Letter of Explanation Copy of Data Disproportionality Initial Eligibility 60-day Timeline Early Childhood Transition Secondary Transition Corrected and.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Compliance Monitoring Orientation. Monitoring Components Focus Site Review/Fiscal Monitoring SPAM.
Advertisements

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act) and
Early Childhood Special Education Part B, Section 619* Part C to B Transition by Three Jessica Brady, Noel Cole Michigan Department of Education Office.
Special Education Data collection and reporting. SPED Data Collected Graduation/Drop Out (ISEE) State Assessment Participation/Performance (Assessment)
Pre-test Please come in and complete your pre-test.
INDICATORS 11 AND 13 Bureau of Indian Education Division of Performance and Accountability WebEx October 18, 2011 DESK AUDIT.
File Review Activity Lessons learned through monitoring: Service areas must ensure there is documentation supporting the information reported in the self-
Final Determinations. Secretary’s Determinations Secretary annually reviews the APR and, based on the information provided in the report, information.
1 Determinations EI/ECSE SPR&I Training ODE Fall 2007.
Disproportionality of Racial and Ethnic Groups in Special Education Significant Disproportionality and EIS versus Disproportionate Representation due to.
State Directors Conference Boise, ID, March 4, 2013 Cesar D’Agord Regional Resource Center Program WRRC – Western Region.
Special Education Accountability Reviews Let’s put the pieces together March 25, 2015.
Part B Indicator 13 FFY 09 SPP/APR Writing Suggestions Western Regional Resource Center APR Clinic 2010 November 1-3 San Francisco, California.
Special Ed. Administrator’s Academy, September 24, 2013 Monitoring and Program Effectiveness.
State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report Indicator 13 Effective Transition Susan Beck, Ghaski Browning and Karen Ruddle Office of Special Programs.
1 Overview of IDEA/SPP Early Childhood Transition Requirements Developed by NECTAC for the Early Childhood Transition Initiative (Updated February 2010)
Tennessee Department of Education Compliance Training February 2012 Department of Exceptional Children.
Verification Visit by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) September 27-29, 2010.
2013 Office of Special Education (OSE) Fall Forum Tuesday, November 4, 2013  10:15 am – 11:45 am  Ballroom E Jayme Kraus Data Analyst, Performance Reporting.
Presented by the Part C- Kristie Musick, Part C Coordinator Dr. Lesly Wilson, Part C Data Manager Part B- Lori James, Part B Data Manager Part C & B March.
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.
Welcome to the Regional SPR&I trainings Be sure to sign in Be sure to sign in You should have one school age OR EI/ECSE packet of handouts You.
1 Accountability Conference Education Service Center, Region 20 September 16, 2009.
STATE MONITORING VISIT Montgomery County Schools Week of April 18, 2016.
An Introduction to the State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report.
State Performance Plan (SPP) Annual Performance Report (APR) Dana Corriveau Bureau of Special Education Connecticut State Department of Education ConnCASEOctober.
Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools Programs for Exceptional Children State Performance Plan/ Annual Performance Report/Continuous Improvement Performance.
Complaints Information Santina Thibedeau March 5, 2009.
2010 B13 Data Collection March 24, 2010 Craig Wiles Public Sector Consultants Chuck Saur MI-TOP.
Richard Henderson Evelyn S. Johnson A NNUAL P ERFORMANCE R EPORT U PDATE Richard O’Dell Division of Special Education Idaho State Department of Education.
Tom Corbett, Governor ▪ Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Educationwww.education.state.pa. us Compliance Monitoring for Gifted Education COMPLIANCE MONITORING.
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services.
Texas State Performance Plan Data, Performance, Results TCASE Leadership Academy Fall 2008.
Cyclical Monitoring Presented to State and Local Task Force.
How to write great transition IEPs and meet compliance for Indicator 13!
Noncompliance and Correction (OSEP Memo 09-02) June 2012.
District Annual Determinations IDEA Part B Sections 616(a) and (e) A State must consider the following four factors: 1.Performance on compliance.
Evaluation IEP Development, Review and Revision Placement
Special Education Compliance Monitoring. 3 Phases of Compliance Monitoring Review Pre-Site phase Pre-Site phase On-Site phase On-Site phase Post-Site.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction California Department of Education California Department of.
JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction Improving Special Education Services November 2010 Sacramento, CA SPP/APR Update.
State Performance Plan/ Annual Performance Report/Continuous Improvement Performance Plan (SPP/APR/CIPP) Buncombe County Schools 2013.
Procedural Safeguards for Parents What Educators Should Know Michelle Mobley NELA Cohort III.
Special Education Performance Profiles and SPP Compliance Indicator Reviews Office for Exceptional Children.
1 Early Intervention Monitoring Wyoming DDD April 2008 Training.
State Performance Plan ESC-2 Presentation For Superintendents September 19, 2007.
6/18/2016 DES / AzEIP 2011 Cycle Two Self Report Overview & Training Cycle Two Self Report Overview & Training.
Understanding the Data on Preschool Child Find and Transition Annual Performance Report Indicator 12 February, 2016
March 23, SPECIAL EDUCATION ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEWS.
Continuous Improvement Performance Plan (CIPP) New Hanover County Schools Students with Disabilities Data Story.
CIMS Community of Practice (COP) Face-to-Face Call CIMS Community of Practice (COP) Face-to-Face Call ISD Monitors December 9, :00 – 2:45 p.m. 1.
Post-Secondary Transition
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR PARENT REQUESTS
ARC Chairperson Training
What is “Annual Determination?”
Disproportionality: Tier Two Monitoring Activities
Agenda 3:00 Introductions and ZOOM Webinar reminders
Guam Department of Education
ARC Chairperson Training
Indicator 13, Secondary Transition IEP Record Reviews
SPR&I Regional Training
St. John the Baptist School System Special Education Chairperson’s Meeting September 8, 2016.
Post-Secondary Transition
Idaho New Charter Schools Determination Levels 2011
Brielle Elementary School Special Education Monitoring Summary
SECN – Transition Role Group Meeting
YEAR #4 (2010) DETERMINATIONS
Special Ed. Administrator’s Academy, September 24, 2013
Presentation transcript:

