Great, hello everybody.
My name is Tracy Harris
and I am the Coordinator for Behavioral Supports
at the Vermont Agency of Education.
I've been there about 10 years
and I've been doing restraint and seclusion support
and technical assistance and training for all those years.
But I have recently been joined by Kate Anderson,
who is going to do the lion's share today's webinar.
Thank you, yes,
and I am a Program Coordinator on the Vermont MTSS,
Multi-Tiered System of Support Team.
As Tracy said, I have recently started
to join her on this work with Rule 4500 in the past year.
And prior to that, I have worked as a special educator
and I've worked in the after school space
before my time at the agency.
So I think we will go ahead and get started.
And I'm going to turn off my camera
because I can't see without my sunglasses
because my regular glasses broke.
But it is a very hip look that you're rocking.
So just our logistics,
you are going to be muted during this session.
You can use the chat box or raise your hand
if you have a question,
although I think we'll ask for the majority of questions
to be saved for the end,
because there's a lot that we're going to cover.
And your question hopefully will be answered
over the course of the webinar.
And we wanna make sure that we save time at the end,
in case it isn't for Tracy and I to feel those questions,
I'll direct you to wherever you can find that information
if it's something we need to look up.
You may show or hide your video, it's up to you.
This session is being recorded.
You can email Anne Dubie for access
and the materials for this session
can be found online as well.
So there is a link, I believe,
-going into the chat soon. -Soon, yes.
For that.
So just want to introduce the purpose of today.
The purpose of Vermont Board of Education Rule 4500,
which was enacted in 2011 is to promote positive
and safe environments,
to promote positive behavioral interventions and supports,
and to ensure that students are not subjected
to inappropriate use of restraint or seclusion
in our schools in Vermont.
So throughout this webinar,
Tracy and myself will be sort of unpacking
some of the definitions that are laid out in Rule 4500.
And we'll also have some scenarios and sort of,
not drawn from specific real life examples,
but similar to what you might encounter in a school setting
that we will use to help us
sort of clarify those definitions.
So the first one that we're gonna look at is the definition
of seclusion as it is described in Rule 4500.
So seclusion is the confinement of a student
alone in a room or an area
and the student is prevented or reasonably believes
they would be prevented from leaving that space.
So seclusion under Rule 4500 does not include time out
or private processing in which a student is not left alone
and is under adult supervision.
So again, in red is sort of the key pieces
of this definition that the student's alone in a space
and that they are prevented from leaving,
whether they're physically prevented from leaving
by a door being shut,
or whether they just reasonably believe
that they would be prevented from leaving that space.
So, as I said,
we're going to go through these real world scenarios
rather than us talking about them conceptually only.
So we're gonna do that in the form of some polls
throughout today to give you all a chance
to participate and think it through.
And the way we're gonna do the polls
is with sort of a waterfall style chat.
So if you haven't experienced that
in a virtual presentation before,
it allows everybody to take some time to think through.
And I think we'll probably give you about 30 seconds
after presenting the scenario,
think through what your response is,
and you can type it into the chat,
but please do not hit Enter yet
because as you can imagine if somebody hits Enter,
then it's kind of spoiling it for other people
who are still processing
or maybe there's peer pressure to put a different response.
So think about your answer, type it in,
but do not hit Enter
until Tracy or myself tells you to do so.
So we'll try it out with the first poll.
And we're gonna ask if the following incident
involves the use of seclusion and why or why not?
I think we'll just start by saying yes or no.
And then you can add additional details if you'd like,
or we can talk about it after.
So again, you can type your response in,
but do not hit Enter yet until we do the waterfall.
So this is a scenario about Zuri.
Zuri began kicking a peer who was in line in front of her
and would not stop when her behavioral interventionist or BI
attempted to intervene and deescalate.
So her BI walked with her into the quiet room
where the door was closed
and Zuri was not permitted to leave
until she discussed the incident with her BI.
Together the two of them processed the situation
and they made a plan for what to do the next time
she became upset with a peer.
So let's take 30 seconds to type in, but not hit Enter.
Does this involve the use of seclusion
under Rule 4500's definition and why or why not?
All right, you all can hit your Enter button, you'll see.
And I'm seeing a lot of different responses, mostly noes.
You are correct if you said no.
So this incident does not represent a seclusion.
Her behavior interventionist was with her in the space
and she was not alone in the room.
She was interacting with her interventionist.
So it's correct that she was not permitted to leave,
but because she was not alone, she was not secluded.
So now we're going to go into a different
sort of a parallel universe with Zuri and her BI.
So given this same situation where she was kicking her peer,
she wasn't able to be deescalated,
she was escorted to the quiet room,
but instead of going with her BI to the quiet room,
she chose to go there herself and cool down
before processing with her BI.
So she just sort of stormed off,
she said, "I need some space."
And she was allowed to do so, she closed the door
and she was told to open the door
whenever she felt ready to talk it through.
So does this scenario represent a seclusion?
And again, please do not hit Enter yet.
We'll take maybe 15 to 20 seconds this time
to type in yes or no.
And you can also add onto what your answer,
if you have time, why or why not.
All right, let's hit Enter now.
And you guys are good.
I'm seeing nothing but correct answers.
This is also not a seclusion.
So she entered the room of her own accord
and she could leave anytime she was ready
and they made it very clear to her.
Her BI told her that when she was ready,
she could leave the room.
So sometimes especially with younger students,
we might see this in terms of like a sensory room
or a cool down space of any kind.
If a student is choosing to go there
and they can leave when they're ready,
then that's a great way for them
to start to practice those self-regulation skills
and maybe in the future before she starts kicking a peer,
she'll start to recognize those feelings
in herself and be ready to go to a space at will.
So again, not a seclusion
because she could leave the room when she chose to do so.
[Tracy] And I would just say,
make sure that you let her know
that she can leave when she wants.
Sometimes you may tell a student they can leave,
but they might perceive that they're not allowed to.
So really make it clear that they are allowed to leave.
-Yes, thank you. -In a situation like that.
-Yeah. -Yeah.
All right, another parallel universe with Zuri.
So the same scenario,
this time once they're in the quiet room together,
she becomes highly aggressive
toward her behavioral interventionist
and she doesn't respond to deescalation strategies.
So given this level of physical aggression,
the failure of other less restrictive techniques,
her BI exits the room
and tells Zuri she cannot leave the room.
She needs to stay in there until the BI allows her to leave.
So she closes the door and heads out.
So again, we'll take the 15 to 20 seconds
to type your response, but not hit Enter.
Is this scenario a seclusion with Zuri and why or why not?
All right, and you can hit Enter on your answers.
Yep, I'm seeing a lot of yeses.
So you all were accurate.
This does represent a seclusion
and it's reportable under Rule 4500.
So she's alone in the quiet room
and she has to remain until she has permission to leave.
So those two kind of big conditions
for it to be seclusion are met.
And we do actually have one more scenario
with Zuri to unpack.
So again, she becomes highly aggressive towards her BI.
They are not able to deescalate her, it's not safe.
Given that level of aggression
and the failure of other less restrictive interventions,
the BI exits the room, but leaves the door open.
Zuri is directed to remain in the room
until she was told she could leave.
So this is the exact slide that we just looked at,
but that red text has changed.
The BI leaves the door open
instead of closing it behind them
Is this a seclusion and why or why not?
So you can type your response.
And in a moment we will hit Enter.
All right, let's see what everybody thinks this one.
So this one I'm seeing as a much more mixed response.
This is an interesting question
and one that comes up a lot
in the support that Tracy and I provide to schools.
This is still a seclusion.
This still counts as a seclusion under Rule 4500.
So the child was confined alone in the quiet room
and a seclusion doesn't have to happen in a room.
