77 Incidents of Prone Restraint to 10 year-old with ASD: DOJ v. Anova Settlement Agreement

Print this page

77 Prone Restraint Incidents on 10 Year-Old with Autism:
DOJ v. Anova Settlement Agreement

by Peter W.D. Wright & Pamela D. Wright

Discrimination

Background: DOJ v. Anova

The DOJ received a complaint that the Anova Center for Education (Anova) had placed a ten year-old child with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in prone restraints on seventy-seven separate occasions. The DOJ investigated and found that the school restrained the child repeatedly because the child had behavior problems.

The DOJ also found that Anova failed to convene IEP meetings with parents and staff after the restraint incidents and failed modify its “standard program" to meet the child's needs. As a result, school staff relied on inappropriate, unnecessary restraints and exclusion from the classroom in their attempts to manage the child’s behavior. These actions discriminated against the child and violated Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Terms of Settlement Agreement

Under the terms of the three-year settlement agreement, Anova agreed that:

* when a child’s IEP includes individualized interventions to mitigate behavior, Anova will provide these interventions as reasonable modifications to its standard behavior program;

* when a child’s behavior negatively affects the child’s ability to participate in the educational program, Anova will convene the child’s IEP team, including the parents, to determine different more effective interventions.

Anova also agreed to:

* submit its written policies and procedures about the school’s obligations under the ADA to the DOJ for revision and to implement the revised policies and procedures;

* consider requests for behavioral supports and interventions upon requests by parents and staff, including information about how parents/guardians may request meetings about their child’s behavior and protocols about how the school will respond to these requests;

* establish and disseminate protocols for how parents and staff will identify and implement behavioral supports and interventions for children with disabilities;

* develop protocols for when to convene an IEP meeting to address the child’s need for reasonable modifications, including a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) based on a Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA);

* convene a staff meeting that includes the child’s parents/guardians after each use of restraint;

* designate an ADA Compliance Office who will monitor Anova's compliance;

* report each incident of restraint, steps taken after each incident to create and/or modify the child’s individualized interventions, and any decision to terminate a child’s enrollment to the Department of Justice.

You can download 77 Prone Restraints to 10 Year-Old Child with Autism: Settlement Agreement in DOJ v. Anova Educational Center (Anova) from Wrightslaw.com

or from the Justice Department website at U.S. Department of Justice

Do You Know a Child Who Has Been Forcibly Restrained at School?

ProPublica is an independent, nonprofit newsroom that produces investigative journalism with moral force. The goal of ProPublica is to shine a light on abuses of power and betrayals of public trust."

ProPublica is investigating the practice of forcible restraint in U.S. schools and is interested in hearing from parents, educators or others who know children who have been restrained or inappropriately disciplined in a school setting. To learn more, read Do You Know a Child Who's Been Forcibly Restrained in School?

How to File an Americans with Disabilities Complaint with the Department of Justice

You may file an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Complaint with the Department of Justice to allege disability discrimination against a State or local government or a public accommodation (i.e., private businesses including restaurants, doctors’ offices, retail stores, hotels).

How to File a Complaint with the Justice Department .

More Resources: Restraint and Seclusion

In 2018, the California General Assembly added sections about Restraints and Seclusion to the State Education Code. (§49005–49006.4). These changes went into effect on January 1, 2019.

California law states that students have “… the right to be free from the use of seclusion and behavioral restraints of any form imposed as a means of coercion, discipline, convenience, or retaliation by staff” (§ 49005.2).

Seclusion or a behavioral restraint may only be used “… to control behavior that poses a clear and present danger of serious physical harm to the pupil or others that cannot be immediately prevented by a response that is less restrictive” (§ 49005.4).

