When a BIP is not working

By the IEP Atlas editorial teamLast updated November 1, 2026

Short answer

When a BIP is not working, check four things in order before rewriting it: whether the data are accurate, whether staff are doing the plan as written, whether the replacement behavior pays off as fast as the problem behavior, and whether the hypothesis still fits. Fix the first problem you find, collect 2 to 3 more weeks of data, then decide whether to keep, adjust or redo the FBA.

A behavior plan that is not working usually has one of four problems, and only one of them means the plan itself is wrong. Teams that jump straight to a new plan often end up with a second plan that fails for the same reason as the first: nobody was doing it, or the data were wrong.

This guide gives a fixed order of checks, a worked example, and the mistakes that send teams in circles. For how the FBA and BIP fit together in the first place, see the FBA and BIP guide.

What "not working" means

Decide what "working" looks like before you judge the plan. Look at the graph, not the last bad day.

Pattern after 4 to 6 weeks	What it suggests
Problem behavior flat or rising, replacement behavior near zero	The replacement is not being taught, prompted or reinforced
Problem behavior dropped, then climbed back	Something changed: staff, schedule, setting event, reinforcement fading too fast
Big swings day to day	Inconsistent use of the plan, or a setting event the plan misses
Problem behavior down a little, slowly	The plan may be working; it may need more time or more intensity
A brief spike in the first 1 to 2 weeks	Often an extinction burst; keep going if staff can do so safely

If the data show slow but steady improvement, the plan may be working. Give it the time you planned for before changing it.

What you need before you start

The BIP, the FBA report and the hypothesis statement.
At least 4 weeks of data on the problem behavior and the replacement behavior.
The baseline from before the plan started.
The staff who carry out the plan, available for a short interview or observation.

If you do not have data on the replacement behavior, start there. A plan with data only on the problem behavior cannot tell you whether the teaching part is happening.

Step by step

Step 1: Check the data

Ask who is collecting, when, and with what definition. Compare the current definition to the one in the FBA. Have a second adult collect data on the same session at least twice and compare.

Example: the para counts "aggression" as hitting only; the teacher also counts pushing. The graph mixes both, and the numbers mean nothing until the definition is shared. The guide on interobserver agreement shows how to compare two observers.

Step 2: Check fidelity

Observe the plan in action, or use a short checklist with each adult. List each part of the BIP and mark whether it happened.

BIP component	Observed?	Notes
Visual schedule reviewed at the start of each block	Yes / No
Break card on desk and prompted at first warning sign	Yes / No
Break granted within 30 seconds of request	Yes / No
Specific praise for the replacement behavior	Yes / No
Problem behavior met with minimal attention as planned	Yes / No

If fewer than about 4 of 5 components happen as written, the plan has not been tested yet. Retrain, simplify or add support before changing the strategies.

Step 3: Check the replacement behavior

A replacement behavior has to work at least as fast and as reliably as the problem behavior. Ask three questions. Was it taught directly, in practice sessions? Is the student prompted to use it at the right moment? When the student uses it, do adults respond right away?

If a break card takes 3 minutes to get a response and throwing materials ends the task in 10 seconds, the plan is teaching the student to throw. The replacement behavior examples by function show replacements matched to each function.

Step 4: Check the hypothesis

If the data are accurate and the plan is being done well, the function may be wrong or may have changed. Look at new ABC data for 1 to 2 weeks. Has the trigger changed? Is the payoff different now? A behavior that started as escape can pick up attention as a second payoff if adults rush over every time.

Step 5: Check for new setting events

Look for changes outside the plan: a new medication, a move, a new sibling, a schedule change, a different lunch period, a long absence. These can make a working plan look like it failed.

Step 6: Decide and set a review date

After the first problem is fixed, collect 2 to 3 more weeks of data and decide.

Finding	Decision
Data or fidelity was the problem, now fixed, and behavior improves	Keep the plan
Replacement behavior was weak, now strengthened	Keep and monitor; adjust reinforcement
Hypothesis no longer fits	Update the FBA and rewrite the BIP
Behavior is unsafe and rising	Meet sooner, review the crisis plan, consider more support

IDEA requires the IEP team to review the IEP periodically, and to revise it to address any lack of expected progress.^[1] A BIP attached to the IEP is part of that review.

