Focused Monitoring SPR & I Training October 2009.

Slides:



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

(Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act) and
Exceptional Children’s Dept Additional Compliance Reminders.
The IEP Individualized Educational Program. The IEP is the process and document that outlines what a free appropriate public education (FAPE) is for an.
Region 3 Monitors April What is a REED? It is a “process” whereby the IEP team reviews existing evaluation data to make evaluation decisions about.
1 Evaluation Reviews and Reevaluations Macomb ISD Special Education Management Services August, 2006.
Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Top ten non compliance findings from the Office for Exceptional Children from their Special Education Onsite Reviews.
INDICATORS 11 AND 13 Bureau of Indian Education Division of Performance and Accountability WebEx October 18, 2011 DESK AUDIT.
From Here to Here Transition from Infant and Toddler Connection Programs to ECSE School Division Programs.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHECKLIST for 1 st year grants By Office of the Governor Criminal Justice Division (CJD) October, 2009.
Early Childhood Transition Forums Sponsored by the Massachusetts Department of Early Education and Care, Department of Elementary and Secondary Education,
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.
Early Childhood Transition Presenters: Kimberly Mitchell Ginger Sheppard Jessica Spataro NOVEMBER 2011.
1 Common IEP Errors and Legal Requirements. 2 Today’s Agenda Parent Survey Results Procedural Compliance Self Assessment Results.
Understanding your child’s IEP.  The Individualized Education Plan (IEP) is intended to help students with disabilities interact with the same content.
CHRISTINA SPECTOR WENDI SCHREITER ERIN ARANGO-ESCALANTE IDEA Part C to Part B Transition.
1 Overview of IDEA/SPP Early Childhood Transition Requirements Developed by NECTAC for the Early Childhood Transition Initiative (Updated February 2010)
The Next Decade: Special Education and Oregon Charter Schools COSA Fall Conference October 2009.
Tennessee Department of Education Compliance Training February 2012 Department of Exceptional Children.
OFFICE OF INDEPENDENT EDUCATION & PARENTAL CHOICE Monitoring and Reporting 2009 CSP Grant OFFICE OF INDEPENDENT EDUCATION & PARENTAL CHOICE Monitoring.
Erin Arango-Escalante & Sandra Parker. EC Indicators At-a-Glance.
Writing Compliant ETRs State Approved Training Module
2014 ALACASE CONFERENCE Preschool Indicators 2014 EI Preschool Conference.
OSEP National Early Childhood Conference December 2007.
Sarah Walters - Part C Coordinator KDHE Tiffany Smith - Part B ECSE Coordinator KSDE 1.
CIMP & DUE PROCESS POINTERS It’ that time again… Anoka-Hennepin participates in the Continuous Improvement Monitoring Process supported by.
Initial Referrals NRMPS Exceptional Children’s Department November 24 th, 2008.
Fall  Please do not start screening children until they have had 2 weeks to adjust to being in Head Start/ Early Head Start  Screenings are to.
Special Education Timelines
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.
Tom Corbett, Governor ▪ Ronald Tomalis, Secretary of Educationwww.education.state.pa. us Compliance Monitoring for Gifted Education COMPLIANCE MONITORING.
REEVALUATION: BEST PRACTICES M-DCPS EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN BEESS 037.
Improvement Planning Mischele McManus Infant/Toddler and Family Services Office of Early Childhood Education and Family Services July 20, 2007
Title III Desk Monitoring Oregon Department of Education September 24,
Child Find (Indicator 11) Colleen Stover / Steve W. Smith 2009 COSA Conference October 2009 Meeting the 60 School-Day Requirement for Initial Evaluations.
1 Transition: Part C to Part B Infant & Toddler Connection of Virginia Spring/Summer 2007.
Noncompliance and Correction (OSEP Memo 09-02) June 2012.
ESEA FOR LEAs Cycle 1 Monitoring Arizona Department of Education Revised October 2015.
12/15/2015LCBE/gcm Department of Exceptional Children Mid Year Update Leslie County Schools.
EC Compliance Kristin Haigler and Kris Earl November 2009.
Early Development Network Conference June 10, 2015 Kearney, NE Amy Bunnell & Cole Johnson, NDE Julie Docter, DHHS.
IUSD Special Education Department October 14, 2015.
©2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. Chapter 19 Planning Transitions to Support Inclusion.
The New IDEA in Special Education
 ask in writing for evaluation; keep a copy of the request  explain child’s problems and why evaluation is needed  share important information with.
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.
PSRC EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN Compliance issues and suggestions that will help with case management.
What’s New for Transition to Special Education Services? Paula E. Goff, Part C Coordinator May 23, 2013.
EARLY CARE AND EDUCATION PROVIDER’S MEETING March 2016.
SPECIAL EDUCATION PROCEDURES TO ADDRESS NON-COMPLIANT FINDINGS RELATED TO CHILD FIND Presenter Jim Kubaiko, Director Special Education.
Special Education School Coordinator Monthly Webinar October 12, 2015.
11/23/2016LCBE/gcm Department of Exceptional Children School Year Information Leslie County Schools.
Navigating the ARD/IEP Process
Review, Revise and Amend from Procedures for State Board Policy 74
Menlo Park City School District Special Education Self-Review (SESR)
Understanding the Section 504 Process
Special Education Division Data Identified Noncompliance (DINC) Overview Presented by the Assessment, Evaluation, and Support Unit.
Understanding the Section 504 Process
Understanding Indicator 6: Early Childhood Special Education Settings for Children Ages Birth-Five Hello and welcome to Understanding Indicator 6: Early.
Virtual Fall Kick-Off Important Information for All Special Education Teachers & Related Service Personnel.
Understanding Indicator 6: Early Childhood Special Education Settings for Children Ages Birth-Five Hello and welcome to Understanding Indicator 6: Early.
Understanding Indicator 6: Early Childhood Special Education Settings for Children Ages Birth-Five Hello and welcome to Understanding Indicator 6: Early.
Entering Correction Activities for 60 Day Timeline, Early Childhood Transition and Discipline Noncompliance Welcome to the presentation on how to enter.
New Special Education Teacher Webinar Series
Presentation transcript:

Focused Monitoring SPR & I Training October 2009

Purpose To verify the compliance and noncompliance found in the PCR review.