Findings and declarations

“While it is appropriate to intervene in an emergency to prevent a student from imminent risk of serious physical self-harm or harm of others, restraint and seclusion are dangerous interventions, with certain known practices posing a great risk to child health and safety.” (Subsection (a))

Definitions (CA Education Code § 49005.1)

Behavioral restraint means ‘mechanical restraint’ or ‘physical restraint,’ as defined in this section, used as an intervention when a pupil presents an immediate danger to self or to others.” (Subsection (a))

Mechanical restraint is “the use of a device or equipment to restrict a pupil’s freedom of movement.” (Subsection (d)(1))

Physical restraint is “a personal restriction that immobilizes or reduces the ability of a pupil to move his or her torso, arms, legs, or head freely” (§ 49005.1(f)(1]).

Prone restraint “means the application of a behavioral restraint on a pupil in a facedown position” (§ 49005.1(g)).

Seclusion is defined as “the involuntary confinement of a pupil alone in a room or area from which the pupil is physically prevented from leaving (§ 49005.1[i]).

Limitations

School Staff May Not Use Restraint or Seclusion for Coercion, Discipline, Convenience or Retaliation

California law says a student “... has the right to be free from the use of seclusion and behavioral restraints of any form imposed as a means of coercion, discipline, convenience, or retaliation by staff” (§ 49005.2).

Seclusion or a behavioral restraint may be used “… only to control behavior that poses a clear and present danger of serious physical harm to the pupil or others that cannot be immediately prevented by a response that is less restrictive” (§ 49005.4).

The law includes additional prohibitions on the use of restraint and seclusion (§ 49005.8):

(a) An educational provider shall not:

1. Use seclusion or a behavioral restraint for the purpose of coercion, discipline, convenience, or retaliation.

2. Use locked seclusion, unless it is in a facility otherwise licensed or permitted by state law to use a locked room.

3. Use a physical restraint technique that obstructs a pupil’s respiratory airway or impairs the pupil’s breathing or respiratory capacity, including techniques in which a staff member places pressure on a pupil’s back or places his or her body weight against the pupil’s torso or back.

4. Use a behavioral restraint technique that restricts breathing, including, but not limited to, using a pillow, blanket, carpet, mat, or other item to cover a pupil’s face.

5. Place a pupil in a facedown position with the pupil’s hands held or restrained behind the pupil’s back.

6. Use a behavioral restraint for longer than is necessary to contain the behavior that poses a clear and present danger of serious physical harm to the pupil or others.

Behavioral Interventions for Individuals with Exceptional Needs - Part 30 Special Education Programs [56520-56525]

The revised statute states that for “an individual with exceptional needs, if a behavioral restraint or seclusion is used, the procedures for follow-up contained in subdivisions (e), (f), (g) and (h) of Section 56521.1 shall also apply” (§ 49006.4).

These sections of the California Education Code pertain to behavioral emergency reporting:

California Education Code

California Department of Education

Restraint and Seclusion Resources from U.S. Department of Education (USDOE)

Dear Colleague Letter about Restraints and Seclusion from U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights (2016). In a Frequently Asked Questions format, describes limits on use of restraint and seclusion by public schools and how use of restraint and seclusion may result in discrimination against students with disabilities and violations of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Restraint and Seclusion: Resource Document from the U.S. Department of Education specifies that the use of restraint and seclusion must be consistent with the child’s right to be treated with dignity and be free from abuse and ...

* Restraint and seclusion should only be used as a safety measure of last resort, and should never be used as punishment or discipline or for staff convenience.

* Restraint and seclusion may cause serious injury or long-lasting trauma and death, even when done safely and correctly.

* There is no evidence that restraint or seclusion is effective in reducing the problem behaviors that frequently precipitate the use of those techniques.

Download Restraint and Seclusion: Resource Document from the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE).

For more resources, go to Abuse, Restraints and Seclusion in School.

To Top

Created: 01/20/20
Last revised: 01/27/20


	About the Book To Order	About the Book To Order	About the Book To Order	About the Book To Order	About the DVD Video To Order

Copyright © 1998-2025, Peter W. D. Wright and Pamela Darr Wright. All rights reserved. Contact Us \| Press l Mission l Our Awards l Privacy Policy l Disclaimer l Site Map


COVID-19 Law Advocacy Topics A-Z Training Wrights' Blog Wrightslaw Store Yellow Pages for Kids