It could happen in a hallway, in an alcove, in an area.
It could happen behind sort of a protective divider,
but she's alone in the space.
She's not able to interact with anyone.
And she had to remain there
until she was given permission to leave.
So we will touch on this later,
but even in a case of a seclusion,
the child must be monitored at all times.
So you need to maintain visuals with that child
and make sure that they're safe in there.
And that further action doesn't need to be taken.
But with the door open, but the child still can't leave
and they're still not interacting with anyone,
that is still a seclusion under Rule 4500
and still needs to be reported.
Anything to add here, Tracy?
[Tracy] No, just the door being opened
does not remove the condition of it being a seclusion.
All right, thank you.
So we are going to set seclusion aside for now.
We're certainly not finished talking about it,
but we're gonna move on to another definition.
And that's the definition of physical escort.
So our definition or the Rule 4500 definition
of physical escort is momentary touching or holding
without the use of force.
A student may be exhibiting minimal resistance,
but it's for the purpose of just directing their movement
and is not considered a restraint.
A moving restraint or a transport,
which is governed by Rule 4500
is the use of physical force.
It's also a momentary period of physical contact,
but it's more than a minimum level of force
from a staff member.
It may involve restriction of the student's movement.
The student would be actively resisting.
And as I said at the beginning,
this is a restraint and this is governed by Rule 4500
and the protocols of reporting
and everything that goes along
with a restraint of a student.
So just to kind of lay that side by side
a little more clearly,
I'll give you all a moment to review it,
but the first two conditions are the same.
Both an escort and a moving restraint
are a temporary or momentary period of physical contact
between a student and a staff member.
And they're both for the purpose
of moving directly from one place to another.
An escort is with minimal or no force.
So for example, if you use CPI training
that a lower medium level transport
would fit that description,
whereas a moving restraint is a CPI high level transport,
or it's another form of restraint
that involves restriction of a student's movement
and more than the minimum level
of force from a staff member.
In an escort, a student is demonstrating minimal
or no physical resistance, maybe some verbal resistance
and in a moving restraint,
the student is physically resisting.
They're not moving of their own cord
and even actively attempting to halt movement.
So this, again, you'll get these slides later,
or you can access them later if you need to review this,
or you're also welcome to reach out
to Tracy or myself for more clarity,
if you're looking at policies surrounding this,
but the escort on the left
does not need to follow the 4500 protocol,
including reporting,
the moving restraint on the right
does need to follow that protocol.
[Tracy] And just for the sake of clarity,
some of the training programs will use the word escort,
but what they are really doing is a moving restraint.
So there's a bit of semantics here
and we are using the term moving restraint
to differentiate between the escort,
which is not governed by 4500,
but that which does restrict a child's movement
and involves some force.
Thank you.
And again, we're gonna have a few polls
that I think will help to clarify this further.
So we are going into a new scenario here with Ben
and we are going to ask if this involves an escort
or a moving restraint and why or why not?
So in this scenario, Ben is asked to step into the hallway
to discuss a matter with his classroom assistant.
Ben refused, and instead he crawled under his desk,
something that I think many of us are familiar with
having worked with students.
Luckily his assistant is able to verbally coax him out
from under his desk,
but he still refuses to leave the classroom
and he says, he's staying right where he is.
So the assistant places their arm across Ben's shoulders
and engaged him in conversation
while slowly moving toward the door.
Ben grumbled and complained,
but slowly moved along with the assistant.
So they make it out the door,
but his assistant has her arm across his shoulders
and is kind of gently guiding him and talking with him
while they move to the door.
So without hitting Enter yet,
let's take 15 to 20 seconds to type in
is this an escort or is it a moving restraint?
And hold on to hitting Enter just yet, sorry.
And we'll go ahead and hit Enter.
Yep, I think I'm seeing a hundred percent of people
saying correctly that this is an escort.
So this was an intervention
that involved minimal force from the staff member,
verbal resistance from the student,
but not physical resistance.
He's not being carried out of the room.
Escorts are allowable
and they don't need to be reported as restraints.
So again, be aware of the language
that your training program might use.
But if it is a situation where there's minimal force,
you're touching that student,
but they're not actively physically resisting
that it doesn't fall under Rule 4500 reporting protocol.
And returning to some of the definitions,
physical restraint is the use of physical force
to prevent an imminent and substantial risk of bodily harm
to the student or others.
We will return to that definition
of imminent and substantial risk of bodily harm later.
So stay tuned.
And then a prone restraint is a type of restraint
where a child is held face down on his or her stomach.
A supine restraint is where the student is held
on his or her back.
So those are sometimes referred to as floor restraints,
prone and supine.
And our note about those,
which is clarified in Rule 4500 as well,
is that they are prohibited in situations
except when a student size
and severity of behavior require it
because a less restrictive restraint has failed
or would be ineffective.
And that's simply because they're more restrictive
and they're more dangerous
in cases where students have been harmed
or even deaths that have occurred in schools.
It is largely when prone or supine restraint is used
because of the danger posed by those particular poses.
So they are permitted in Vermont schools,
but again, only if the student's size
and severity of behavior require it
and a less restrictive restraint
has been attempted and failed
or is judged to be ineffective to prevent physical harm.
So we're gonna jump into another poll.
And again, don't type,
or you can type your response, but don't hit Enter just yet.
We are asking if this incident represents a restraint
and why or why not.
So this time using the scenario involving Ben,
he is pulling at the assistance hair
and uses his knee to forcefully strike her in the jaw.
She's able to unclench his fist from her hair
and with her hands underneath his forearms,
she guides Ben to a standing position.
She speaks quietly
and she uses verbal deescalation techniques to calm Ben,
but Ben continued to reach toward her hair
and kicked at her shins.
At that point, she used an approved maneuver
that involved wrapping his upper arm with hers
and attempting to guide him toward the door.
Ben attempted to dig in his heels,
but due to his small size,
the assistant was able to move him toward the doorway
in spite of his opposition.
So take a moment, you can review the scenario
and don't hit Enter just yet,
but type into the chat,
whether this is a restraint
or whether you believe it was an escort
that we talked about earlier.
All right, and you can go ahead and hit Enter.
Yes, I'm seeing a lot of folks typing in restraint.
That is correct.
So this is a moving restraint.
There was more than minimal force from staff.
Ben was actively physically resisting.
And as we said, moving restraints are restraints.
They must be reported as such and they're governed
by all the conditions outlined in the Rule 4500 series.
And we'll go back to continuing
with clarifying some of these definitions.
So physical restraint under Rule 4500
does not include momentary periods of physical restriction
accomplished with limited force.
So that might be, for example,
the escorts that we talked about,
minimum contact necessary to direct a student
to a new location, hand-over-hand assistance with a task.
So for example, if you're helping a student
learning to tie their shoes,
or if you're helping them to feed themselves,
hand-over-hand assistance, that's not considered restraint.
And it does not include techniques that are prescribed
by a qualified medical professional.
So for example, if a child is in a wheelchair
and the wheelchair has a seatbelt,
that's not considered a restraint
because it is prescribed by a medical professional.
And I know I just mentioned the wheelchair.
So the one that we are about to do the next scenario
actually involves that.
So we're going to say, does the following incident represent
an acceptable use of restraint and why, or why not?
Cara is a fourth grade student with disabilities
who previously used a wheelchair for mobility reasons.
Over the past year, however,
Cara has made significant progress in her physical therapy
and she's actually able to move freely around the classroom
comfortably without the use of her chair most of the time.
However, her wheelchair is still available
in case of emergencies.
For example, if there is a building evacuation,
her behavioral interventionist
might have her sit in the wheelchair
so that they could quickly exit the building.
