A Multi-Year Improvement System and Schedule

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MONITORING OF SUBGRANTEES
Advertisements

NCLB Consolidated Monitoring Integrated Approach to Title III Monitoring.
Compliance Monitoring Orientation. Monitoring Components Focus Site Review/Fiscal Monitoring SPAM.
Six Year Plan Meeting the state targets Region Meeting August 16, 2007.
Updates in IDEA NCLB is the symbol of the paradigm shift to a new mission of universal high achievement From: All children will have universal access.
(Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act) and
Mississippi Special Education Advisory Panel Annual Report to the State Board of Education July 2009.
Office of Special Education & Early Intervention Services Getting Ready at the Local Level Preparing for the Service Provider Self-Review.
Individualized Learning Plans A Study to Identify and Promote Promising Practices.
From Here to Here Transition from Infant and Toddler Connection Programs to ECSE School Division Programs.
5/2010 Focused Monitoring Stakeholders May /2010 Purpose: Massachusetts Monitoring System  Monitor and evaluate program compliance with federal.
ESEA Program Review Russ Sweet Preparing for ESEA Program Reviews of Titles I-A, II-A, VI-B (REAP), and X Summer 2014.
Final Determinations. Secretary’s Determinations Secretary annually reviews the APR and, based on the information provided in the report, information.
Special Education Monitoring – IDEA Grant
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education Overview of Results Driven Accountability Assuring Compliance and Improving Results August.
State Directors Conference Boise, ID, March 4, 2013 Cesar D’Agord Regional Resource Center Program WRRC – Western Region.
Office of Special Education Services Instructional Leaders Roundtable Oct. 16, 2014 John R. Payne, Director.
Special Education Accountability Reviews Let’s put the pieces together March 25, 2015.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services.
Special Ed. Administrator’s Academy, September 24, 2013 Monitoring and Program Effectiveness.
1 Early Childhood Special Education Connecticut State Department of Education Early Childhood Special Education Maria Synodi.
Verification Visit by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) September 27-29, 2010.
Career and Technical Education Monitoring for Compliance Monday, July 13, 2015 CTE Summer Conference CTE Administrators Ted W. Summey, Regional Coordinator,
Systems Performance Review & Improvement (SPR&I) Training Oregon Department of Education Fall 2007.
ACADEMIC SERVICES DIVISION. ACADEMIC SERVICES In other words, Chapters 4, 5, and 6 of your charter.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA General Supervision.
A Review of the Special Education Integrated Monitoring Process BIE Special Education Academy September 12-15, 2011 Tampa, Florida.
OSEP National Early Childhood Conference December 2007.
2011 OSEP Leadership Mega Conference Collaboration to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career 2.0 Participation of the State Advisory Panel and State Interagency.
1 Accountability Conference Education Service Center, Region 20 September 16, 2009.
STATE MONITORING VISIT Montgomery County Schools Week of April 18, 2016.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Special Education Advisory Committee Virginia Department of Education.
Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Virginia Association of School Superintendents Annual Conference Patty.
SPR&I: Changes, New Measures/Targets, and Lessons Learned from Focused Monitoring Visits David Guardino, SPR&I Coordinator Fall 2009 COSA Conference.
An Introduction to the State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report.
Letter of Explanation Copy of Data Disproportionality Initial Eligibility 60-day Timeline Early Childhood Transition Secondary Transition Corrected and.
Continuous Improvement and Focused Monitoring System US Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Overview of the OSEP Continuous Improvement.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services Last Revised 8/15/2011.
Presented by: Jan Stanley, State Title I Director Office of Assessment and Accountability June 10, 2008 Monitoring For Results.
Texas State Performance Plan Data, Performance, Results TCASE Leadership Academy Fall 2008.
Cyclical Monitoring Presented to State and Local Task Force.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
2010 OSEP Leadership Mega Conference Collaboration to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career Dan Schreier, Gregg Corr, Jill Harris, Ken Kienas, Kate Moran,
Special Education Compliance Monitoring. 3 Phases of Compliance Monitoring Review Pre-Site phase Pre-Site phase On-Site phase On-Site phase Post-Site.
Early Childhood Transition: Effective Approaches for Building and Sustaining State Infrastructure Indiana’s Transition Initiative for Young Children and.
An Update of One Aspect of Monitoring, Support and Technical Assistance Available Through the State Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education.
South Hunterdon Regional School District Consolidated Monitoring Report (CMR) Presentation to the SHRSD Board of Education on October 26, 2015 Audit from.
In accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Chapters 14 and 15 of the State Board Regulations, PDE provides general supervision.
State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) Office of Special Education January 20, 2016.
Special Education Performance Profiles and SPP Compliance Indicator Reviews Office for Exceptional Children.
LEA Self-Assessment LEASA: Presentations:
Patricia Williams & Anita Castro Special Education Team 1 Sample IEP Forms College and Career Ready.
1 Early Intervention Monitoring Wyoming DDD April 2008 Training.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs General Supervision: Developing an Effective System Implications for States.
6/18/2016 DES / AzEIP 2011 Cycle Two Self Report Overview & Training Cycle Two Self Report Overview & Training.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA General Supervision.
March 23, SPECIAL EDUCATION ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEWS.
Continuous Improvement Performance Plan (CIPP) New Hanover County Schools Students with Disabilities Data Story.
Preparing for Title IIA Monitoring Review (FY15) November 9, 2015 Deborah Walker Meagan Steiner David LeBlanc.
Child Outcomes Summary Process April 26, 2017
Public School Monitoring Roadmap
ESEA Consolidated Pre-Monitoring Meeting
Department of Exceptional Student Education
ESEA Consolidated Monitoring
Monitoring Child Outcomes: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
SPR&I Regional Training
SECN – Transition Role Group Meeting
Special Ed. Administrator’s Academy, September 24, 2013
Presentation transcript:

