The improper use of reported restraints has been associated with serious in- jury and death in both mental health and school settings. However, there is currently no federal legislation that regulates the use of reported restraints in the schools in contrast to health care facilities (e.g., Children's Health Act of 2000). As children with disabilities are significantly more likely to experience restraint events, we examined what variables may predict the use of reported restraints in the public schools among these children. Results indicate that schools with lower socioeconomic status and located in states that did not prohibit corporal punishment or regulate the use of reported restraints in the schools experienced more reported restraint events. The use of restraints has been termed "a low frequency but high consequence event," (LeBel, Nunno, Mohr, & O'Halloran, 2012, p. 78). Ryan, Peterson, Tetreault, and van der Hagan(2008) note the use of restraint ". . . continues to be an understudied but overused proce- dure among of one of our nation's most vulnerable populations," (p. 214) which are children with disabilities. With respect to restraints, there are generally three types discussed in the literature: physical, mechanical, and chemical restraints. Chemical restraints refer to the use of medications to control behavior or restrict a patient's freedom of movement (Ryan & Peterson, 2004), which, while increasing in fre- quency in their administration in the schools (Canham, et al., 2007), are generally out of the purview of the schools in terms of decision- making. Physical restraints, also known as ambulatory and manual restraints, refer to a personal restriction that immobilizes or prevents a student from moving his or her torso, arms, legs or head freely, in which the restraint mechanism is the body of another person(s). A physical escort is not included in this definition (U.S. Department of Education (U.S. DOE), 2012a). Mechanical restraint refers to the use of