skip to content
Primary navigation

Rule 40 Advisory Committee

DHS will revise Rule 40 as part of an agreement in a recently settled lawsuit. Rule 40 governs the use of aversive and deprivation procedures in licensed facilities that serve persons with developmental disabilities. Minnesota Rules parts 9525.2700 to 9525.2810 (Rule 40).

Rule 40 Advisory Committee Recommendations on Best Practices and Modernization of Rule 40

In accordance with the Jensen Settlement Agreement, the Rule 40 Advisory Committee provided its recommendations to the Minnesota Department of Human Services (PDF) to modernize Minnesota Rules 9525.2700 to 9525.2810, commonly referred to as "Rule 40." The recommendations were made to reflect current best practices when providing services to individuals with disabilities.

The outcome of these practices is to increase quality of life and appropriately respond to the behavior of the person. The advice and recommendations of the advisory committee, as reflected in the July 2, 2013, report are the product of many hours of meetings, contemplation, research and discussions.

Committee information

The advisory committee consists of 16 people representing:

  • Counties/lead agencies
  • Family members
  • Independent experts
  • Minnesota Department of Human Services
  • Minnesota Disability Law Center
  • Minnesota Governor's Council on Developmental Disabilities
  • Parents
  • Plaintiffs' counsel
  • Providers
  • Self-advocates
  • Other interested parties

The committee will study, review and advise DHS on how to revise Rule 40 to reflect current best practices. The committee will meet monthly for approximately eight months. DHS invites the public to attend these meetings.

Member list / Principles to participate

Meeting information

See all meeting information, including agendas, materials and summaries from past meetings.

Jensen Settlement

In July 2009, a federal class-action lawsuit was filed on behalf of individuals who had been subjected to seclusion or restraint at the Minnesota Extended Treatment Options (METO) program. The METO program was located in Cambridge, Minn. The lawsuit heard by U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank, was based in part on a report by the Office of Ombudsman's for Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities.

Rather than a trial, on Dec. 5, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota adopted a Settlement Agreement (PDF). More information about the settlement is available on the DHS Jensen Settlement Web page.

Other resources

Advisory committee associated groups and their roles (PDF)
Cambridge Training Materials (PDF)
Chapter 1600 of the Arizona Developmental Disabilities Policy and Procedures Manual (Managing Inappropriate Behaviors) (PDF)
Definitions for use in the Residential Service Provider Request on the Usage of Restrictive Aversive and Deprivation Procedures (PDF)
Disability Services Definitions Aversive Deprivation Survey
Emergency use of restraints recommendations (PDF)  
Georgia Guidelines for Supporting Adults with Challenging Behaviors in Community Settings (PDF)
How advisory groups enhance rule development (PDF)  
Implementation work group summary (revised) (PDF)  
Michigan Department of Community Health - Person-Centered Planning Policy and Practice Guideline (PDF)
Minnesota Chapter 2960 restrictive procedure summary (PDF)  
Monitoring reporting oversight work group summary (revised) (PDF)  
National Consensus Statement on Mental Health Recovery (publication no longer available at this site)
Nebraska Rules and Regulations Chapters for Title-404 (Health and Human Services System
Report to the Minnesota Department of Human Services Disability Services Division from Fredda Brown Nov. 6, 2013 (PDF)
Rulemaking flow chart (PDF)
Summary of behavioral safeguards (PDF)
U.S. Department of Education's Restraint and Seclusion: Resource Document (PDF)
Minnesota Positive Behavior Support Network
Waiver Instructions, Appendix G-2 (PDF)

More information

For questions or concerns, please send an email to

back to top