Letter of Explanation

Copy of Data Disproportionality Initial Eligibility 60-day Timeline Early Childhood Transition Secondary Transition Corrected and Verified Noncompliance within 365 days Accurate & Timely Data Total 9 & % - 90% 3 = 0 over 3 = % timely or 1 late 3 = % or 1 (13 not met) 3 = On time 89% - 75% 2 = 1-2 areas over 2 = 50-74% timely or 2 late 2 = 50-74% or 2 (13 not met) 0 = Late 74% - 50% 1 = 3 areas over 1 = 30-49% timely 1 = 30-49% 49% - 0% 0 = 4+ areas over 0 = 0-29% timely or 3 late 0 = 0-29% or 3 (13 not met)

Monitoring RequirementsTechnical AssistanceIncentives or Actions MEETS REQUIREMENTS No changes to compliance monitoring schedule Upon request the Local Education Agency may receive technical assistance on general areas of need. The Local Education Agency will receive a letter of recognition from State Education Agency.

IDEA Below are Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) requirements for States as stated in an FAQ document: States are required to enforce the IDEA by making “determinations annually under IDEA section 616(e) on the performance of each LEA under Part B”

IDEA States must use the same four categories in IDEA section 616(d) as OSEP in making determinations of the status of LEAs/EIS programs. These categories are:  Meets Requirements;  Needs Assistance;  Needs Intervention; and  Needs Substantial Intervention.

IDEA States MUST consider:  Performance on compliance indicators;  Whether data submitted by LEAs programs are valid, reliable, and timely;  Uncorrected noncompliance from other sources; and  Any audit findings.

IDEA In addition, States could also consider:  Performance on performance indicators; and  Other information

Monitoring Workgroup Participants Directors Superintendents Parent Group Regional Consultant Central Office Staff Across the Regions Large and Small Districts Debby Lund, Pat Farmer, JoAnn Curtis, Desi Laughlin, Mert Burns, Mel Wiseman, Mike Haberman, Charlie Silva, Cathy Thornton, Frank Howe, Evelyn Mason, Marybeth Flachbart, Jean Taylor, Jacque Hyatt, Jodie Mills, Gina Hopper and Janice Carson

Monitoring Workgroup Advise the SDE: Monitoring Process and Procedures Timelines Guidelines Determination Criteria

What are our Compliance Indicators? Indicators 9 & 10- Disproportionality of race/ethnicity that is due to use of inappropriate practices and/or procedures Indicator 11- Timely initial eligibility determinations (within 60 days of receiving parental consent) Indicator 12- Early childhood transitions (from Part C to Part B) are completed by the child’s 3 rd birthday. Indicator 13- Secondary transitions are compliant on all 8 questions. Indicator 15- Noncompliance findings are corrected by the due date and any required Corrective Action (usually from a complaint) is completed by the due date. Indicator 20- Data for Child Count, Exiting, and Discipline is submitted by the due date and is accurate.