Recently, her BI has been using the wheelchair
to keep Cara contained when she becomes dysregulated.
Sometimes the student will yell loudly,
she'll throw herself onto the floor,
or even throw her books at her BI's face.
And so her BI will strap her into her wheelchair
at those times.
Often just the suggestion
that she'll need to go in the chair
helps her BI to deescalate her behavior.
So before hitting Enter, take about 15 seconds to type in,
do you think this is an acceptable use of restraint
and why or why not?
All right, you can hit Enter.
Yes, you all are correct.
This is a restraint and it's also a non-permitted restraint.
I think I saw somebody type this.
It is a mechanical restraint
and it is not permitted by Vermont's rules.
So Cara does not need her wheelchair for mobility anymore
so it's no longer a prescribed or authorized device
being used under the supervision of a medical professional.
The wheelchair straps in this case
are being used as a mechanical restraint.
Even if she was presenting a risk of imminent physical harm
to herself or to her BI, this type of restraint
is never permitted in Vermont schools.
Another intervention needs to be used instead
to protect Cara and her behavioral interventionist
when her behavior becomes unsafe.
And I am actually going to turn it over to Tracy
for this next piece.
There will still be definitions
and there will still be polls.
[Tracy] Okay, thanks.
So now we are going to define substantial risk.
So, and you'll hear us say this repeatedly
throughout the webinar
that restraints and seclusions are only permitted
when the student is posing a substantial risk of harm.
So we're going to unpack exactly what that means.
So substantial risk needs to be imminent
and it needs to involve the risk of significant bodily harm.
We'll go forward and unpack those even further.
So by imminent, we mean that the effects
of the student's behavior are, or will be immediate,
or they could occur at any time.
It means that the child has the ability
or the means to enact physical injury or bodily harm
through their behavior
and even after adults have provided
less restrictive interventions to deescalate the behavior,
the child's behavior persists or cannot be prevented.
So it's imminent, it is happening,
or it is about to happen right then and there.
In terms of significant bodily harm,
what we are talking about, and we have defined this further
for the use of part of Act 35,
which is not part of this webinar,
but that act in part defines when a student
under the age of eight is allowed to be suspended.
And so we drew from specific Vermont law
to define exactly what we mean by significant bodily harm.
And here, what we mean
is that the harm would be severe enough
to cause an injury such as a cut, abrasion, burn, bruise,
or disfigurement.
It would be severe enough to cause pain,
physical pain or injury, or I'm sorry, illness.
And it would be severe enough to impair the function
of one of their limbs or a bodily member
or an organ or a mental faculty.
So by mental faculty,
we mean something like a concussion, for example.
So the bar is set really high for this
because restraints and seclusions
are very restrictive interventions
and should only be used as an emergency intervention
when there is an imminent, substantial risk of harm.
We're not talking about verbal threats.
We're not talking about non-compliance,
we're not talking about anything
except what is happening right then and there
and cannot be prevented otherwise.
And the risk is great enough
that it could cause significant bodily harm.
Okay, so let's go to poll number eight.
I'm gonna ask you if this incident
presents a substantial risk.
So in this example,
Chloe is a high school, junior rugby player.
She is big and strong and large and in charge.
And in this case, she was angry at the score she received
on a quiz and she lashed out at her teacher.
She loudly provided very specific threats to the teacher,
such as "I'm gonna slash your throat with a 10-inch blade."
And "I'm gonna run your baby over with my boyfriend's car."
At first, the teacher praised the other students
who were sitting quietly and she planfully ignored Chloe,
but then Chloe continued
and so the teacher positioned herself at a safe distance,
but closer to Chloe's desk.
And she spoke softly and quietly
prompting her to use one of her anger management skills
and giving her the choice to take a break
and process her feelings with another staff member.
Chloe, however, stubbornly remained in her seat,
arms crossed over her chest
and continued with the verbal threats.
So as with the previous waterfall responses,
please type in your answer as to whether or not
this incident with Chloe poses a substantial risk.
Type it in, but don't send it until I say go.
All right, why don't you go ahead and hit Send.
Okay, great.
Yep, I'm seeing everyone saying, no,
Chloe's not presenting substantial risk.
She is remaining seated at her desk,
even with her arms crossed.
And she didn't have the means
by which to carry out any of those threats.
The teacher did make several attempts to deescalate her,
but she persisted.
Still she wasn't showing imminent risk of harm
given that she remained in her seat.
She did not have a knife
nor her boyfriend's car at the moment.
And the teacher's baby presumably was safe
at a childcare center or at home.
So Chloe had no means
by which to enact those threats in the moment.
But let's go further with Chloe and this time,
wait, I just lost my place here.
This time Chloe begins tearing up pieces of paper
from her notebook, wading them up into balls
and throwing them at her teacher.
She has really good aim.
And so several of those paper balls
strike the teacher's head and torso.
So does this behavior now pose a substantial risk of harm?
Go ahead and type your answer, but don't hit Send quite yet.
Okay, go ahead and hit Send now.
That's great, all right.
You're all with me here.
You're correct, this does not represent a substantial risk.
Paper balls do not pose a risk of serious injury
although they're not acceptable.
Getting hit with a paper ball
doesn't pose the risk of a serious injury,
such that a cut or an abrasion or a bruise or a burn
or disfigurement, pain, illness
or impaired bodily function would occur.
So no, a paper ball isn't going to cause significant harm.
Let's move on to poll 10 and still talking about Chloe,
this time, when the teacher moved closer to Chloe's desk,
this student stood up and hurled her desk
directly at the teacher.
Then she began grabbing random objects like chairs,
the classroom globe, staplers,
and she threw those objects at the teacher as well.
And remember, Chloe is a large and strong rugby player
and she has good aim.
So does this behavior now pose a substantial risk?
Okay, go ahead and hit Send.
Okay, nice.
So, I noticed that one person said no.
And who is that?
Anyway, person who said no
is talking about whether or not this is an allowable use of,
whether it would be an allowable reason to restrain Chloe.
And we're not getting into that just yet.
We're just talking about is Chloe posing a substantial risk?
And so the answer here is yes,
it is posing a substantial risk because Chloe has access
to all of these materials in the room
and she's using them to enact harm.
Heavy objects like tables, chairs, globes, and staplers
could indeed cause significant physical injuries.
Let's not forget, again, that she's a strong rugby player
and she's carrying through with her threats.
They're no longer just threats,
she's following through with them
and posing a significant and immediate risk of harm.
Okay, let's go on.
And let's now talk about permissible.
So we're now no longer talking about definitions.
Now we are talking about what is, or is not allowed
here in terms of seclusion.
So we have our definition of seclusion down.
It means that the child is confined alone in a space
and they are not permitted or reasonably believe
that they would not be permitted to leave.
Seclusion may be used
only when they are in a space that's large enough
to permit safe movement,
that's adequately lit, heated ventilated,
free of sharp or otherwise dangerous objects.
And it's in compliance with fire and safety codes.
They can be secluded
only when there are no known developmental,
medical, psychological,
or other contraindications to its use.
We'll get back to that in a moment.
And seclusion may be used
only when physical restraint is contraindicated.
Go on to the next slide.
So let's go through this once again,
only when there's an imminent risk,
only when other less restrictive interventions have failed.
I'm sorry, I think I skipped a slide,
but only when, sorry,
only when less restrictive interventions have failed,
only by a trained staff, only as a temporary intervention,
only when monitored, only if the space meets criteria.
And only when there are no known contraindications,
such as physical restraint being contraindicated.
Let's go on to the next slide.
And this can be confusing,
and this is why we've issued some written guidance
that you can see we posted in the chat.
And I've gone through this many times in previous trainings,
but it's still something that feels very counterintuitive
to a lot of people.
