Who Owns My Child's AAC Device? Your Rights to Assistive Technology

"We were told in an April 2023 meeting that the device was ours and not the school's property. The SLP specifically told us the iPad is my child's and I can do whatever I want to it. Now his current speech therapist is threatening to lock out our outpatient speech therapist from making modifications to her own vocabulary list. Mind you, outpatient copied what we use at home and made her own list to edit the toys she has at her office — no other changes."

— Parent of a child who uses AAC, via online support group

If an AAC (augmentative and alternative communication) device is written into your child's IEP as assistive technology, the school must provide and maintain it. Under IDEA, the IEP team can require the device to go home with the child if home use is necessary for a free appropriate public education (FAPE). Ownership depends on how the device was funded — but access must not be restricted if the IEP requires it.

This is not an isolated story. Parents of children who use AAC (augmentative and alternative communication) face this exact scenario constantly: a device that was supposed to give their child a voice becomes the center of a power struggle between providers. And the child — the one who actually needs to communicate — gets caught in the middle.

This article explains who actually owns your child's AAC device, what the law requires, and exactly what to do when someone threatens to restrict your child's access to their own voice.

What Is AAC and Assistive Technology Under IDEA?

Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) refers to any tool, system, or strategy that supplements or replaces spoken language. This includes low-tech options like picture boards and communication books, mid-tech devices with recorded speech buttons, and high-tech devices like iPads running apps such as LAMP, Proloquo2Go, TouchChat, or STARS.

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), AAC devices fall squarely within the definition of assistive technology (AT). Federal law defines this in two key regulations:

• 34 CFR 300.5 — Assistive Technology Device: "Any item, piece of equipment, or product system... that is used to increase, maintain, or improve the functional capabilities of a child with a disability." An iPad with a speech app is an assistive technology device.
• 34 CFR 300.6 — Assistive Technology Service: Any service that helps a child select, acquire, or use an AT device — including training for the child, family, and professionals who work with the child.

IDEA also requires that the IEP team consider assistive technology for every child — not just children with specific disabilities. This is codified at 20 U.S.C. § 1414(d)(3)(B)(v): the IEP team must consider "whether the child needs assistive technology devices and services."

For a child who relies on AAC, the device is not an educational extra. It is their voice.

Who Actually Owns the Device?

This is the question at the center of most AAC disputes — and the answer depends entirely on who paid for it.

School-purchased devices

If the school district purchased the device with district funds, the district typically retains ownership. It is school property, like a textbook or a laptop. However — and this is critical — the child must still have access to the device as determined by the IEP team. Ownership does not give the school unlimited control over when, where, and how the device is used.

Insurance-purchased devices

If the device was purchased through private insurance, Medicaid, or a state assistive technology program, the device belongs to the child and family. The school has no ownership claim. The school cannot restrict access, lock out users, or dictate who programs it. Period.

Family-purchased devices

If your family purchased the device out of pocket, it is your property. Full stop. The same rules apply: the school has no authority over a device they did not buy.

When the school said "it's yours"

In the parent's story above, the SLP specifically said the iPad was the child's and the parent could "do whatever I want to it." If the device was indeed purchased through insurance or family funds, that statement was accurate — the device is the family's property, and the school SLP's later threat to lock out the outpatient therapist contradicts their own earlier statement.

Even if the SLP misspoke and the device was actually school-purchased, the school's verbal representation that the device belongs to the family creates significant complications for any later attempt to restrict access. This is why documentation matters.

Your Child's Right to Use AT at Home

Regardless of who owns the device, federal law is clear about access. 34 CFR 300.105 states:

"Each public agency must ensure that assistive technology devices or assistive technology services, or both, as those terms are defined [by law], are made available to a child with a disability if required as a part of the child's... special education... related services... or supplementary aids and services."

The regulation further specifies that AT must be available for use "in the child's home or in other settings" if the IEP team determines the child needs access in those environments.

