) | The committee must consider a BIP |
| Oregon: a student with an IEP or Section 504 plan whose behavior created an imminent risk of serious bodily injury | OAR 581-015-2181 | An FBA and a new or revised BIP within 45 school days of parental consent |
| Texas: restraint is used | 19 TAC 89.1053(e) | The notice to parents says whether the BIP may need revision, or how to request an ARD meeting about an FBA |
The legal minimum is a poor starting point. IRIS describes the FBA and BIP process as typically used for students with chronic, intensive behaviors who receive Tier 3 supports in a framework such as Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), and the 2024 FBA guidance encourages FBAs even for behaviors that are not safety-related, such as talking out. A district that waits for a manifestation determination writes its first plan after a removal.
Components of a Behavior Intervention Plan
IRIS lists six components: the target behavior, a summary of FBA data, the hypothesized function, the replacement behavior, specific interventions and a progress monitoring plan. New York requires a baseline and a schedule to measure effectiveness, and the 2024 guidance adds responsible staff, training and fidelity.
| Component | What it states | Quality check |
|---|---|---|
| Target behavior | What the behavior looks and sounds like, with examples and nonexamples | Observable, measurable, actively stated |
| Baseline | Frequency, duration, intensity or latency across settings and times | Sets the criteria for judging progress |
| Function hypothesis | Context, triggers, maintaining consequences, function | Taken from the FBA |
| Prevention strategies | Changes to the setting, tasks, prompts and schedule | Each tied to a trigger |
| Replacement behavior | A behavior that meets the same need, and how it is taught | Same function, better payoff |
| Reinforcement and responses | What adults do after each behavior | The replacement pays off more |
| Safety plan, if needed | Steps for dangerous behavior, within state law | Only where safety is at risk |
| Roles, data and review | Who does what, data method, review dates | Fidelity checked before changes |
Target Behavior, Baseline and Data
New York requires a baseline of the frequency, duration, intensity or latency of the behavior, taken where practicable across activities, settings, people and times of day, and used as the standard for judging the intervention (8 NYCRR 200.22(b)(4)). IRIS recommends at least one to two weeks of baseline, then progress monitoring typically at least once a day with Direct Behavior Rating, a scatterplot or direct observation. Formats are in our IEP data collection sheets.
Prevention Strategies
Antecedent-based interventions change what happens before the behavior so the student no longer needs it. IRIS describes modifying the physical space (seating, sensory input, visual schedules), prompting before the hard moment, adapting tasks (smaller chunks, fewer items, extended time, oral responses, assistive technology) and offering choice. When the behavior is a reaction to academic difficulty, the student also needs high-quality academic instruction.
Teaching the Replacement Behavior
IRIS sets four tests for a replacement behavior: it serves the same function, it pays off better (more, faster, higher-quality or easier reinforcement), it is socially valued across settings, and it fits the student’s culture, ideally with the student’s input. A student who cannot yet perform it needs explicit teaching:
- Explain the behavior, when to use it and why.
- Model it, with examples and nonexamples.
- Practice with feedback through role-play until mastery.
- Support generalization in real settings, with refreshers.
A student who can perform the replacement but does not has a performance deficit, so prevention and reinforcement carry more of the plan. When the replacement behavior is a request, such as asking for a break or for help, the team is using functional communication training. Coping skills such as requesting a break also belong in social emotional IEP goals.
Reinforcement and Response Strategies
BIPs often use differential reinforcement of alternative behavior: adults reinforce the replacement behavior while reducing the reinforcement the target behavior used to produce. IRIS groups reinforcers as social, activity or privilege, and tangible, and advises tying them to the function. The response section states, step by step, what adults do when the target behavior occurs so it stops producing the old payoff: the task stays for a student seeking escape, the material goes back to the peer for a student seeking access.
Token Economy and Token Boards in a BIP
A token economy is a reinforcement system in which a student earns tokens for using the replacement behavior and later exchanges them for a reinforcer chosen in advance. The IRIS Center calls it an evidence-based intervention that fits differential reinforcement, with the token as the reinforcer for the replacement behavior, and the 2020 NCAEP review places token economy within Reinforcement, one of its 28 evidence-based practices for autistic learners from birth to 22. A token board is the visual version: a card with a set number of spaces the student fills with tokens before trading them for the reinforcer.
The AFIRM reinforcement module (updated 2024) and IRIS describe the setup:
- Choose tokens that suit the student’s age and are easy to carry and hand out: stickers, check marks, points or punches on a card.