What we need to say here is that seclusion in Vermont
is permitted only when physical restraint
is contraindicated.
It is considered the less restrictive
and the preferred intervention.
The law was enacted only after a lot of public comment
and input from many, many different aspects of society,
many different people with a shared interest here.
And it was concluded that restraint
truly is the most preferable
and least restrictive intervention
unless, of course, it's contraindicated.
I want to interject here
that there is pending federal legislation,
that if it were enacted into law
it would outlaw or ban seclusions altogether
in any school in the United States.
And in fact, some states have banned the use of seclusions.
So seclusions must not be used
except when physical restraint has been deemed inadvisable.
So there are, however,
so I wanna make clear that seclusion
is banned except under certain circumstances.
There are valid reasons though
for deeming restraint inadvisable.
Later we'll talk about the potential impact of COVID-19
on this section of the rules,
but there are some valid reasons
for having this be inadvisable.
That student might have a medical condition.
They may be injured at the time already.
They may have severe asthma,
which would pose the risk of positional asphyxia.
You may have data that shows you,
and as a team, you may have met
and looked at that data and seen
that when you restrain a student,
it only escalates them further.
And that those restraints go on for a long period of time,
or they're very intense, or someone gets hurt.
That would be a valid reason for a team to meet
and to determine that restraint is contraindicated.
So I do encourage you to use that process of a team meeting.
And I would absolutely involve parents,
guardians and members of medical establishment,
your school nurse, preferably the students pediatrician,
if you can get input from them, but this is serious stuff
and you would be cited with a violation of the rule
if you secluded a student
without first trying physical restraint,
or unless physical restraint was contraindicated.
So let's go through some polls
and hopefully we can get a better handle on this.
So in poll number 11,
we're gonna ask you in this instance,
is seclusion permissible?
When he was told he was going to be missing recess,
D'Andre lost his temper.
Now, let me just interject here.
I'm not gonna comment here
on whether or not denying recess to a student is reasonable.
It may well not be reasonable
to disallow a student to go to recess,
but these things do sometimes occur
against the better wishes of other team members.
And in this case, D'Andre was told
that he couldn't go to recess.
He lost his temper and he climbed
to the top of a tall shelf next to the windows
where he began pounding his fists
in an attempt to break the glass.
It was glass that couldn't be shattered,
but then he started banging his head forcefully
against the window.
The teacher evacuated the classroom,
fearing that maybe the glass could shatter
and cause harm to D'Andre or others.
But mostly she was worried about his hand
or most probably his head being injured.
So the classroom was evacuated and the classroom assistant,
who was CPI-trained,
remained in the classroom with D'Andre
and tried several deescalation techniques.
But the behavior continued.
At that point, another CPI-trained staff member arrived
and together they were able to get D'Andre off the shelf.
They accompanied him to the quiet room
and placed him in seclusion
until he was no longer showing aggressive behaviors.
So the question is,
is seclusion permissible in this circumstance?
Type in your answers
and hold off on sending until I say, go.
I'll give you a little bit more time
to think about this one.
Okay, go ahead and send your answers.
All right, you guys are good.
All right, nice.
I'm seeing everyone saying no.
So you're correct,
a seclusion would not be permissible in this instance.
With no other students in the room
and with two trained staff members,
the adults may have been able
to employ additional strategies to deescalate D'Andre.
And let's be clear that the substantial risk
of a broken window per se, isn't of concern,
but of D'Andre causing substantial risk to his hands or head
is what the concern is.
So if the blows to his head were of concern,
the adults may have been able to coax D'Andre
off the bookshelf,
and then they could corral him to a safer part of the room.
And in that case,
I would suggest that they call for medical assistance
to check his head.
But if those strategies failed
and D'Andre continued to put himself at risk
for substantial harm, given that no additional,
given that no, ah, sorry.
Given no information that restraint was contraindicated,
the staff members could have restrained him
and a medical staff member should have been called
to assess him right there in the evacuated classroom.
-Okay. -I just have a quick question
-about that. -Yes.
Somebody commented,
it wasn't mentioned whether the moving to the quiet room
was considered a moving restraint.
If it was a moving restraint, is it kind of like,
okay, we did a moving restraint, he still was escalated
and now seclusion is allowable
because we did the moving restraint.
You know what I mean?
[Tracy] Yeah.
So that's a good point.
I would still say that there should have been additional,
there should have been additional things in place.
They could have corralled him in a safer part of the room.
They could have just restrained him there.
His behavior seems to be quite escalated.
I think I may, I don't remember if I wrote that here, but,
yeah, I would just say that in that case,
unless a medical person arrived and said, "Hands off,"
that he should be restrained right there in the classroom
because I don't think a moving restraint
would be safe in that case.
But let's move forward to the next example
still involving D'Andre.
So in this example, the class is evacuated
and the classroom assistant
attempts of variety of strategies to calm D'Andre
to no a avail.
And so she restrains him.
She was able somehow to get him to step off of the bookshelf
and she then properly used a CPI hold.
Now, D'Andre is wiry and quick,
and he was able to escape the hold
and he now began aggressing against the assistant,
biting, scratching and kicking.
No other staff members arrive to help contain the situation.
The assistant is able to persuade D'Andre
to walk with her to the quiet room though.
So once they're both inside the room,
D'Andre starts punching and kicking the assistant.
She's not confident at that point
that she'll be able to hold him safely,
so she steps out of the room,
closes the door and secluded him, visually monitoring him,
but also calling for additional support.
And I would suggest that the additional support
also involve a medical staff member to assess his head.
So in this case, is seclusion permissible?
Go ahead and type in your answers,
but don't hit Send just yet.
Okay, go ahead and hit Send.
Some of you already have.
So yes, in this instance, seclusion would be permissible.
I want to unpack that though.
So the staff member had attempted a restraint
after having tried several different strategies
and after getting no additional support
and then even with the restraint,
D'Andre remained highly aggressive
and she had cause for concern over the harming of his head.
So given that D'Andre walked willingly
with her to the quiet room,
I think the staff member had good reason to believe
that the walk or the change of environment
may have calmed him down.
And because of that may have afforded them an opportunity
to process this situation and for her to examine his head.
So the staff member, I believe made a sound decision
to go into the quiet room with D'Andre.
With her in there, that would not be considered a seclusion.
However, D'Andre re-escalated
and he was aggressive toward the assistant again
inside the quiet room.
I think it was a reasonable professional judgment
to exit the room and seclude him at that point
while calling for additional help and medical care.
I think it's likely that the staff member was fatigued
from all the physical exertion already,
perhaps she was injured or in pain herself
from having been punched and kicked.
And I think she had a valid reason not to feel confident
in her ability to restrain him safely again.
So because she attempted restraint
and it failed to keep them safe,
this seclusion is allowable.
Now, this might be an example where D'Andre's team
would want to take all this information into account
when debriefing
and perhaps they would gather some additional data,
consult with other team members
and they would want to decide
whether or not restraint is in his best interest,
because he's showing some pretty significant behaviors here.
He's escalating.
Yeah, it's just a valid question to ask
and to come together as a team about.
And Tracy, the emphasis
or the clarity provided on this slide too,
about having a staff member in a quiet room with a space.
I'm wondering if that could also add some clarity
to the question Amy brought up too
that if you have someone in there with the student
and they're not physically becoming very aggressive
and the student is not presenting a risk of harm,
once they're in a different space,
-then it's not a seclusion. -Right.
-She was in there. -It would be permissible
because they're co-regulating.
[Tracy] Yes, yes.
Let's go on poll 13, still with D'Andre,
still with him banging against the window.
We're going to ask, is this permissible?