For a child who uses AAC, think about what "home use" actually means: it means being able to tell a parent they are hungry. It means asking to play. It means saying goodnight. Communication does not happen on a school schedule.

Under 34 CFR 300.324, the IEP team is the body that determines AT needs. If the team agrees the child needs access to the device at home — and for AAC users, this is almost always the case — the school must make it happen. They cannot lock the device in a cabinet at 3pm.

Can the School Lock Out Your Private Therapist?

If your family owns the device: absolutely not.

A family-owned device is your property. You decide who has access to it, who programs it, and how it is used. The school SLP has no more authority to lock out your outpatient therapist than your child's teacher has authority to lock your front door.

In the parent's story, the outpatient therapist did everything right: she copied the home vocabulary, created her own separate list, and made edits relevant to her therapy setting. She did not modify the school's programming. And yet the school SLP threatened to lock her out.

This is a power and control issue, not a legal one. The school has no legal basis for this restriction.

If the school owns the device, the analysis is different — but the conclusion is similar.

Even when the school owns the device, they cannot restrict access in ways that interfere with the child's ability to communicate across settings. If the IEP requires home access to the device, and the child works with an outpatient therapist who needs to use the same communication system, the school cannot create barriers that effectively deny the child access to related services or community participation.

Outside therapists who work with the child should be able to interact with the child's communication system. That is what AT services means under 34 CFR 300.6 — it includes training and support for professionals who work with the child.

Coordinating School and Outpatient Therapy

The best outcomes for children who use AAC happen when school and outpatient providers collaborate rather than compete. Here is what good coordination looks like:

• Shared vocabulary goals. Both providers work from a shared understanding of what vocabulary the child is learning and using. They do not need identical lists — but they should know what the other is working on.
• Separate programming spaces. Many AAC apps allow multiple users or separate vocabulary pages. The outpatient therapist can have her own workspace without touching the school's programming. This is exactly what the parent in our story described.
• Communication between providers. With your written consent, the school SLP and outpatient SLP can share notes, strategies, and progress data. A simple quarterly email or phone call prevents most conflicts.
• Consistent core vocabulary. The child benefits most when core words (want, go, more, stop, help) are consistent across settings. Fringe vocabulary (specific toys, classroom items, therapy materials) can and should differ by setting.

If the school refuses to coordinate, that is a red flag. If they actively block outpatient providers from accessing the child's communication system, that is a potential IDEA violation — because it interferes with the child's ability to use their AT device effectively across settings.

What to Say When the School Threatens to Restrict Access

You do not need to be confrontational. You need to be clear, specific, and in writing. Here are phrases you can use verbatim:

When the school claims authority over a family-owned device

"This device was purchased through [insurance/family funds/Medicaid]. It is our family's property. Please explain your legal basis for restricting who has access to our property."

When the SLP threatens to lock out your outpatient therapist

"Our outpatient SLP has created her own vocabulary list and is not modifying the school's programming. Please provide Prior Written Notice explaining why you are restricting access to my child's communication device."

When you want the restriction documented

"I am requesting Prior Written Notice under 34 CFR 300.503 for any proposed restriction on access to my child's AAC device, including the legal and factual basis for the restriction."

When you want to reference the law

"Under 34 CFR 300.105, assistive technology must be made available as needed, including in home and community settings. Restricting access to the device or locking out our private therapist interferes with my child's right to use their communication system across settings."

Sample letter to the IEP team

Dear [SLP/IEP Team Coordinator],

I am writing regarding [child's name]'s AAC device. As discussed in our [date] IEP meeting, we were informed that the [device type] is our family's property.

We are requesting that no restrictions be placed on access to the device by our outpatient speech-language pathologist, [therapist name]. Our outpatient SLP has created her own vocabulary list for therapy sessions and is not modifying the school's programming.

Under 34 CFR 300.105, assistive technology must be made available as needed, including in home and community settings when the IEP team has determined the child needs access. Restricting access to the device or locking out our private therapist would interfere with [child's name]'s ability to communicate across all settings.

Please confirm in writing that no restrictions will be placed on our family's access to or use of the device.