Worked example: Andre, grade 7

The student and numbers are fictional. Andre's FBA found that he throws materials during long writing tasks to escape the task. Baseline: a median of 5 throwing incidents per week (range 3 to 7). His BIP started January 6: writing tasks chunked into 3 parts, a break card, 2-minute breaks granted on request, and praise for asking.

Weeks 1 to 6. Throwing incidents per week: 4, 6, 5, 7, 6, 5. Break card uses per week: 2, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0. The team calls a review on February 18.

Step 1, data. The teacher and para both count throws the same way. Agreement on two shared sessions: 100% and 90%. The data are sound.

Step 2, fidelity. The case manager observes 3 writing classes. Tasks were chunked in 1 of 3. The break card was on the desk in 2 of 3, but nobody prompted it. When Andre did hand it over once, the teacher said "after you finish this paragraph." Fidelity: about 2 of 5 components.

Fix. The team meets with the ELA teacher and the para. They agree the break is granted right away, with no conditions, for the next 3 weeks. The para prompts the card when Andre first pushes his paper away. The teacher prepares chunked tasks on Fridays for the next week.

Weeks 7 to 9. Throwing per week: 3, 1, 1. Break card uses: 6, 8, 7. Fidelity checks: 5 of 5 components in 2 of 2 observations.

Decision on March 11. Keep the plan. Begin stretching the work time before breaks from 8 minutes to 12. The hypothesis was right all along; the plan had not been done.

Andre's IEP goal stayed the same: "During writing tasks, Andre will request a break using his card and return to the task within 3 minutes, in 4 of 5 opportunities across 4 consecutive weeks." The replacement behavior goal templates have similar wording.

Common mistakes

Changing the plan before checking fidelity. Weak: "It has been a month and he is still throwing things. Let's try a token board." Better: observe the plan in 3 sessions first. Fix what is missing, then judge.

Adding consequences when the plan stalls. Weak: adding loss of recess for each throw. Better: strengthen the replacement behavior so it pays off faster than the problem behavior.

Judging by the worst day. Weak: "Thursday was terrible; the plan is not working." Better: compare the median of the last 3 weeks with the baseline median.

Fading too fast. Weak: after 2 good weeks, breaks are cut from every 8 minutes to every 20. Better: stretch in small steps and keep data at each step.

No data on the replacement behavior. Weak: the graph shows only incidents. Better: graph both lines, so the team can see whether the new skill is growing.

Templates and tools

Use the BIP template with examples to rewrite a plan section by section.
Compare your plan with the BIP examples by function.
If the plan is a lighter support plan, see BSP vs BIP for when a full BIP is needed.
Track both lines with the frequency data sheet, and graph weekly as in progress monitoring for behavior goals.
Check revised goals in the goal checker, and find more wording on the behavior IEP goals hub.

The National Center on Intensive Intervention describes data-based individualization: a cycle of checking fidelity, looking at data and adjusting the intervention when progress is not adequate.^[2] The IRIS Center FBA module covers revising a behavior plan when the data call for it.^[3]

Frequently asked questions

How long should a BIP run before deciding it is not working?

Plan on 4 to 6 weeks of consistent use before judging, unless the behavior is unsafe. Look at the trend compared with the baseline, not single days. If the plan was not carried out as written, that time does not count yet.

What is an extinction burst?

A short-term increase in a problem behavior when it stops getting the payoff it used to get. It often appears in the first week or two of a new plan. If staff can keep everyone safe and stay consistent, the behavior usually drops afterward.

Does a new BIP need a new FBA?

Not always. If the hypothesis still fits and the problem was fidelity or a weak replacement behavior, revise the plan. If new data show a different trigger or function, update the FBA before rewriting the plan.

Can parents ask for the BIP to be reviewed?

Yes. Parents can ask for an IEP meeting at any time to review the behavior plan and the data. Bring dates and examples of what you are seeing, and ask to see the graph of the behavior since the plan started.

Use it in IEP Atlas

Sources

34 CFR §300.324: Development, review, and revision of IEP, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School
What Is Data-Based Individualization?, National Center on Intensive Intervention
Functional Behavioral Assessment: Identifying the Reasons for Problem Behavior and Developing a Behavior Plan, IRIS Center, Vanderbilt University

Written and checked by the IEP Atlas editorial team under our editorial policy. This guide describes general practice and federal rules. It is not legal advice; your state may add requirements, and the IEP team makes the decisions for each student.