The once common use of restrictive interventions (the use of restraint and seclusion) for controlling the behaviour of people with an intellectual disability is now coming under greater scrutiny by government and community sector services. Questions are being raised with respect to the clinical efficacy and ethical appropriateness of such interventions. In Victoria, Australia, the Senior Practitioner was established in 2007 by the Disability Act (2006) to protect the rights of people with a disability who are subjected to restrictive interventions or compulsory treatments, and who are in receipt of a disability service funded by the Department of Human Services' Disability Service. Among other functions, the Senior Practitioner is mandated by the Disability Act (2006) to monitor and review the use of restrictive interventions in Victoria. The data included in this paper summarise findings from the first 12 months of operation of the Office of the Senior Practitioner's Restrictive Intervention Data System (RIDS) as collated at March 2009. The collection and analyses of these data are important because people know little about the prevalence of the use of restrictive interventions in disability services in Australia and, consequently, have a paucity of evidence to inform the development of policy and monitor practice. (Contains 4 tables and 1 note.)