- Explain the system first: the behavior that earns a token and how many tokens buy a reinforcer.
- Give a token every time at the start, and say why.
- Set the exchange: a reinforcer menu, a time and place to trade, and a reset after each trade. IRIS notes that one student may need to trade every hour, another once a week.
- Fade on purpose: reinforce every other use, then every third (AFIRM), or raise the number of tokens required (IRIS), with the same system in every setting.
Taking earned tokens away is response cost. NCAEP lists punishment, with response cost as an example, among practices with insufficient evidence and says its use “should be limited or at least carefully monitored,” so decide in the BIP, before the plan starts, whether tokens can ever be lost.
Example: Malik, a third grader, calls out during independent reading, and his FBA points to adult attention. His replacement behavior is holding up a green card. Each card use earns a check on a five-space board and a quiet “Thanks for the card”; five checks earn five minutes of drawing with the teacher, a choice from his menu that delivers the attention he seeks. After three weeks of steady data, the team gives a check for every second card use, then moves to an eight-space board.
Safety and Crisis Plans
Only some students need a safety plan, and state law limits what it may contain. New York prohibits corporal punishment, aversive interventions, seclusion and physical restraint in a BIP and bars restraint as a planned intervention (8 NYCRR 200.22(b)(3) and (d)). Texas requires restraint training that covers prevention and de-escalation, written notice to parents within one school day, and documentation in the eligibility folder by the third school day so the ARD committee can use it when revising a plan (19 TAC 89.1053). A safety section should cover early warning signs, de-escalation, who to call, how other students stay safe and how the student returns to learning. Check your state’s restraint and seclusion law with district counsel.
Behavior Intervention Plan Examples
The two plans below are original examples about fictional students, written for this guide. Adapt every element to your own FBA data, your state’s forms and the student’s IEP.
Example 1: Elementary BIP for Grabbing and Hitting
| Section | Nora, grade 1 |
|---|---|
| Target behaviors | Grabbing: taking a material from a peer’s hands or work space without asking. Hitting: striking a peer with a hand. Not included: taking materials from the shared bin. |
| Baseline | Over 10 days of 25-minute center time, grabbing averaged 6 times and hitting 2 times per session; none during whole-group lessons. |
| Hypothesis | During centers, when a peer is using a material Nora wants, she grabs it and, if the peer resists, hits; she usually keeps the material. Function: access to items. More likely after indoor recess. |
| Prevention | A second set of the most wanted materials, a picture turn list, a 5-minute sand timer, and a reminder before centers: “If you want a turn, show your card.” |
| Replacement behavior | Nora hands a “My turn next” card to the peer or an adult and waits for the timer. The aide teaches it in daily 5-minute sessions with puppets and role-play. |
| Reinforcement | Card use earns the material when the timer ends, plus specific praise; at first, an adult makes sure the turn happens every time. |
| Response | Calmly return the material to the peer, point to the card, restart the timer. Nora gets a turn only through the card. |
| Safety | If hitting continues, the adult moves peers back and stays near Nora until she is calm. No restraint is planned. |
| Data and review | Daily tally of card use and incidents, graphed weekly; first review after three weeks, then monthly. |
Example 2: Secondary BIP for Work Refusal and Leaving Class
| Section | Andre, grade 9 |
|---|---|
| Target behaviors | Refusal: within 3 minutes of a written task, Andre puts his head down, says he will not do it, or leaves the page blank. Leaving: walking out of the room without permission. |
| Baseline | Over three weeks in English and history, refusal on 7 of 10 written tasks and 4 departures; rare in math and discussions. |
| Hypothesis | When a writing task longer than a paragraph is assigned, Andre refuses or leaves, and the task is usually dropped. Function: escape from difficult writing. More likely in the last period. |
| Prevention | Tasks in parts, the first sentence started together, a graphic organizer, speech-to-text for drafts (an existing IEP accommodation), a private check-in at the start. |
| Replacement behaviors | Ask for help with the first step, or show a break pass, take 3 minutes in a set spot, and return. Taught by the case manager in two short sessions. |
| Reinforcement | Each finished chunk earns a check; three checks earn a choice of task order or 5 minutes of reading. |
| Response | Offer help or a break once, privately; the task stays, with the next chunk shortened. A designated adult walks Andre back if he leaves. |
| Safety | Not needed: the FBA found no safety risk. The team reconvenes if he leaves the building. |
| Data and review | Direct Behavior Rating of engagement each period; weekly tally of departures; first review after four weeks. |
Behavior Intervention Plan Template
Check first whether your state or district requires its own form; many have adopted one (IRIS).