D'Andre's team had looked at his data,
consulted with his therapist
and determined that physical restraint
is contraindicated for him
because he has a history of sexual trauma
and the data has shown that restraints
only escalate him further.
So again, D'Andre's teacher directed him to the quiet room
with the classroom assistant accompanying him
and he complied.
Once they'd arrived at the seclusion space, however,
D'Andre, again, began punching and kicking the assistant.
The assistant told D'Andre
that he's to remain in the quiet room
for the remainder of that class period
and until recess ended.
The assistant closed the door
and visually monitored him from outside the room
throughout that period of time.
Is this a permissible use of restraint?
Okay, you can go ahead and send your answers.
And I will say that after we discuss this slide,
we'll take a short break.
I saw someone suggest that.
Okay, so this is a bit of a trick question and I apologize,
but this is not a permissible use of seclusion
and I'll tell you why.
The assistant was right
to use seclusion rather than restraint
because his team had determined
that restraint was contraindicated,
but seclusion is a temporary intervention,
meaning that it should be terminated
as soon as the student's behavior
no longer poses an imminent and substantial risk of harm,
or as soon as less restrictive interventions
may prove successful.
The assistant should have told D'Andre
that she would watch for signs that he was calming
and/or that he could tell her when he was ready to talk
and then the seclusion would end.
So we're not allowed to put arbitrary time limits
or time constraints on the use of seclusion.
So that is why this intervention was not permissible.
If there are no questions about that,
we could take a short break now
and we could return at 10:05.
Look at that perfect timing, right?
-As such (indistinct) -I know, how about that?
All right, Anne, if you wanna pause the recording
and then restart when we...
-Yes, thank you. -Okay.
Hopefully everyone's back.
And Amy has had to hop off this webinar
to attend another meeting,
but Anne is still here as I and Kate.
So take it away, Kate.
Thank you.
Yeah, we had perfect timing.
We're switching back to me sharing the next section,
and this is the permissible use of restraint.
So when is it acceptable to use under Rule 4500?
So restraint may be used only when, as we've covered,
there's an imminent and substantial risk of physical injury,
and that can be to the student or to other people,
less restrictive interventions
have failed or would be ineffective.
So that would include things like verbal deescalation.
That would also include, if possible,
trying to block or dodge aggression by a student.
Again, if it's acceptable to do so.
In accordance with a school-wide safety plan,
the student must be monitored face-to-face
for signs of distress.
It must be used in a manner that's safe, proportionate
and sensitive to a range of student characteristics.
So it's tailored to a particular situation and student,
and when it's used by trained and certified staff.
So we have a directory at the Agency of Education
of programs that are approved to teach the use
of restraint in Vermont schools.
And so only staff who have trained in one of those programs
and typically, districts select one of the programs
and use that and train and retrain regularly.
Only those staff may be restraining students.
And remember, again, those conditions
for using prone or supine restraint specifically,
those can only be used
when a student's size and the severity
of their behavior require these holds
because less restrictive holds
or forms of restraint have been tried and failed,
or would be ineffective to prevent that imminent
and substantial risk of physical injury.
So again, it's a pretty high bar,
but as Tracy said, restraint can be a dangerous
and can be a very traumatic event
for both a student and a staff person.
So we have another poll.
We're looking at a new student this time,
Abigail is in kindergarten.
We're gonna do the same process of the waterfall chat.
So hold on to your response, you can type it in,
but do not hit Enter until I tell you to go.
So Abigail is a kindergartner
and she's been having some difficulty adjusting
to the new school environment.
And on this particular day, her mother calls the teacher
to share that Abigail was just having a tough morning
and she wasn't gonna make it onto the school bus.
So her mom is going to drive her to school that day.
The paraprofessional assigned
to Abigail's kindergarten classroom
meets Abigail and her mother
when they arrive outside the school.
Abigail is quiet and sullen,
but she says goodbye to her mother
and she begins walking inside with her para.
Right before she gets into the school doors, however,
she has a change of heart
and she runs to the back of the school building
onto the playground and onto a swing.
The paraprofessional,
who was trained to administer restraints,
attempted a wide variety of less restrictive interventions
in an effort to encourage Abigail
to stop swinging and walk to class,
but Abigail just blissfully ignores
all of these different strategies and ideas
and she just keeps swinging.
So in this case, would it be acceptable
for her para to restrain Abigail and why or why not?
All right, and you all can hit Enter.
And I see everybody is correct
in their responses in the chat.
This is not permissible to restrain her.
Swinging on a swing does not pose an imminent risk
of significant physical harm
to herself or to anyone else in the vicinity.
So you would need to use other strategies,
however frustrating it might be to get that kindergartner
to decide that she's ready to come into school.
So now we have another version of the Abigail story.
She's arriving to school with her mom.
Instead of running to the playground,
she impulsively runs after her mother
straight into the flow of oncoming traffic
in the roadway adjacent to the school property.
So this time her paraprofessional
runs after her and catches up to her
just before she steps in front of a moving car.
The para holds Abigail in a standing hold
and when Abigail wriggles and kicks and goes limp,
refusing to stand or walk,
the para continues the stationary standing restraint
until Abigail agrees to walk with her
into the school building.
So type in your answer, but do not hit Send yet.
Is it okay for her paraprofessional
to perform this restraint of Abigail?
Is it allowable?
All right, you can hit Enter.
Yes, absolutely.
This was a permissible use of restraint.
So many of you described this in your chats,
but this student was at imminent risk
of substantial physical injury.
She is a kindergarten student who is running
into oncoming traffic.
And there's little to no time
to implement less restrictive interventions
because of the danger posed.
So if it weren't for the traffic,
then maybe her para could have used some other strategies
to talk to her about it.
But when it comes to running into a busy street
at a busy time,
there's no way that she could have safely used
another intervention.
She needed to quickly use restraint
with Abigail to keep her safe.
And we are going to get into prohibited interventions now.
So Vermont Rule 4,500 prohibits mechanical restraint,
which we discussed, chemical restraint,
any intervention that restricts or limits breathing
or communication, causes pain
or is imposed without maintaining direct visual contact.
So as we described earlier, prone and supine restraint
are only used sort of as a last resort
when other forms of restraint
and interventions have failed or would fail.
And part of that is because it's very challenging
to maintain direct visual contract
and also that those have a higher risk
of limiting a student's ability to breath or communicate.
You may not use restraining or seclusion
for convenience of staff
as a substitute for an educational program
or due to inadequate staffing or training.
It also may not be used
as a form of discipline or punishment
in response to a student's use of disrespect
or in response to a verbal threat,
not accompanied by the means
or intent to carry out that threat.
So I think we touched on that with the Chloe scenario,
-but in that-- -Chloe.
Yes, in the Chloe scenario that if a student
does not have the means to carry out a threat,
then it does not meet that threshold
of imminent physical harm.
So we are going to do another poll.
Given this scenario,
would this intervention be permissible?
Why or why not?
Frankie is frequently disruptive in class,
often defiant when given instructions
and uses racial slurs when he gets angry.
The school psychologist conducted
a Functional Behavior Assessment
and the team used that to develop
a clearly defined behavior support plan.
When a classmate reached for a toy,
Frankie used an offensive term related to his peer's race.
Because his plan stated
that he is to receive a ten-minute timeout
in response to the use of offensive racial language,
his BI brought Frankie to the seclusion room, shut the door,
set the timer for 10 minutes
and monitored him through the window throughout his timeout.
So type in your responses, but don't hit Send yet.
Is this acceptable for his BI to bring him to the space,
shut the door and monitor him during those 10 minutes
in response to his use of a racial slur.
All right, you can hit Enter.
Great, you guys are strong on this one, absolutely.