[Your name]
[Date]

How to Document Device Ownership

The single most important step you can take right now is to establish a clear paper trail on ownership. Here is how:

1. Request a written statement of ownership. Send an email to the special education director: "I am requesting written confirmation of who purchased [child's name]'s AAC device, including the funding source and any documentation of the purchase."
2. Check your insurance records. If the device was purchased through insurance or Medicaid, pull the claim documentation. This is your proof of ownership.
3. Review IEP meeting notes. If a team member said the device belongs to your family (as in the parent's story), that statement may be in the meeting minutes or notes. Request a copy.
4. Document verbal statements. If someone told you verbally that the device is yours, send a follow-up email: "Per our conversation on [date], you confirmed that the AAC device is our family's property. Please let me know if this is not accurate."
5. Check the IEP itself. The IEP should document what AT devices and services are provided. Look for language about device access, home use, and who is responsible for the device. To understand where to find this information, see our guide on how to read an IEP.

State-Specific Protections

New Hampshire

RSA 186-C:2 incorporates the federal IDEA definitions for assistive technology devices and services (34 CFR 300.5 and 300.6). The state's special education rules (Ed 1100 and Ed 1109) require that AT be addressed in the IEP when the team determines the child needs it.

New Hampshire follows federal AT requirements closely. If the IEP team determines a child needs an AAC device at home, the school district must make it available. The district cannot restrict access to outside providers working with the child if the family owns the device.

If the school violates your child's AT rights, you can file a complaint with the NH Department of Education or request a neutral conference under RSA 186-C:5-a as an informal first step.

Massachusetts

Massachusetts requires school districts to provide a free appropriate public education, which includes assistive technology when the IEP team determines the child needs it. 603 CMR 28.05 governs how AT is documented in the IEP, specifying that all services and devices must be listed with frequency, duration, and location.

Massachusetts has been particularly active on AAC rights. The Massachusetts Advocates for Children and other organizations have pushed for stronger AAC protections, and the state's special education framework emphasizes that schools remain responsible for ensuring AT service provision even when outside providers are involved.

The school district remains responsible for ensuring that AT devices and services are delivered as written in the IEP. If the school is restricting access to your child's device, you can request mediation through the Bureau of Special Education Appeals (BSEA) at 781-397-4750 or file a complaint with the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education's Program Quality Assurance (PQA) office.

Your Next Steps

1. Determine who owns the device. Check insurance claims, IEP records, and school purchase documentation. This single fact determines much of your legal standing.
2. Get ownership in writing. Email the school asking for written confirmation of the device's funding source and ownership status.
3. Review the IEP for AT language. Look for what the IEP says about assistive technology devices and services, home access, and who has access to the device.
4. If access is being restricted, request Prior Written Notice. Ask the school to document in writing their legal basis for any restriction on device access.
5. Coordinate, do not capitulate. Offer to facilitate communication between your outpatient therapist and the school SLP. Collaboration is ideal — but it must be voluntary, not coerced through lockout threats.
6. Put your position in writing. Use the sample letter above to clearly state that no restrictions should be placed on your family's access to the device.
7. Check your IEP. Join the waitlist to get a plain-language breakdown of whether your child's AT rights are fully documented — and specific questions to bring to your next meeting.

Sources

• Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) — U.S. Department of Education
• 34 CFR 300.5 — Assistive Technology Device — Code of Federal Regulations
• 34 CFR 300.6 — Assistive Technology Service — Code of Federal Regulations
• 34 CFR 300.105 — Assistive Technology — Code of Federal Regulations
• 34 CFR 300.324 — Development, Review, and Revision of IEP — Code of Federal Regulations
• 20 U.S.C. § 1414 — Evaluations, Eligibility, IEPs — Cornell Law Institute
• RSA 186-C — Special Education — New Hampshire General Court
• MGL c.71B — Children with Special Needs — Massachusetts Legislature
• Education Rights — Disability Rights Center of New Hampshire
• Special Education — Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education