Worth The Fight: Worth The Fight: Effective Approaches to Effective Approaches to Seclusion and Restraint Seclusion and Restraint Legislation Legislation

AASA Member Webinar Series

July 10, 20122 p.m. E.T.

Overview of WebinarOverview of Webinar2:00-2:15

Sasha Pudelski, Government Affairs Manager, AASA will review AASA’s latest report on how S/R is used in schools, federal policy threats and recent U.S. Dept of Ed. Guidance document

2:15-2:35: John D. Forester, Director of Government Relations, School Administrators Alliance (SAA) of Wisconsin andSandra J. MacArthur, Deputy Executive Director, Maine School Superintendents Association will discuss how their respective state battles on S&R legislation

2:35-2:45Merrill Winston, Director of Program Development for the Professional Crisis Management System will highlight myths surrounding the use of restraint and why schools need to keep the ability to use it

2:45- 3:00 Q&A. Send questions to Sasha throughout the presentation. Technical questions? Send them to Gayane Minasyan.

Summary of Findings from AASA SurveySummary of Findings from AASA Survey 97% of school districts do not use mechanical restraints under any

circumstances 94% of school districts monitor students when they are in seclusion at all

times 97% of school districts have a policy to end the use of seclusion and restraint

as soon as the emergency ends Of the students that are restrained or secluded, 66% of districts reported

they exclusively use these techniques on students with severe emotional or behavioral disabilities

While not all students with disabilities need to have seclusion or restraint documented in either the IEP or the BIP, 42% of districts have seclusion and restraint outlined in 100% of their student’s IEPs after a child is secluded or restrained

Almost 30% of districts have these techniques mentioned in the vast majority (75-99%) of their student’s IEPs

Almost 90% of respondents stated that 25% or less of students who are restrained or secluded do not have a known disability

80% of all school personnel trained to use seclusion and restraint are also trained in nonviolent crisis intervention techniques

In 92% of school districts, less than 10% of the time school personnel are not trained in how to use seclusion and restraint in situations where they have had to employ these techniques

78% of school personnel are trained in seclusion and restraint or nonviolent crisis interventions at least annually

21% of all school districts report that school personnel used 1-2 staff days each year or filed 1-2 cases of workers compensation when staff attempted to use seclusion and restraint on a student or when staff were assaulted by a student with an emotional behavioral disability.

Schools need funding for Schools need funding for PBIS and nonviolent crisis PBIS and nonviolent crisis interventionsinterventions

43% of school administrators indicated the elimination of the Safe and Drug Free Funding has made it “considerably more difficult” to fund professional development, training, or programs like positive behavioral support systems and nonviolent crisis interventions.

34% of respondents indicated the loss of this funding stream has made it “moderately more difficult” to fund professional development, training or programs focused on improving school safety and school climate.

91% of respondents said their school district would benefit from Safe and Drug Free Funding to implement school-wide positive behavioral support and intervention systems and nonviolent crisis interventions.

But, not all school administrators But, not all school administrators are on the same page…are on the same page…

16% use S/R to punish students19% of school administrators

support using S/R techniques to punish students

More PD is needed to ensure school administrators never use S/R to punish students.

These techniques must be used

exclusively in emergency situations.

Details of Sen. Harkin’s Bill Details of Sen. Harkin’s Bill (S.2020)(S.2020) Seclusion prohibited for special-ed and gen-ed

students S&R prohibited from being including in IEP

◦ Creates more conflict between parents and school staff if techniques must be used

◦ Runs counter to premise of IDEA Mandated debriefing session all personnel all

school personnel in the proximity of the student immediately before and during the time of the restraint must attend◦ Information communicated by the student in de-

briefing session cannot be used against the student in any disciplinary, criminal or civil investigation

◦ This debriefing session must occur within five days of the incident and parents must receive verbal or electronic communication the day of the incident as well as formal written notification within 24 hours of the incident

But the real kicker is…But the real kicker is…Serious Bodily Injury

In S. 2020, restraints can be used in emergency situations by trained personnel, but only when the student is at risk of imposing “serious bodily injury” on himself or others.

What is the ‘serious bodily injury’ standard?1) substantial risk of death; 2) extreme physical pain; 3) protracted and obvious disfigurement

It is NOT A broken nose or pain rated a “7” on a scale of 1-10

Department Resource Department Resource DocumentDocument The Department recommends that all school

personnel be trained “in school-wide programs of PBIS including de-escalation techniques, for preventing dangerous behavior that leads to the use of restraint or seclusion.” In addition, the Department recommends that “teachers and other school personnel [are trained] in how to safely implement procedures for physical restraint and how to collect and analyze individual student data to determine the effectiveness of these procedures in increasing appropriate behavior and decreasing inappropriate behavior…. including refreshers on positive behavior management strategies, proper use of positive reinforcement, the continuum of alternative behavioral interventions, crisis prevention, de-escalation strategies, and the safe use of physical restraint.”