McFarland district reports 60 seclusion or restraint incidents in 2024–25, training and reporting emphasized

Lauren Arango presented the McFarland School District’s annual seclusion and restraint report, telling the board the district recorded 60 total incidents in the 2024–25 school year — 12 seclusions and 48 physical restraints — involving 25 distinct students across district programs.

Arango explained the legal definitions used for the report: a physical restraint “immobilizes or reduces the ability of a student to freely move his or her torso, arms, legs, or head” and seclusion is “the involuntary confinement of a student apart from other students in an area or room which the student is physically prevented from leaving.” She said seclusion rooms must be free of objects and cannot be locked from the outside.

The district breakdown Arango presented showed McFarland Primary School recorded 26 incidents (six students), WAVESO recorded 23 incidents (five seclusions and 18 restraints), the middle school recorded seven incidents (one seclusion, six restraints), the high school had one incident (a physical restraint), and three incidents occurred at the Richardson School, a private alternative placement used by the district. District totals of 12 seclusions involved nine students; 48 restraints involved 16 students. Arango said many incidents involved students with individualized education programs (IEPs).

Arango told the board that state rules require districts to file the data with the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) and that DPI “is really looking at any district that has more than 0 incidences” to examine root causes. She said the district typically notifies parents the same day as an incident, although the written report is allowed up to three days.

On responses and supports, Arango said some incidents have an SRO presence and named SRO Joel Zietzma as often responding; she clarified that reporting an SRO on the incident log does not necessarily mean the officer physically restrained the student, only that the officer was present or responded.

Arango described current and planned strategies to reduce seclusion and restraint, including staff training in alternatives that “look[] at blocking a student as opposed to physically secluding or restraining them,” and said the district continues efforts begun in prior years to reduce incidents. She displayed a multi-year trend showing a decline from near 300 incidents in 2014–15 to roughly 60 in each of the last three years (57 in 2021–22; 61 in 2022–23; 60 in 2023–24).

Board members asked whether the district’s rates could be compared with similar-size districts; Arango said DPI posts district-level reports on its website but she did not have comparative figures at the meeting. Board members also asked about overlap between seclusion and restraint events; Arango said some events are reported separately as both seclusion and restraint when both occurred during the same episode.

Arango closed by inviting questions and noting staff are pursuing additional training and prevention practices to reduce instances going forward.