Monitoring is supposed to make sure a signed federal agreement protects students. In Virginia, U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) took so long that others had to file new cases while earlier ones were still under review or being monitored.
The pattern appears across the following six cases:
OCR’s 2017 review of restraint and seclusion across Southeastern Cooperative Educational Programs (SECEP).
An individual SECEP complaint whose case number points to fiscal year 2019.
A teacher’s 2015 complaint about Fairfax County Public Schools’ (FCPS) restraint-and-seclusion practices.
A 2019 federal lawsuit that forced FCPS to change its restraint-and-seclusion practices before OCR finished the teacher’s complaint.
OCR’s 2021 investigation and 2022 resolution agreement on FCPS’ pandemic-period practices.
A 2024 Virginia state complaint over FCPS’ delayed follow-through on remedies tied to the 2022 OCR agreement.
SECEP: OCR Left an Entire Service Setting Out of Its File Review
OCR opened its SECEP review Aug. 29, 2017. It didn’t resolve the review until Dec. 16, 2022, more than five years later.
SECEP is a regional special and alternative education program run by eight Virginia school divisions. During the years OCR reviewed, about 85% of its about 1,200 students had disabilities. SECEP had five regional centers and about 70 special education classes inside about 50 comprehensive public schools.
During the 2016-17 and 2017-18 school years, SECEP reported 15,713 uses of restraint and seclusion. Some files tied those measures to spitting, profanity, obscene gestures, and insubordination. The records didn’t show whether another danger was present. OCR expressed concerns that SECEP may have used restraint and seclusion to manage behavior instead of reserving them for the most dangerous conduct.
Records were also missing or inconsistent. Students lost large amounts of class time, and OCR found no evidence that SECEP gave them services to make up for those losses.
Additionally, OCR expressed concern that SECEP relied on informal safety or intervention meetings. OCR said they didn’t meet Section 504’s reevaluation rules and often didn’t lead to new evaluations, behavior assessments, revised behavior plans, or IEP meetings.
OCR reviewed 77 files of students with disabilities at SECEP’s five regional centers. It reviewed no individual files from SECEP programs inside comprehensive schools.
More than 100 students with disabilities in those school-based programs experienced restraint or seclusion in each year. About 30 students in 2016-17 and 35 in 2017-18 had at least 10 incidents. OCR later said some may have needed reevaluation.
OCR then required SECEP to review current students from either setting who had been restrained or secluded since 2016-17. However, the review was limited to students still enrolled when SECEP signed the agreement. Students who had left by Dec. 15, 2022, including those who left during OCR’s five-year review, were outside the review.
The Individual SECEP Case Was Already Waiting
OCR Case No. 11-19-1090 focused on a student who attended SECEP for seven days. During those seven days, staff used restraint or seclusion five times.
The student’s IEP and behavior plan didn’t mention either practice—and SECEP didn’t revise the behavior plan as the placing school division had advised.
After the third incident, SECEP held what it called a critical meeting. OCR couldn’t tell whether the parent took part or received advance notice. OCR also found no evidence that SECEP considered an IEP meeting to decide whether the student needed new supports, reevaluation or makeup services.
The exact filing date is redacted. The “19” in the case number suggests the complaint entered OCR’s system in fiscal year 2019.
OCR didn’t resolve the complaint until July 20, 2026. By then, the student had left SECEP. OCR’s resolution letter says the 2022 agreement addressed the student’s complaint only “in part,” separate relief was still needed, and OCR was still monitoring the older agreement.
If OCR already had the individual complaint while reviewing SECEP as a whole, why didn’t it address the student’s relief in the 2022 agreement?
SECEP’s quarterly assessments were due by Dec. 22, 2023. Student reviews were due by Dec. 31, 2023. Approved makeup services were to be completed by Dec. 20, 2024. Yet OCR was still monitoring the agreement in July 2026. Its public letter doesn’t say what remained unfinished or what the monitoring found.
FCPS: Private Plaintiffs Reached Court Before OCR Finished
In 2015, a teacher in FCPS’ Comprehensive Services Site (CSS) program filed an OCR complaint related to the 2014-15 school year. OCR reviewed claims involving disability harassment, failure to follow students’ IEPs, race discrimination in discipline, discrimination against English learners, and restraint and seclusion.
OCR didn’t issue its resolution letter and agreement until Jan. 16, 2025, almost a decade later.
While OCR’s case remained open, six students with disabilities and several disability-rights groups sued FCPS in federal court in October 2019. FCPS records showed that the lead plaintiff had been restrained or secluded at least 745 times.
The parties settled in November 2021. The court-enforceable agreement required FCPS to ban seclusion in all schools by the start of the 2022-23 school year. It also banned several dangerous restraints, sharply limited others, addressed students’ communication needs, and required public reports.
OCR’s 2025 resolution letter noted that the lawsuit was filed while its case was open. OCR also remained concerned about possible denials of a free appropriate public education (FAPE), and the need for makeup services because the lawsuit didn’t include FAPE claims.
Private plaintiffs secured court-enforceable changes more than three years before OCR resolved the teacher’s complaint.
Where was OCR before the lawsuit? Why did the OCR case take until 2025? Why did OCR then wait almost seven more months, until Aug. 8, 2025, to post its resolution letter and agreement?
FCPS’s Pandemic Remedy Still Required a State Complaint
January 2021, OCR opened a directed investigation of FCPS’s pandemic-period practices.
November 2022, OCR found that FCPS failed or was unable to provide FAPE to thousands of students who have disabilities. OCR found that FCPS used an incorrect FAPE standard, cut or capped services for reasons other than each student’s needs, changed some placements without required evaluations and team decisions, and failed to create an adequate plan to fix those denials. OCR also raised concerns about poor service tracking.
The agreement required FCPS to name a qualified plan administrator, notify families, review each student’s case, and create an electronic tracking system by Jan. 17, 2023.
Public records obtained from FCPS later showed serious problems. November 2023, FCPS told OCR that data involving almost 400 students was corrupted and hard to use. The audit was put on hold. OCR followed up twice before FCPS responded. FCPS later said its report wasn’t pulling correct data and that some internal data couldn’t be recovered.
January 2025, FCPS told OCR that its system showed 283 meetings were still needed. FCPS said an audit found the correct number was 17.
Families were also waiting for makeup services and reimbursements already written into students’ IEPs.
I filed State Complaint C24-166 over FCPS’ delays and its use of a first-come, first-served queue to provide those remedies. May 31, 2024, Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) found FCPS at fault for systemic noncompliance for delays in implementing IEPs divisionwide, including makeup services and reimbursements.
It shouldn’t have taken a new complaint with another agency to make FCPS fully implement the IEPs in a timely manner.
Final Words
OCR moved too slowly, so others had to force the next step.
Oversite is no more than a piece of paper and hollow words if it isn’t enforced.