How are counties chosen? Rotating schedule Every county is reviewed at least once every six years Systemic non-compliance

How are files chosen? 50% of submitted files in each of the three categories (EI, EI Transition, & ECSE)50% of submitted files in each of the three categories (EI, EI Transition, & ECSE) Balance of different ethnicity, sex and disabilityBalance of different ethnicity, sex and disability Reviewer’s choiceReviewer’s choice

More considerations Looking for minimal complianceLooking for minimal compliance Data is accurate (correct student, correct SSID#, complete SSID#, etc.)Data is accurate (correct student, correct SSID#, complete SSID#, etc.) Review encompasses all kinds of documentationReview encompasses all kinds of documentation

More Considerations If you have made corrections to documentation since you completed your initial PCR review, be sure that your documentation of correction complies with OAR (2), (3) and CFR (a)(4), (a)(6) – amending the IFSP with a written agreement for ECSE.If you have made corrections to documentation since you completed your initial PCR review, be sure that your documentation of correction complies with OAR (2), (3) and CFR (a)(4), (a)(6) – amending the IFSP with a written agreement for ECSE. Communicate only with SSID# (no initials, birthdates, or other identifying information attached to SSID#’s)Communicate only with SSID# (no initials, birthdates, or other identifying information attached to SSID#’s) Phone or face-to-face meeting if files are not 100% verified.Phone or face-to-face meeting if files are not 100% verified.

Kinds of Reviews Desk AuditDesk Audit Site VisitSite Visit Determined on a case by case basisDetermined on a case by case basis

Desk Audits Review of requested copies of documentation that is completed at the ODE officeReview of requested copies of documentation that is completed at the ODE office Provide master list with student name, SSID#, and DOB.Provide master list with student name, SSID#, and DOB.

Desk Audits Include all documents you used in PCR submissions:Include all documents you used in PCR submissions: 1. What was in the child’s file? (The items cited with specific dates in your PCR submissions) 2. Redact documents with other children’s names 3. Other source documents from outside the file (case notes, attendance sheets, EC Data printouts, phone logs, for example)

Desk Audits Suggestion - Flag documents according to what they were used for, such as:Suggestion - Flag documents according to what they were used for, such as: * Prior Written Notice * Current IFSP * Meeting Notice * Consent for Evaluation

Desk Audits Suggestion – Put submitted documentation in the order it appears in the PCR file review form.Suggestion – Put submitted documentation in the order it appears in the PCR file review form.

Site visits Pre-visit communication to review process.Pre-visit communication to review process. A staff member needs to be available at all times to answer questions about the information being reviewed.A staff member needs to be available at all times to answer questions about the information being reviewed. Make sure documents used in PCR submissions are in file or available in some other way.Make sure documents used in PCR submissions are in file or available in some other way. Provide a space that has internet access.Provide a space that has internet access. Meet immediately after review to discuss results.Meet immediately after review to discuss results.

The Top 10 missed standards # 10. (201): A transition conference occurred at least 90 days and, at the discretion of the parties involved, up to 9 months prior to the child’s third birthday.

The Top 10 missed standards # 9. (352): Progress reports to parents indicated: The child’s progress toward each of the annual goals; and,The child’s progress toward each of the annual goals; and, The extent to which that progress is sufficient to enable the child to achieve the goals by the annual IFSP review date.The extent to which that progress is sufficient to enable the child to achieve the goals by the annual IFSP review date. Progress reports are provided to the parents at the time indicated on the IFSP.Progress reports are provided to the parents at the time indicated on the IFSP.

The Top 10 missed standards # 8. (304): Written notice and consent for initial and reevaluation includes a description of each evaluation procedure, test, record, or report.

The Top 10 missed standards # 7. (130): The IFSP contains a description of other services, such as medical, that are not EI, and the funding sources or the steps to secure funding.

The Top 10 missed standards # 6. (104): Written consent for initial and reevaluation included a description of each evaluation procedure to be conducted.

The Top 10 missed standards # 5. (101): Procedural safeguards were made available to parents upon initial referral for evaluation and at least once annually.

The Top 10 missed standards # 4. (106): The need for an evaluation is determined by a team represented by: At least two professionals, at least one of whom is a specialist in evaluating and educating children with disabilities; andAt least two professionals, at least one of whom is a specialist in evaluating and educating children with disabilities; and The parent.The parent.

The Top 10 missed standards # 3. (325): Required IFSP Team members included the regular preschool teacher if the child is or may be participating in a regular preschool; (Mark “NA” if the child is not participating in or anticipated to participate in a regular preschool)

The Top 10 missed standards # 2. (330): Required IFSP team members include an LEA representative the year before the child enters school.

The Top 10 missed standards # 1. (345): If IFSP services are not provided with typical peers, mark “No’ and write: A statement of the amount of time the child will not participate with typical peers andA statement of the amount of time the child will not participate with typical peers and The exact justification written on the IFSP in the comments section below.The exact justification written on the IFSP in the comments section below.

Questions?