Old Saybrook 26-0596

Complaint Summary

Date Findings Report Sent

June 4, 2026

Case Number

26-0596

School District

Old Saybrook Public Schools

Person filing complaint

Parent

Grade Level

Elementary School

Allegation(s)

  • The Parent alleges that the seclusion room at the District’s elementary school does not meet state requirements (i.e., does not have proper heating/cooling/ventilation, does not have a way for a child to look out when locked in, and does not have a fire marshal approved lock). (RCSA § 10-76b-8(h)(5))
  • The Parent alleges that the seclusion room is being used for punishment and not safety, and its use is also due to lack of staff training. (CGS §§ 10-236b(d)(1), 10-236b(i), and RCSA § 10-76-10))
  • The Parent alleges that the District has called the Parent to request that the Student be picked up due to challenging behaviors but has failed to document these instances as suspensions. (34 CFR § 300.101, and RCSA § 10-76d-1)

Conclusion(s)

  • While not an issue directly addressed during the investigation of this complaint, the Student was restrained or secluded 10 times before the District convened a PPT meeting to recommend conducting an FBA. Consequently, significant time was lost where interventions and supports could have been implemented to address the Student’s behavior, possibly mitigating the use of physical interventions and increasing the Student’s ability to access their education. Recommendations will follow.
  • The seclusion room meets the requirements under RCSA § 10-76b-8(h)(5), therefore, the District is in compliance and no corrective action is required.
  • The District is in compliance with CGS § 10-236b(i) and RCSA § 10-76-10, as all staff members who have administered restraints and seclusions are PMT trained. In addition, 10 of the 16 staff members have completed advanced training in understanding behaviors or the Student’s specific BIP. All incidents of restraint or seclusion were reported as responses to an imminent risk to the safety of the Student or others, in compliance with CGS § 10-236b(d)(1). Therefore, no corrective action is required.
  • Of the three District-reported Parent forced pick-up requests due to challenging behaviors, one occurred outside the investigation timeline, another took place at the end of the school day, and the third should have been reported and documented as an out-of-school suspension as the duration of the exclusion exceeded 90 minutes. However, as this does not constitute a change of placement (more than 10 days), it is not a denial of FAPE. Therefore, the District is not in violation of 34 CFR § 300.101, RCSA § 10-76d-1, and CGS § 10-233a(d) and no corrective action is required, but a recommendation will follow.

Corrective Action(s)

None

Recommendations

  • The District should ensure that appropriate steps are taken, without delay, to gather relevant information and support students whenever behaviors interfere with learning. Utilizing a function-based approach may help reduce reliance on overly restrictive interventions.
  • The District should ensure that all staff understand the parameters for out-of-school suspensions related to forced pick-ups, as outlined in the Special Education Procedures and Practices Manual.