PPM 145 and Disability Discipline in Ontario: What Schools Must Consider
PPM 145 and Disability Discipline in Ontario: What Schools Must Consider
If your child has a disability and has been suspended from an Ontario school for behavior related to that disability, the suspension may have been issued without completing the legal analysis the Education Act requires. This isn't a technical argument — it's a substantive protection that Ontario's discipline policy explicitly mandates, and most parents don't know it exists.
The Policy and Its Legal Basis
Policy/Program Memorandum 145 (PPM 145) is the Ontario Ministry of Education's directive governing progressive discipline. It requires school administrators to apply a graduated set of responses to student behavior, ranging from support interventions to formal suspension and expulsion. PPM 145 is not optional guidance — it is Ministry policy that all publicly funded school boards must follow.
Critically, PPM 145 operates in conjunction with Ontario Regulation 472/07, which specifies mandatory "mitigating and other factors" that administrators must consider before imposing a suspension.
The mandatory mitigating factors include:
- Whether the student was able to control their behavior at the time
- Whether the student was able to understand the foreseeable consequences of the behavior
- Whether the behavior was a manifestation of the student's disability
- Whether the student was in a vulnerable state at the time (for example, experiencing a mental health crisis)
- The degree to which the student's behavior was influenced by an unaccommodated disability need
This means that before suspending a student with an IEP, autism diagnosis, ADHD, or any other disability designation, the principal must conduct and document this analysis. A suspension issued without it has not followed the required process.
The Discipline-Accommodation Loop
The pattern that PPM 145 is designed to prevent looks like this:
- Student has a disability-related behavioral need that is documented in their IEP
- The IEP accommodations or EA support are not being consistently provided
- Without the supports, the student's behavior escalates — meltdown, aggression, elopement, refusal
- The school responds with a suspension
- The cycle repeats without addressing the underlying unmet need
This pattern is both common and legally indefensible. The school cannot fail to provide the accommodations required by the IEP, and then suspend the student when the predictable consequence of that failure occurs.
PPM 145 requires the principal to examine whether the behavior was a "manifestation of the student's disability" — and if the behavior would not have occurred if the IEP had been properly implemented, that causal link is highly relevant to whether a suspension is appropriate.
The Supreme Court's Role: Moore v. British Columbia
PPM 145 doesn't exist in isolation. Its application is informed by the broader legal principle established by the Supreme Court of Canada in Moore v. British Columbia (Education) (2012) — a decision that applies across Canada, including Ontario.
The Court held that adequate special education is "not a dispensable luxury" but the "ramp" that provides students with disabilities equal access to the educational system. The practical implication for discipline: if a school has denied a student the ramp — failed to provide IEP accommodations, cut EA support, ignored behavioral needs — and then punishes the student for the behavior that emerges from being on the stairs without the ramp, the school has compounded a discriminatory failure with a punitive one.
The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario has applied this principle in cases where discipline was used discriminatorily — suspending or expelling students for behaviors that were direct manifestations of unaccommodated disabilities.
Free Download
Get the Ontario Dispute Letter Starter Kit
Everything in this article as a printable checklist — plus action plans and reference guides you can start using today.
What to Do If Your Child Was Suspended
Step 1: Request the documentation
You have the right to see the principal's notes and records from the discipline decision. Specifically request:
- The record of the mitigating factors analysis conducted under Reg 472/07
- Notes from the incident
- Any incident reports
If no mitigating factors analysis was documented — which is common — you now have evidence that the required process wasn't followed.
Step 2: Suspension appeal
Under the Education Act, parents have the right to appeal a suspension to the principal and then to the board. An appeal on the grounds that the PPM 145 mitigating factors process was not followed is a substantive procedural basis for the appeal, not merely an emotional objection.
Step 3: IEP review meeting
Request an emergency IEP review to discuss the unmet needs that contributed to the behavioral incident. This meeting puts the board on notice that the accommodations were inadequate and creates a record of that inadequacy.
Step 4: Human Rights considerations
If the suspension was connected to a pattern of disability-related behavior stemming from unmet IEP needs, and if informal resolution doesn't address the underlying accommodation failure, the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario is the appropriate venue. The HRTO can adjudicate both the discriminatory discipline and the underlying accommodation failure.
Writing the PPM 145 Challenge Letter
An effective challenge to a suspension that failed to conduct the mitigating factors analysis looks like this:
"I am writing to formally appeal the suspension of [child's name] issued on [date]. Under PPM 145 and Ontario Regulation 472/07, the principal is required to consider and document mitigating factors before imposing a suspension, including whether the behavior was a manifestation of my child's disability. I am requesting written confirmation that this analysis was conducted and documented. If this analysis was not completed prior to the suspension decision, the suspension was not issued in accordance with required Ministry policy and should be rescinded."
This is factual, cites the correct authority, and demands a specific response. It is not aggressive — it is legally grounded.
The Broader Context: Discipline and Disability Data
Black students in Ontario are disproportionately suspended at higher rates than white students, and students with behavioral exceptionalities face suspension rates significantly above their share of the student population. These patterns suggest that PPM 145's mitigating factors protections are frequently not being applied as intended.
If your child is being suspended repeatedly for behaviors connected to their disability, the pattern itself is evidence that the school's behavior management approach is not addressing the underlying disability-related needs. The Ontario Special Ed Advocacy Playbook covers both the PPM 145 appeal process and the Human Rights framework for addressing discriminatory discipline patterns.
Get Your Free Ontario Dispute Letter Starter Kit
Download the Ontario Dispute Letter Starter Kit — a printable guide with checklists, scripts, and action plans you can start using today.