- Student and dates: start, first review, annual review.
- Team: members, parent and student input.
- Target behavior: definition, examples, nonexamples.
- Baseline: measure, settings, dates.
- Hypothesis: context, triggers, setting events, consequences, function.
- Replacement behavior: teacher, schedule, mastery criterion.
- Prevention strategies by setting.
- Reinforcement: reinforcers, schedule, who delivers.
- Responses to the target behavior.
- Safety plan, if needed.
- Data: method, frequency, recorder, family updates.
- Implementation: staff, training, fidelity checks.
- Review dates and decision rules.
- Links to IEP goals, services and accommodations.
Implementing a BIP With Fidelity
IRIS defines implementation fidelity as the degree to which each intervention is carried out as designed. The IEP, including a BIP within it, must be accessible to every responsible teacher and provider, and each must know their specific responsibilities (34 CFR 300.323(d)). For plans written under its serious-injury rule, Oregon requires the district to ensure the plan was correctly implemented before revising it (OAR 581-015-2181(3)).
- Train before the start date: classroom, special education and specialty teachers, paraeducators and administrators, as IRIS lists.
- Use the plan every day, in every setting.
- Expect a rough start: behavior “will sometimes get worse before it gets better” (IRIS).
- Check fidelity briefly and often with a short list of observable steps.
Reviewing and Revising a BIP
IRIS recommends a first review typically within two to four weeks, then a set schedule such as monthly or quarterly, with each change written into the plan with its rationale and date. Texas requires review at least annually, and more often if appropriate, to address changes such as a new setting, persistent disciplinary actions, a pattern of unexcused absences, an unauthorized departure from an educational setting, or safety (19 TAC 89.1055(t)). New York also requires at least annual review (8 NYCRR 200.22(b)(2)).
| If the data show | Next step (IRIS) |
|---|---|
| A strong drop in the target behavior and a rise in the replacement | Fade gradually: fewer prompts, higher criteria, longer intervals, self-monitoring |
| Progress in some settings or with some adults only | Keep the plan; teach where to use the replacement; coach staff |
| No change, or not enough | Check fidelity, functional equivalence, practice dosage, triggers and reinforcement; ask the student |
The team must also revise the IEP, as appropriate, to address any lack of expected progress toward the annual goals (34 CFR 300.324(b)(1)(ii)(A)); see the IEP progress report guide.
Funding and Staffing
| Source | What it can support |
|---|---|
| IDEA Part B | Positive behavioral supports, FBAs, behavioral services and staff training for students with IEPs (2024 FBA guidance) |
| IDEA CEIS (up to 15% of Part B) | Behavioral evaluations, services, supports and training for K-12 students not identified, emphasis K-3 (34 CFR 300.226) |
| Title IV-A (ESSA) | “implementation of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports” (20 U.S.C. 7118) |
People are the tighter constraint: OSEP expects districts to ensure that staff who conduct FBAs are adequately prepared, and 45 states reported special education teacher shortages in 2024-25 (Learning Policy Institute, 2026).
Common Mistakes District Leaders Make
- Accepting a plan without a current FBA. A guessed function targets the wrong need.
- Writing the plan about the student. “Nora will behave” is a wish, not a plan.
- Choosing a replacement that serves another function. Sitting quietly gives no attention to a student who called out to get it.
- Planning consequences only, with no prevention or teaching.
- Writing restraint or seclusion into the plan, which some states prohibit.
- Giving the plan to the case manager only. Every responsible adult must know their part.
- Revising before checking fidelity. A plan never carried out has not failed.
Recommended Actions
- Inventory every BIP: date of the FBA, stated function, last review.
- Adopt one template that matches your state’s rules.
- Train implementers before a plan starts, and schedule short fidelity checks.
- Put review dates in the IEP system: a first review within weeks, then a set schedule.
- Connect incident data to plan review, so a restraint or removal prompts a look at the BIP.
- Report BIP outcomes each semester, including plans faded or revised.
Questions District Leaders Should Ask
- How many students have a BIP, and how many of those plans rest on an FBA less than a year old?
- Does every plan state a function, and does its replacement behavior serve it?
- How many students with a BIP were restrained, secluded or removed this year, and what changed in their plans?
- What share of plans were faded because the student succeeded?
Frequently Asked Questions
What does a behavior intervention plan include?