A Multi-Year Improvement System and Schedule LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Improving Special Education Compliance and Results: Four Phases of Alabama’s Continuous Improvement Process Add logo Alabama Department of Education Office of Learning Support Special Education Services Cynthia Lester clester@alsde.edu Courtney Utsey cutsey@alsde.edu A Multi-Year Improvement System and Schedule

A LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Special Education Services (SES) must have in effect policies or procedures to ensure that it complies with the monitoring and enforcement requirements in IDEA regulations CFR §300.600-602 and CFR §300.606-608 The general supervision system should demonstrate effective accountability efforts towards enforcing the requirements and ensuring continuous improvement

A LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION The SES Continuous Improvement Process provides an effective system of general supervision to: Supports practices that improve educational results and functional outcomes Uses multiple methods to identify and correct noncompliance within one year Uses mechanisms to encourage and support improvement and to enforce compliance

A LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION The implementation of this model also supports the Alabama PLAN 2020 1. Improve student growth 2. Close the achievement gap 3. Increase the graduation rate 4. Increase the number of student graduation from high school that are college and career ready

Benefits of the Continuous Improvement Process: Provides a linkage between the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) and the monitoring requirements set forth by IDEA Provides an opportunity for differentiated support for LEAs whose data trigger compliance and/or performance needs Provides a multi-faceted approach to resolving issues of noncompliance and/or low performance Is a continuous process rather than episodic or an “event” Requires LEAs to frequently review data and make adjustments for improved results

A LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Phase I: DESK AUDIT

Guided Conversation Purpose of the Guided Conversation is to use data and other relevant information to determine areas of focus/need. Review of Documentation from the following areas: LEA Profiles Dispute Resolution Accounting Information Child Count Previous monitoring reports

A LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Prior to Monitoring SES will develop a preliminary list of issues to be discussed during the on-site visit   During the on-site visit for Phase I, the Team Leader and the Special Education Coordinator will co-develop and determing hypothesis(es) regarding the contributing factors. A plan of action to determine “next steps” and follow-up will be developed

Desk Audit Review Record utilizing STISETS (2-3 weeks prior to on-site visit) During the on-site visit, staff members from SES will review the areas of non-compliance with the Special Education Coordinator and participate in the exit conference SES will develop a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) to be implemented After the CAP has been completed, SES will pull “New Data” to ensure the LEA is implementing the regulatory requirements

Phase II: System Profile/ Fiscal Review LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Phase II: System Profile/ Fiscal Review

Review of Documentation from the following areas: Child Find Private school Surrogate Parents Certification In-service trainings Personnel certification/licensure Least Restrictive Environment

The review will also consist of fiscal information that is required by the EDGAR regulations.   Documentation from the following areas: Time and Effort Equipment purchases Inventory lists. During the review, staff members from SES will review the areas of noncompliance with the Special Education Coordinator. SES will develop a CAP to be implemented.

A LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Phase III: Student Service Reviews (SSR)/ Review of Transition Practices

The SSR Reviews consist of a case-based review method for: Appraising the current status of selected students with disabilities who are receiving special education and related services. Determining the adequacy of performance of key service functions for those who support them.

A LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION The results of the review will be used for understanding and improving front-line practices by those who serve the students. During the review, staff members from SES will review any areas of noncompliance with the Special Education Coordinator. SES will develop a CAP to be implemented.

A LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION If the scores for the student/LEA indicate unacceptable services SES will make recommendations and conduct a follow-up SSR within 1 year for the student(s) that fall within outcomes Outcomes 3 & 4.

Transition SES will also conduct an intensive review of transition services being provided to students with disabilities. Transition Practices Survey Transition Program Rating Scale Parent Survey

A LABAMA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Phase IV State Systemic Improvement Plan/Annual Performance Report Data and Indicator Review

Phase IV consists of a customized approach for examining LEA data submitted through the district-approved process.   During the visit: Analyze compliance and results data through interactive guided questions Identify root causes of non compliance Identify effective improvement strategies

LEA Determinations are made based upon the LEA’s submitted compliance, fiscal, and timely data submissions. Conducting verification of compliance indicator data submissions for Indicators 11 (Child Find), 12 (Early Childhood Transition), and 13 (Secondary Transition).   Examining selected indicator data through focused reviews (Graduation, Drop-Out, Suspension/Expulsion, Disproportionality, LRE, Assessment Proficiency, Secondary Transition (College and Career-Ready), Dispute Resolution.

Cohort II

Summary Each LEA would have been reviewed in a continuous, rather than episodic manner. The review will be clearly linked to systemic change with integrated, continuous feedback and support. The use of multiple procedures will provide qualitative as well as quantitative measurement to provide for continuous improvement planning. The technical assistance that will be generated as a result of the review would support change within the LEA.