I saw people noting that timeout
is not the same thing as seclusion,
that an adult can be with the student in the space
so they're not secluded from everyone else.
So he was secluded in this case, in this scenario,
'cause they shut the door
and there is no one in there with him and he could not leave
and it's not permissible.
So restraints and seclusions are emergency interventions,
not planned interventions.
So it should not be in his plan
that he would be secluded any time he said a racial slur.
Remember the definition that he's alone
and not permitted to leave at will.
There was no imminent risk of substantial injury.
Certainly there is an emotional risk
to the student that he may be using a racial slur against,
but it does not rise to that physical level of harm
required for an intervention as intense as a seclusion.
And restraints and seclusions must be terminated
as soon as the risk of harm is no longer present
or could be managed by less restrictive measures.
So even if this had risen to that level
of a physical imminent harm risk,
it would still not be appropriate
to have a 10 minute seclusion
as we covered in one of our previous polls.
You need to stop that intervention
as soon as it is no longer necessary to prevent harm.
And that leads well into this next section
on termination of interventions.
So it must be terminated as soon as there's any unnecessary
pain or significant distress,
breathing or communication is compromised.
So if communication that could also include
if a child uses signing to communicate,
they need to be able to sign
so that the staff who are doing the restraint know
if they are trying to communicate distress in that form.
If a child no longer poses
imminent and substantial danger of physical injury,
it must be terminated
or if you get to a situation
where a less restrictive intervention would be effective.
So that child has deescalated enough that another form
of intervention could prevent the risk of harm.
So thinking about Frankie and his behavior plan,
the intervention must be terminated
as soon as there's unnecessary pain or significant distress.
Nope, I think, sorry, this is a double slide.
Just thinking about Frankie and his behavior plan,
how could we adjust that plan
so that it would be appropriate and meet
the conditions outlined in Rule 4500?
You can type your response in
and then I'll ask you to hit Send.
So it's not set up like the polls usually are,
but thinking about Frankie and that behavior plan
that's stated in response to a racial slur,
he'd have a 10 minute seclusion,
how could that be adjusted
to meet the expectations of the rule?
And you can hit Send, you can hit Enter.
Yep, I'm seeing a lot of like using a timeout,
an actual timeout, move to agreed upon space to regulate.
Zen Den, I like that.
Yeah, so there's so many different ways
that they could approach this
but I think what we wanted to highlight here
is that seclusion shouldn't be something
that's written into a plan.
It should be something that is only used in an emergency
when it needs to happen.
So yeah, as soon as Frankie's able to process time out,
we'll end and process with student, absolutely.
We have another poll to continue
kind of thinking about that termination of the intervention.
So now we're talking about Jayden.
Jayden is an eighth grader
who struggles with peer relationships
and managing his anger.
During a group activity in English class,
a friend accidentally steps on his new shoes
and Jayden starts threatening to fight his friend.
He throws a punch,
which almost lands on his English teacher
when she tries to intervene.
She quickly calls for support
and she clears the classroom of all other students.
The two behavioral interventionists
who respond are now alone in the classroom with Jayden
who is still extremely agitated
and kicking each of them as hard as he can.
They work to use verbal deescalation
and encourage him to use his breathing strategies,
but he's not hearing them.
He tries to bite one of the Bis
when they attempt to restrain him.
They determine it's not going to be effective
to use restraint.
They leave the classroom and they close the door,
starting a seclusion.
As the adults observe through window in the classroom door,
he slowly starts to enter a calmer state.
So he takes some deep breaths,
he eventually stops kicking the door
and he begins to walk around the classroom pacing around.
He asks them to open the door
so he can have a drink of water,
but the BI state that he needs to have a calm body
and he needs to remain seated for at least 30 seconds
before they will let him leave the room.
So type in your answer, but don't hit Send yet.
Is this an acceptable use of seclusion for Jayden?
All right, you can hit Send.
Yep, yeah, so I appreciate, I think Brendan said
it was and then it wasn't.
That's an accurate summary seeing yes and no.
So no, this is not permissible
as he should have been allowed to leave the classroom
when he was no longer presenting a risk of physical harm.
So the first part, as you all identified
that was an appropriate use of seclusion.
They had tried other strategies, they tried restraint
and they were in the classroom with him, working with him,
but when it became unsafe
and he was trying to bite while being restrained,
they secluded him.
But then once he has calmed down somewhat,
it's no longer appropriate.
So seclusion is an emergency intervention
that's only used to prevent imminent physical harm
and it must end when they're no longer
presenting this risk of harm
or a less restrictive intervention could be effective.
So a student who's not following directions,
but is no longer escalated to a level of physical danger
may not continue to be secluded.
The student could be allowed to leave the room
or the trusted adults could enter the room
to co-regulate with them further
before they go back to a situation with peers.
So as we've talked about,
if there's someone in the room with them working with them
to get to a better place emotionally,
that is not a seclusion anymore.
And that's sort of what we're working towards
is to end that seclusion as quickly as possible
when it's no longer needed to prevent harm.
So we're not saying that when Jayden's pacing
around the classroom, they should instantly
send the rest of the students back in there
and start teaching class again,
or send him back to wherever his class went
when they were evacuated.
But the seclusion of him being alone in a space
where he's not allowed to leave, needs to end at that point.
All right, so Tracy is going to share
a little bit more about
what restraint and seclusion looks like
in the context of COVID-19 these past few years.
[Tracy] Yeah, so just to take a walk back in history.
In the fall of 2020,
we granted an exception during the global pandemic
that talked about that seclusion could be used
instead of restraint
as a means to mitigate the risk of viral transmission.
Then in the fall of 2021, we had this weird scenario
where some students were eligible for vaccines
if they were, I think, 12 and up,
but kids who were age five to 12
still hadn't been eligible for the vaccine.
So we had this sort of advice
that said that schools serving students
that weren't yet eligible for the vaccine
could use the exception noted above,
but schools serving students eligible for the vaccine
should return to these seclusion only.
Here we are in the fall of 2020,
and we have no formal COVID consideration.
So we're back to the rules as they are written
and with no specific exceptions except onto the next slide.
I just want to remind you
that under any circumstance COVID or otherwise,
teams can always meet on a case by case basis
to determine whether a restraint is contraindicated.
I want to encourage you to include the parents or guardians,
include your COVID coordinator if you still have one
or a school nurse or other medical professionals,
and you would want to consider physical, medical,
psychological factors and personal histories
here in the context of this weird COVID space that we're in,
determine whether the student is at high risk
for serious medical complications from COVID
and get input from the student's physician.
Consider what your data tells you,
consider whether the student is eligible for
but hadn't been vaccinated
and consider factors such as a history of spitting or biting
that may pose a greater risk of viral transmission.
So again, teams are encouraged to meet
to determine what is in the student's best interest
when it comes to restraint versus seclusion.
So although there are no formal exceptions granted,
there is always this piece to the law
which says that a team may consider
restraint being contraindicated ad you should use that
if circumstances are such that you think that's the case.
Just wanna make sure that you know
that this is on an individual case by case basis
and not for a whole student body.
So that's all that I really had to say about that.
-Thank you, yeah. -Sure.
So I'll kind of pick up
with the last few slides we have here
and we will then have time for questions.
So after the intervention has been terminated,
a student must be evaluated and we typically, if possible,
would recommend that a school nurse do that,
understanding that not all schools have a school nurse,
you need to have someone who is not involved
in the restraint.
So not doing the restraint of the student or seclusion.
That person should not be the one to evaluate them
for any injuries or signs of distress
and they also need to be monitored
for the remainder of the school day.
Again, by someone who was not of involved
in that initial restraint or seclusion.
A routine physical and medical assessment
shall be conducted and any injury received
as a result of the intervention must be documented
and included in that report.
