Proposed Changes to the Title I, Part D, Federal Data Collection As of June 28, 2012

2 Questions & Contact Information for Assistance Question & Answer  There will be an opportunity to ask questions at the end of each section of the presentation.  All phones will be muted throughout the Webinar. To unmute your phone, press *7 on your phone. To re-mute your phone, press *6 on your phone. Assistance  For assistance during the Webinar, please contact NDTAC at

3 Agenda Introductory Remarks  John McLaughlin, Federal Program Manager, Title I, Part D, Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk Program Part 1: Review Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR) for SY 2011–12  Liann Seiter, Research Associate, NDTAC Q&A for SY 2011–12 Part 2: Review Proposed Changes to CSPR for SY 2012–13  Liann Seiter, Research Associate, NDTAC Q&A for SY 2012–13

Introductory Remarks John McLaughlin Federal Program Manager, Title I, Part D

The SY 2011–12 Title I, Part D, Collection

6 Summary of Changes for SY 2011–12  Refers to school year ending June 2012  Reporting in winter 2013  Much of the CSPR remains the same  Minor changes made (removed or condensed items)  Total average length of stay (item removed)  Multipurpose facility count (item removed)  Number of programs with academic offerings (table removed)  Students obtaining postsecondary outcomes (items condensed)  Students enrolling in vocational training (items condensed)

and : Programs and Facilities State Program/Facility TypePrograms/Facilities Average length of stay (in days) Neglected programs Juvenile detention Juvenile corrections Adult corrections/At-risk Other Total NO LONGER REQUIRED (1) Total average length of stay cell removed (2) Information on multipurpose facilities removed

and : Programs and Facilities Reporting Data State Program/Facility Type# Reporting Data Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult corrections/At-Risk Other Total (Auto calculated)

and : Students Served # of Students Served Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs Total Unduplicated Students Served Long-Term Students Served

and : Students Served by Race and Ethnicity and Sex Race/Ethnicity Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Black or African American Hispanic or Latino Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander White Two or more races Total (Auto calc) Sex Male Female Total (Auto calc)

and : Students Served by Age Age Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs 3 through Total (Auto calc)

and : Program/Facility Academic Offerings # Programs That Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Facilities Juvenile Corrections Facilities Adult Corrections Facilities/ At Risk Facilities Other Programs Awarded high school course credit(s) Awarded high school diploma(s) Awarded GED(s)

and : Academic Outcomes While in Facility # of Students Who Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs 1. Earned high school course credits 2. Enrolled in a GED program

and : Academic Outcomes While in Facility or 30 Days After Exit # of Students Who Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs Enrolled in their local district school Earned a GED Obtained a high school diploma Accepted into post-secondary Education Accepted and/or enrolled in postsecondary education Consolidate items related to postsecondary education into a single item

and : Vocational Outcomes # of Students Who Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs Enrolled in job training courses/programs Obtained employment (1) Remove tables (S1) and (S2), with item on “enrolled in elective job training” (2) Consolidate the job training items into a single item in tables and (elective and external distinctions are no longer made)

and : Academic Performance in Reading/Mathematics Performance Data (Based on most recent pre/post-test data) Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs 1. Long-term students who tested below grade level upon entry 2. Long-term students who have complete pre- and post-test results (data) Performance Data (Based on most recent pre/post-test data) Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs 3. Negative grade level change from the pre- to post-test exams 4. No change in grade level from the pre- to post-test exams 5. Improvement of up to 1/2 grade level from the pre- to post-test exams 6. Improvement from 1/2 up to one full grade level from the pre- to post-test exams 7. Improvement of more than one full grade level from the pre- to post-test exams Of the students reported in row 2 above, indicate the number who showed:

17 Questions Related to SY 2011–12

Proposed Changes to the SY 2012–13 Collection for Title I, Part D

19 Summary of Proposed Changes for SY 2012–13  Refers to school year July 2012–June 2013  Reporting in winter 2014  Changes primarily expand information on student need and clarify transition information  IDEA and LEP status of students (new to Title I, Part D)  Items on transition services (revised since 60-day comment period)  Academic and Vocational Outcomes merged into a single CSPR table and collected via EDFacts (individual items unchanged)  Disaggregation of outcome/transition data (same items)  Expansion of transition period to 90 days  Pre-posttest items and requirements altered  Merging of improvement categories  Removal of At-Risk from Subpart 2 tables (revised since 60-day comment period)

and : Students Served # of Students Served Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs Total unduplicated students served Long-term students served # of Students Served Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs Students with disabilities (IDEA) LEP students Student Subgroups (NEW)

and : Transition Services Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs Are facilities in your State able to collect data on student outcomes after exit? (Explain) Number of students receiving transition services that address further schooling and/or employment. Table language was revised after the initial 60-day comment period.

and : Academic and Vocational Outcomes # of Students Who Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ At-Risk Other Programs In facility 90 days after exit In facility 90 days after exit In facility 90 days after exit In facility 90 days after exit In facility 90 days after exit Enrolled in their local district school Earned high school course credits Enrolled in a GED program Earned a GED Obtained a high school diploma Accepted and/or enrolled into post-secondary education Enrolled in job training courses/programs Obtained employment (1)All outcomes merged into one table for EDFacts reporting (2)Disaggregation of “in-facility” outcomes and “transition” (3)Reporting of transition outcomes allowed up to 90 days after exit

and : Academic Performance in Reading/Mathematics Performance Data (based on most recent testing data) Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/Other Programs 1. Long-term students who tested below grade level upon entry 2. Long-term students who have complete pre- and post-test results (data) Of the students reported in row 2 above, indicate the number who showed: Performance Data (based on most recent pre/post-test data) Neglected Programs Juvenile Detention Juvenile Corrections Adult Corrections/ Other Programs 3. Negative grade level change from the pre- to post-test exams 4. No change in grade level from the Pre- to post-test exams 5. Improvement of up to 1/2 grade level from the pre- to post-test exams REMOVE ITEM 6. Improvement from 1/2 up to one full grade level from the pre- to post-test exams COMBINES ITEMS 5 and 6 7. Improvement of more than one full grade level from the pre- to post-test exams At Risk No longer required for At-Risk programs

24 Contact Information NDTAC Data Team  Liann Seiter:  Dory Seidel:  Stephanie Lampron:  State Liaisons: delinquent.org/nd/direct_assistance.asphttp:// delinquent.org/nd/direct_assistance.asp ED  John McLaughlin,  Joel McFarland,

25 Questions related to SY 2012–13