For many Ohio students with disabilities, transportation is part of the school district’s duty to provide an education. Federal law defines a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to include special education and the related services identified in a student’s individualized education program (IEP).[1] Those services include transportation when the student needs it to benefit from their special education.[2]
Ohio law adds another layer. A student’s district of residence may be responsible for transportation when the student attends a nonpublic school.[3] At the same time, a school board may declare that transportation “impractical” based on its cost, the length of the route, the disruption to existing service, and other statutory factors.[4] Transportation may therefore be required by the student’s IEP and otherwise fall within the district’s duties yet still be considered impractical under Ohio law.[5]
That determination, however, does not end the district’s obligations. The district must formally explain its decision and offer payment in lieu of transportation.[6] The family may reject that offer, request mediation, and challenge the result.[7]
Transportation Generally
Transportation is not automatically required for every student with an IEP.[8] The IEP team must decide whether the student’s individual needs make transportation necessary.[9] As a general rule, transportation may not need to be included in the IEP if the student can use the same transportation as their peers.[10] Transportation may be necessary when a student has mobility limits, behavioral or emotional disabilities, visual impairments, or cognitive disabilities.[11] When transportation is required, the service may include adapted vehicles, lifts, ramps, transportation aides, or different pickup and drop-off arrangements.[12]
Ohio’s Impracticality Framework
Ohio law requires a student’s district of residence to provide transportation as a related service when the student attends a nonpublic school, and the district receives the required IEP documents.[13] A school board may still declare transportation to a private or charter school impractical.[14] Before doing so, the district must consider six factors: (1) the time and distance involved, (2) the number of affected students, (3) the cost of transportation, (4) the availability of similar services for other students, (5) the disruption to existing routes, and (6) the availability of other transportation that may qualify for reimbursement.[15]
After weighing those factors, the school board must explain its decision in a formal resolution.[16] The district must then notify the family, the student’s school, and the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce in writing.[17] The district must also include an offer of payment in lieu of transportation.[18]
Interim Transportation
A family does not have to accept the payment in lieu.[19] The parent or guardian may reject the offer and request mediation.[20] Once the parent or guardian requests mediation, the district must continue transporting the student until the dispute is resolved.[21] The Ohio Supreme Court considered this interim transportation duty in State ex rel. Siebold v. Columbus City Schools Board of Education and State ex rel. Yost v. Columbus City Schools Board of Education.[22] Although both cases were ultimately decided on procedural grounds, each arose from the district’s duty to provide transportation during mediation and any later administrative proceedings.[23]
Conclusion
Impracticality is not necessarily a definitive end to a district’s transportation obligations under Ohio law. The district is required to weigh the statutory factors, explain its reasoning, and offer payment in lieu. Families can reject that offer, request mediation, and challenge the result.
[1] See 34 C.F.R. § 300.17.
[2] See 34 C.F.R. § 300.34(a).
[3] See Ohio Rev. Code § 3327.01.
[4] See id. § 3327.02(A)(1)-(6).
[5] See Abdnour Weiker, LLP, 2025 Student Rights Conference: Overcoming Transportation Challenges in Special Education, YouTube (July 23, 2025), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=guma44JI7BE.
[6] See Ohio Rev. Code § 3327.02(A)-(C).
[7] See id. § 3327.02(E).
[8] See Abdnour Weiker, LLP, SELC – February 2026, Overcoming Transportation Challenges in Special Ed, YouTube (Feb. 18, 2026), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8m-rH3UOjw.
[9] See id.
[10] See id.
[11] See id.
[12] See id.
[13] See Ohio Rev. Code § 3327.01.
[14] See id. § 3327.02.
[15] See id. § 3327.02(A)(1)-(6).
[16] See id. § 3327.02(B).
[17] See id.
[18] See id. § 3327.02(C)
[19] See id.
[20] See id. § 3327.02(C)(1)(b)
[21] See id. § 3327.02(E)(2)
[22] See State ex rel. Siebold v. Columbus City Sch. Bd. of Educ., 2025-Ohio-5245, ¶¶ 1, 7; State ex rel. Yost v. Columbus City Sch. Bd. of Educ., 2026-Ohio-1878, ¶¶ 1, 7.
[23] See Siebold, 2025-Ohio-5245, ¶ 3; Yost, 2026-Ohio-1878, ¶ 3.
Written by Ashton Lawler, AW Summer Intern