So any time that restraint or seclusion is used,
it must be reported to the school administrator,
the building administrator, as soon as possible
no later than the end of the school day
on which the intervention occurred.
So as soon as it is possible to report to the principal
or the other building administrator,
it must be reported to them.
It also must be reported to parents or guardians.
The school administrator must make a documented attempt
to provide verbal or electronic notice to parents
as soon as possible no later than the school day
on which the intervention occurred.
Written notice must be provided to the parents
within 24 hours of the intervention
and written notice must include an invitation
for the parent to participate
in a debriefing of the incident.
So the building administrator
will then report the incident to the superintendent
within three school days of the incident
if any of the following criteria are met.
So of course, if there was a death, an injury
that required outside medical attention
or a hospitalization,
that would certainly rise to the level
of reporting to the superintendent.
If an individual staff member
has used restrain or seclusion three separate times,
if it lasted more than 15 minutes,
if a student has been restrain secluded three or more times,
if a student has been restrained or secluded more than once
in a single school day
or if the intervention was used in violation of the rules.
So if the building administrator sees that, for example,
one of the people involved in the restraint
was not trained to use restraint
or if they see that seclusion was used
and perhaps restraint should have been used first
because it was not contraindicated for that child.
The administrator must report it to the superintendent.
And the superintendent
will report incidents to the Agency of Education.
So that's where Tracy Harris and myself would receive them
and respond to them if they rise to that level.
So Rule 4500 states that those reports must be sent
to the secretary's office within three school days
of the superintendent's receipt of the report.
And that is, if again,
there is a death or a severe injury
requiring outside medical attention.
That injury could be to the student
or to any of the staff who were involved.
If the intervention lasted more than 30 minutes,
or again, if there was a violation of the rule.
And we actually have a new reporting foreman system
that we are in the process of rolling out
from the Agency of Education.
So for incidents that meet the criteria
to be reported to the secretary,
we are now requesting that they be sent virtually.
So link to the online form is available on our state webpage
or will be soon
and its use will be mandated in a memo to superintendent.
So I believe most of those who are attending here today
are not superintendents here at the building level,
but in case a superintendent is reviewing this later on,
that is the reporting process.
And we did this to allow us to do a better
and more thorough job of data collection and analysis
that will allow us to analyze some of the trends
that we're seeing and incidents of restraint and seclusion,
as well as to just offer better support
and guidance to those of you who are in the field
who may need to use restraint and seclusion at times.
So we wanted to just make a note of that.
And that is actually the end of our,
oh, I see there's a question.
We're just about to hop into questions and comments,
but I'll address the one Brendan shared.
The staff member three times
on one or more students ever in that year.
I believe that that is in that school year.
Is that correct Tracy?
[Tracy] I have to go back and read it.
Yeah, we can double check the language of the rule.
[Tracy] Sorry, I'm just going through my notes here.
Will the form also be sent to the person reporting for?
Yes, so that is a great question.
With the new reporting form, it is Cognito form.
So you will fill out your name
as the person filling out the form and your email
and then the superintendent's name and email.
And it will go to the person filling out the form
as well as to the superintendent
and I believe the building principle.
But yes, let's go into the formal comments and questions.
You are welcome to raise your hand
and we can ask you to unmute.
I think that works or you can put it into the chat
and we will go through the questions
as they come up in the chat.
So I see Ashley has a question in the chat.
For CPI during a standing position,
children's control position,
would a lower level holding, medium level holding,
sorry, my chat is moving quickly.
[Tracy] No, that's fine.
Always a challenge.
Higher level holding need a 4,500 to fill it out?
You know what, I am not familiar enough with CPIs
specific names for the holds they use
to answer that off the top of my head,
but I believe Tracy and I can take a look
and we can get back to you, Ashley, if you want to share,
or maybe it would be easiest
if you're open to just sending us a quick email
and we'll have our emails on the next slide to clarify.
[Tracy] Yeah, I haven't been trained in CPI,
so I would have to go back
and look at what exactly you're referring to,
but it would only be escorts, lower level escorts,
that would not require 4,500 forms being filled out.
All right, and let's do,
we'll do the couple of ones from the chat
and then I see some hand raises as well.
Katherine asked,
how do I explain when a language impaired student
is not able to communicate
because they cannot find the words he needs to use?
So I guess, my response would be in terms of communication,
maybe they're not able to find the words
to express a particular feeling.
I'm hoping that that child is able to express
if they are in physical distress
and the intervention is unsafe, or I guess,
it would be all the more important
that those who are administering the restraint
are searching for signs of that child being in distress.
If they may not be able to use words you're looking for,
what other ways are they communicating
and being extremely cautious
that you terminate the intervention
as soon as you believe that child may be
in physical distress?
[Tracy] And then maybe afterward
when the student's calm or even in a team meeting,
you could develop some sort of hand signal
that a student could use,
yeah, come up with another strategy.
So it looks like Andrew has a question about
is there an exception for the three staff members
if it's a small school and only a small number
of adults can be part of those situations?
The agency doesn't receive those sort of reports.
That is only meant for your school systems.
And in those cases, a superintendent would want to know
you would want to report to the superintendent,
but Andrew, if you're in a private independent school,
perhaps that's what you're talking about
or maybe even a smaller school
where there's only a few members
that do these interventions.
I would just make sure that the superintendent
understands that that's the case.
There are no outlined repercussions for what happens
if staff members use those many restraints,
it's just to raise the superintendent's level of interest.
Katherine has another question.
How can an alternative program
get the 4,500 to schools within the timeline?
Email is too open and snail mail is too long.
The sending school needs to know the details.
So I think that should be addressed by our new reporting
because there's a space for you to fill out
the student's supervisor union or sending school
or school district, I guess,
and then also to fill out the details of the incident.
So if you complete that Cognito form,
then it will go to the agency,
it will also go to the sending school superintendent.
So they will be made aware of it.
So hopefully that will address that.
So you're saying the new form
is like a digital interactive kinda form?
It is, it's a Cognito form.
So I'm Drew and I work at Kindle Farm.
There's a few of us here.
And we haven't seen that form
and I'm also President of Vermont Independent Schools.
And so I'd just like to request that independent schools--
-Yes. -Make sure we get the benefit
of all that publication 'cause we hadn't heard anything,
but we had heard about it from, so that directions.
Absolutely, yeah, sorry, I'm trying to go back.
So I wrote this with a bit of optimism
about the speed at which we would update the website
and I apologize, you are not being left out
of the loop on information,
simply it has not gone up on the website yet.
So it was my optimism to say that the link is available,
but rather that it will be available I hope very soon.
And there will be a memo from secretary French
that will include superintendents
and independent schools as well.
So thank you for bringing that up.
And I see Todd has had his hand raised for a bit as well.
Yeah, I mean, I work with Drew.
I still want more clarity.
So we contract with probably 15, 16 districts in our area
and so there's just physical distance.
First your thing says
when it's an incident that needs to be reported to you guys,
to AOE that's when you use the digital form,
but we're not talking about only those incidents.
We're talking about just reporting
to our districts and our parents.
But with that, I have two questions.
One is is that form what we would use
even for lower level interventions?
Yeah, you're talking about reporting
to parents or reporting
to the sending school of the child, yeah.
We communicate day of,
and then we write our reports within 24 hours,
but we often mail those reports and it takes time.
We're not clear on the emailing process
and if we're allowed to do that
or if there's confidentiality that prevents that,
those kinds of things.
[Tracy] The new report form, Todd,
will have, posted online will be the Cognito form
which will be sent automatically to the agency.
But then you'll see a PDF version of that form
and that's what you can use to fill out online
and send to the district.
