A Model for Collaborative Technical Assistance for SPP Indicators 1, 2, 13, & 14 Loujeania Bost, Charlotte Alverson, David Test, Susan Loving, & Marianne Moore

What We’ll Share  An accountability framework for improving transition education, services, and outcomes  Examples of coordinated work  State perspectives

IDEA Purpose (d)(1)(A) to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living.

SPP and APR In Part B there are 4 indicators specific to transition: 1.% of youth who graduate 2.% of youth who drop out 13.% of youth with transition components in the IEP 14.% of youth who achieve post-school outcomes

Critical Interrelationships Quality IEPs Staying in School Graduating Positive post- school outcomes

Post-School Outcomes ~Indicator 14~  Postsecondary education and/or training  Employment  Independent living Dropping Out ~Indicator 2~  Why?  Appropriate programs?  Address student and family needs? Graduation ~Indicator 1~  Expectations and standards?  Various pathways available?  Linkage to post-school environments? What’s the Quality of Our IEPs? ~Indicator 13~  Measurable post-school and annual goals  Transition-related assessments  Course of study, services, and activities  Coordination of services N ot so good? Good? Why? Why Not?

What’s Coordinated TA?  Three centers implementing their charges  Three centers working together with RRCs to help meet state needs

The Cross-Indicator Meeting Process  1-2 day “brainstorming” session  Facilitated by staff from NDPC-SD, NPSO, NSTTAC, & RRC  Based on three sets of questions

Collecting and Analyzing Indicator Data Describe the characteristics of your state’s data collection system:  Who is responsible for designing data collection in your state for each transition indicator?  What methods are used to collect data for each indicator (e.g., what are the information sources, how is the information collected, is a unique identifier used to link indicators)?  Who is responsible for data collection?  Who is responsible for data analysis?

Collecting and Analyzing Indicator Data  What challenges and/or opportunities do your answers in Question 1 present for connecting and/or coordinating data collection around the indicators?  How can data collection and analysis be improved and/or coordinated to facilitate reporting and using data to foster program improvement?

Reporting Indicator Data  What data do you need to report?  What is the purpose of reporting data (e.g., accountability, program development, program evaluation)?  Who are the intended audiences?  How will you tailor the message to each particular audience?  What are the best formats/media for conveying information to your audiences?  What changes are needed?

Using Indicator Data to Foster Improvement How do your staff collaborate to use the indicator data for:  data-based decision making?  professional development?  policy analysis and change (including resource allocation)?  technical assistance?

State Perspectives  What are the key characteristics of team members?  How was this constructive for you?  Why would this be worthwhile for others?  What lessons were learned (state & center perspectives)?

Utah  Purpose of the meeting  Partners  Experiences  Aha’s  Outcomes

Virginia  Instructional Services Staff, Federal Program Monitoring Staff, Student Services, Data Manager, VR…  Various State Agencies collect data, but access to the data is limited  Explaining the data  Context for planning  Tie activities to Indicators and measure those activities  New activities needed?  Tree of Influence ties it all together Putting teams together, forming stakeholder groups, examining old activities and developing new activities

What’s Next  Taking the process to scale via regional and/or national meetings