A BIP usually includes a definition of the target behavior, baseline data, the FBA summary and hypothesized function, prevention strategies, the replacement behavior and how it will be taught, reinforcement and planned responses, a safety plan when needed, and a data and review schedule. New York’s regulation requires at least a baseline, intervention strategies and a schedule to measure their effectiveness.
When is a behavior intervention plan required?
Under IDEA, when the team finds that conduct behind a disciplinary change of placement was a manifestation of the student’s disability: the team conducts an FBA, unless one was done before the behavior, and implements a BIP, or reviews the existing plan (34 CFR 300.530(f)). For any student whose behavior impedes learning, the team must consider positive behavioral supports, and some states, such as Oregon, add their own triggers.
Can a student have a behavior intervention plan without an IEP?
Yes. The Department’s 2024 guidance describes FBAs and behavior plans as supports for students with and without disabilities, often within a framework such as PBIS, and Oregon’s rule covers students with Section 504 plans. For a student with an IEP, a BIP the team finds appropriate becomes part of the IEP. An FBA cannot be used to delay an evaluation when a disability is suspected.
Can you have a behavior intervention plan without an FBA?
Federal rules do not define a BIP, but in the discipline context the FBA comes first (34 CFR 300.530(f)), and New York defines a BIP as a plan based on the results of an FBA. IRIS stresses that the replacement behavior must serve the same function as the target behavior, which a plan written without an FBA can only guess.
How often should behavior intervention plans be reviewed?
Plan a first review once the interventions have had time to work; the IRIS Center suggests typically two to four weeks, followed by a set schedule such as monthly or quarterly. State rules set minimums: New York and Texas require review at least annually, and Texas adds reviews when circumstances change, such as a new setting or repeated disciplinary actions.
Who writes behavior intervention plans?
A team. IRIS says a BIP should be developed collaboratively by educators, the student and family, and other relevant professionals; the 2024 guidance lists teachers, school leaders, counselors, psychologists and specialized instructional support personnel. When the plan is part of the IEP, the IEP team decides it, and a general education teacher helps determine the behavioral supports (34 CFR 300.324(a)(3)).
Can AI help draft a behavior intervention plan?
An AI assistant can turn a team’s notes into a tidy draft of prevention steps, a fidelity checklist or wording for a replacement behavior, which the team then checks against its FBA data. It cannot identify the function or decide what the plan contains. Use only tools your district approved for student data, and keep names and incident details out of prompts. See the ChatGPT guide for teachers.
Related Resources
- Functional Behavior Assessment
- Behavior IEP Goals
- Manifestation Determination
- Restraint and Seclusion in Schools
- IEP Data Collection Sheets
- IEP Progress Report
- Social Emotional IEP Goals
Conclusion
A strong behavior intervention plan is specific: a defined behavior, a baseline, a function taken from the FBA, a replacement behavior that pays off better, prevention and responses every adult can carry out, and review dates that force a look at the data. Districts that train every implementer and check fidelity before revising get plans that change behavior.
Sources: 34 CFR 300.530, Authority of school personnel; 34 CFR 300.324, Development, review, and revision of IEP; OSEP, Questions and Answers: Addressing the Needs of Children with Disabilities and IDEA’s Discipline Provisions (July 19, 2022); OSERS and OESE, Using Functional Behavioral Assessments to Create Supportive Learning Environments (November 2024); IRIS Center, Behavioral Intervention Plans (Elementary): Developing a Plan to Address Student Behavior; Sam and AFIRM Team, Reinforcement Brief Packet (updated 2024); 8 NYCRR 200.22, Program standards for behavioral interventions (NYSED); 19 TAC Chapter 89, Subchapter AA (TEA, October 2026 update); OAR 581-015-2181, Functional Behavioral Assessments; OCR, 2023-24 A First Look: The Civil Rights Data Collection (September 2026); Learning Policy Institute, An Overview of Teacher Shortages: 2026 (July 2026). Other sections of 34 CFR Part 300 are linked where they are cited.
Join the 2027 Special Education Pilot
A BIP asks adults to teach a new skill in small doses, every day and in every setting, and the practice a student needs usually exceeds the 1-on-1 time any adult can give. Telo AI is being adapted for students with IEPs: patient, 1-on-1 practice aligned to each student’s IEP goals, including social-emotional learning. We are inviting districts to shape it with us in a 2027 pilot.
Apply to pilot Telo AI in your Special Education program
Found this guide useful?
Preferred sources show up more often in your Google results, including AI Overviews.