I guess, the question of physically getting it.
If we can attach a PDF, we'll just start doing that
if that's approved.
I believe that that is acceptable
in terms of the level of confidentiality.
I will double check and follow up with you on that,
but we have received reports
in the past via emails and PDFs,
so that should be acceptable.
Okay, 'cause there's sort of this lag time, right?
The new link isn't out
and we're working with students right now.
[Tracy] Yeah.
Having a solution that we can make sure
that we're getting the information as is required,
like I'd like to leave this meeting
with an understanding of what we can do.
So it sounds like we could,
'cause we can also make PDFs out of our 4,500 form.
Sounds like we can email a PDF to the school
and to the family.
Yeah, at this, I will reach out if it's not the case,
but yes, you can email a PDF form.
[Todd] Thank you.
Yeah.
Do we have any other hands raised
or should we go back to the chat?
I see Ashley has a question.
In Vermont can a parent ask for no seclusion or restraints
for a student that physically harms themselves and others?
So I think that a parent request
should be part of a team meeting
and their input should be taken seriously,
but ultimately it will be a team decision
whether to decide if restraint or seclusion
are contraindicated for that child.
And I'll let Tracy clarify
'cause I think she has more--
-Yeah. -Experience in that realm.
[Tracy] I mean, the rule was developed
as a safeguard for schools
to be able to use restraint and seclusion.
So Vermont schools are permitted to restrain and seclude
as long as all of the conditions under the rules are met.
So a parent can ask for that
and I would do everything in your power to oblige that,
but if the student is posing an imminent, real,
very serious risk of harm to themselves or to others,
you are allowed to restrain or seclude
as long as it's not contraindicated
according to a team with input from a wide range of people.
Katherine asked, is there a resource
to help design a management system
for dysregulated students who are involved with trauma?
[Tracy] Some of the training protocols do offer
special additional trainings for trauma-informed practices.
And I believe TCI, therapeutic crisis intervention,
is one of those that is very trauma-informed
and I'm not sure what other ones are,
but looks like Todd has his hand raised,
do you have an answer to that question, Todd?
Or is that an old hand raise?
I have a separate question.
[Tracy] Oh, okay.
So is that what you meant, Katherine?
Is there a restraint training program
that is trauma-informed?
[Katherine] Yes, or a resource,
a person that we could bring in because trauma ends up being
one of those things that,
I don't wanna make it worse by all of these interventions.
Absolutely, and let's be real,
being restrained and secluded
very much so can be traumatic
and it can be extra traumatic to a student
who's already experienced trauma.
I know that there are some people
and I can put you in touch with those people
who can do some additional training,
but some just everyday strategies that you can do
is to always verbally mediate what you're doing.
And even before you do any restraints or seclusions,
you can go over with the student and with their families
this is what it will look like if such and such happens,
here is the seclusion room that we will use,
let me show you how we might hold you if you become unsafe,
just when they're in a calm and not triggered space,
really walking them through those things.
And then when they are escalated,
just using your words to try to give them forewarning,
things like keeping a calm and neutral tone of voice,
that's helpful.
Yeah, I used to have a list.
So I'm gonna write that down and I'm gonna send that out
because there are some trauma-informed practices
that you can do
to make restraints and seclusions less traumatic.
Right, and I replied to Katie in the chat
about the form clarification.
Josh asks, assuming teacher or IA in our program
completes the 4,500 report I'm assuming,
and moves it forward to our administrators
would we be scrutinized
if the correct chain does not continue,
or if timelines are not met due to administration?
No, certainly not.
As long as the form is completed and it's accurate,
neither the agency and I'm also assuming
the superintendent would not be returning to the person
administering the restraint and holding that against them
if later on in the chain of command
that report didn't make it where it needed to go.
And here at the agency,
we're really more looking at a broader,
sometimes there may be a particular incident
that's concerning, but you're looking at broader patterns
and if we are determined that additional training or support
or corrective action is needed
on a district or a school level.
We're not looking at individual staff
for the vast majority of cases.
Someone has a recommendation
for Dave Melnick and Ken Kremberg
as possible sources of trauma-informed
training surrounding management systems
that may involve restraint and seclusion of students.
CPI does offer that.
[Tracy] And I agree Dave and Ken are great resources.
Kara Capelli at NFI also is a great resource.
Amanda, sorry if my, oh, I'm sorry, Tracy.
Finish your thought.
[Tracy] Oh no, just I added Kara Capelli.
I can send out a list of additional people too.
Great.
Can I add a little flavor to this conversation?
[Tracy] Yeah.
I mean, first of all,
the names you've named are awesome
and have been our consultants and guides.
So I concur with all that.
I would say CPI, Handle With Care.
I mean, I've been certified trainers of both.
And I think the physical management system
automatically works
-to be trauma-informed. -Yeah.
Because 90% of those trainings are to keep people
out of physical restraint
and then to safely apply physical restraint
like we talked about in terms of safety.
And so it's so obvious to me that a school
that can do this well,
can keep kids in the community
rather than sitting out of the community
if their body isn't able to stay safe on a regular basis.
And so I think inherently, if it's practiced as design,
these things are trauma-informed
because kids that are adjudicated for violence,
kicked outta school for violence, for lack of being safe,
we can stop that process and keep kids in school
and caring ways partnered with AOE.
I just really wanna advocate that I think
most of these are trauma-informed
and to be able to apply this safely and cautiously
allows us to kind of serve a greater breadth of kids
and keep them outta harm's way.
That's just my little plug, thanks for that.
[Tracy] Yeah.
And it prevents kids from being suspended and expelled.
I don't recommend that this be your first line of defense
against suspension or expulsion,
but these rules do allow you
to continue working with the students.
Todd still has his hand raised for another question.
Go ahead, Todd.
I just wanna get some clarity on the third party person
that's checking after a restraint.
We always have more than one person in the room
'cause we have a witness checking on breathing
and doing the face-to-face
that's not the practitioner of the restraint.
Is it also that person that shouldn't be involved
in the checking in after the event
or does it absolutely have to be
then someone who wasn't in the room
or is it only the primary practitioner
that shouldn't do the check?
[Tracy] It shouldn't be anyone
who has directed the intervention
or has had hands on in any way.
But if it were just an observer,
that person, they could do the assessment
if you don't have a school nurse.
It can be the observer?
[Tracy] Yes.
In our scenario we wouldn't have a,
our observer would not be directing the event
there and there to observe.
[Tracy] Okay.
As long as they weren't also restraining the student
in any way, yeah.
[Todd] That's clear to me, thank you.
Okay, Anne, can you capture this chat for us
and save it so that we can get back and answer any questions
that we didn't adequately answer?
Absolutely.
[Tracy] Okay, thank you.
And we have everybody's email address.
So I wrote down a few things that I said
that I would check into and get back to everyone about.
Yes, and you can absolutely email the two of us.
We are kind of the folks at AOE who respond
to any kind of inquiry surrounding Rule 4500
and we receive the reports that are coming to the agency
if they meet that criteria.
I think we would be more than happy to meet with you,
to meet with folks from your school and just talk through
any questions that you have further if issues are coming up.
So these slides will be posted
and there are a few additional slides
at the end of the presentation
with some additional resources,
but otherwise we will be following up directly
with folks who have requested it.
And if I can just say,
I will be sending an evaluation link.
And when you fill out that evaluation,
you'll also receive
your certificate of attendance within that.
That's a button you can click on
within the evaluation afterwards
and the email that you get will also include
the link to the materials that were provided.
Thank you, Anne.
All right, I think that we will wrap this up.
Thank you all so much for your time
and thank you for the important and often challenging work
that you're doing with Vermont students.
[Tracy] Absolutely, thank you.