Compliance Indictors Disproportionality Initial Eligibility 60-day Timeline Early Childhood Transition Secondary Transition Corrected and Verified Noncompliance within 365 days Accurate & Timely Data Total 9 & % - 90% 3 = 0 over 3 = % timely or 1 late 3 = % or 1 (13 not met) 3 = On time 89% - 75% 2 = 1-2 areas over 2 = 50-74% timely or 2 late 2 = 50-74% or 2 (13 not met) 0 = Late 74% - 50% 1 = 3 areas over 1 = 30-49% timely 1 = 30-49% 49% - 0% 0 = 4+ areas over 0 = 0-29% timely or 3 late 0 = 0-29% or 3 (13 not met)

Indicators 9 & 10 Disproportionality What is it? Disproportionality is over-representation of race/ethnicity that is due to using inappropriate policies, practices, or procedures to identify students as having a disability. This can be in either the overall special education program or by specific disability areas. Where do you get this data? December 1 Child Count compared to fall enrollment by ethnicity. (FYI…If there is over identification due to policy practice or procedures, the director received an and the superintendent received and letter. Prior to notices, the district is given an opportunity to explain the data and send in additional eligibility reports that are reviewed by SDE staff. If after review of these documents, the over representation is due to policy, practice or procedures, the notices were sent.)

3 = 0 over 2 = 1-2 areas over 1 = 3 areas over 0 = 4+ areas over Indicators 9 & 10 Disproportionality

Indicator 11 Initial Eligibility What is it? The eligibility must be determined prior to 60 days from receipt for permission to test. Where do you get this data? This is collected at the end of the school year. We are collecting this information right now for next years determination levels. (FYI…If you are not at 100% on this indicator, you will receive a notice of noncompliance from the Compliance Tracking Tool in November that will have to be corrected and verified prior to May 1 of that school year.)

Indicator 11 Initial Eligibility 3 = % timely or 1 late 2 = 50-74% timely or 2 late 1 = 30-49% timely 0 = 0-29% timely or 3 late

Indicator 12 Early Childhood Transition What is it? Transition from Infant Toddler(Part C) to school districts (Part B), so that the IEP is in place by the student's 3rd birthday. Where do you get this data? This is collected at the end of the school year through September 30 th of the coming school year. (FYI…If you are not at 100% on this indicator, you will receive a notice of noncompliance from the Compliance Tracking Tool in November that will have to be corrected and verified prior to May 1 of that school year.)

Indicator 12 Early Childhood Transition 3 = % timely or 1 late 2 = 50-74% timely or 2 late 1 = 30-49% timely 0 = 0-29% timely or 3 late

Indicator 13 Secondary Transition What is it? There are 8 questions on the Secondary Transition Checklist that must be "Yes" or "NA" to receive credit for Indicator 13. 1) Parent meeting invitation includes student on list of those invited. 2) If appropriate, a representative from an outside agency was invited to the IEP Team meeting. 3) IEP includes measurable Post School Goals covering education or training, employment and, as needed independent living. 4) Post School Goals are developed based on information gathered through age appropriate assessment in transition related areas, including a functional vocational evaluation if needed. 5) Post School Goals are reviewed and updated annually as needed. 6) IEP includes a Course of Study (embedded or attached) to reach their Post School Goals. 7) IEP includes Transition Services (activities, related services) to reach their identified Post School Goals. 8) IEP annual goals assist the student to reach their identified Post School Goals. Where do you get this data? Secondary Transition, Indicator 13, data is collected the year the agency/district is in the first year of the monitoring cycle called Self Assessment Monitoring (SAM). (FYI…If you are not at 100% on this indicator, you will receive a notice of noncompliance from the Compliance Tracking Tool in May that will have to be corrected and verified prior to May 1 of the following year.)

Indicator 13 Secondary Transition 3 = % or 1 (13 not met) 2 = 50-74% or 2 (13 not met) 1 = 30-49% 0 = 0-29% or 3 (13 not met)

Indicator 15 Correction of Noncompliance What is it? All noncompliance found in the monitoring process must be corrected and verified prior to the due date. The noncompliance is found in the SAM year, Child Count Verification, dispute resolution findings, Indicator 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 data as well as all corrective action plans from onsite visits. Where do you get this data? The data is recorded in the Compliance Tracking Tool, the Dispute Resolution Database and follow up on individual district written corrective action plans. (FYI…All correction of noncompliance must be corrected and verified by the due date.)

Indicator 15 Correction of Noncompliance 3 = On time 0 = Late

Indicator 20 Timely and Accurate Data What is it? The SDE takes into consideration only Child Count, Exiting, and Discipline Data. Where do you get this data? There are time stamps for each one of these data collection systems.

Indicator 20 Timely and Accurate Data

Idaho’s Determinations

Idaho Determination Level

Meets Requirements Thank You!