1. 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 Unit Jeanne Anderson Tippett Coordinator, Monitoring and Technical Assistance Team John Robertson Data Quality Consultant, Performance Reporting Unit Nick Thelen Data Analyst, Performance Reporting Unit

2. Being Covered Today Why we collect and monitor data Review data sources and their uses Dig deeper into the Part B APR Indicators that result in the greatest number of questions from the field: B-1, B-2, B-5, B-6, B-11, B-12, and Timely Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) Identify the data source and collection period for each of the selected indicators Identify any unique circumstance related to each indicator Identify the monitoring cycle and the required monitoring activities associated with each indicator Provide sources of additional information 2

3. Why Collect and Monitor Data Federal and state reporting requirements Drive decision- making at the state and local level to improve outcomes for each student with an IEP 3

4. Poll Question 1 What is the MDE main application for collecting student data? a)MISchoolData b) Michigan Student Data System (MSDS) c) Michigan Compliance Information System (MI-CIS) 4

5. 5

6. Sources of Data MISchoolData.org – Special Education Inquiries – Data Portraits – Public Reporting Center for Educational Performance & Information (CEPI) – Michigan Student Data System (MSDS) – Educational Entity Master (EEM) – Data Reports Graduation and Dropout Application (GAD) Continuous Improvement and Monitoring System (CIMS) 6

7. Uses of Data Data submitted by locals are used for: (but not limited to) Michigan Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual Performance Report (APR) EDFacts Financial Allocations Public Reporting Determinations Monitoring and Compliance Activities Ad Hoc Reports 7

8. Michigan Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual Performance Report (APR) State Performance Plan (SPP) Six year plan developed by the OSE and approved by US Department of Education (USED) that includes baseline data, measurable and rigorous targets, and improvement activities for various indicators to help the state evaluate its efforts in implementing The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Annual Performance Report (APR) Submitted annually to the USED by the OSE to report on the progress the state has made that year in meeting the targets established in the SPP Determinations Just like local determinations, states receive annual determinations from the USED that document overall progress in meeting the requirement of the IDEA based on information submitted in the APR, as well as additional sources 8

9. EDFacts USED initiative to collect, analyze, report on and promote the use of high-quality K-12 performance data for use in education planning, policymaking, and management and budget decision-making to improve outcomes for students Coordinates data from multiple data sources, providing information on students, school, staff, services and education outcomes at the state, local and school levels for grades K-12 Fall Special Education Count Data are submitted the following February 9

10. Financial Allocations The Special Education Child Count (ages 3-21) is used to calculate the IDEA awards to the ISDs and three state agencies for the Enhancing Opportunities for Students with Disabilities (EOSD) grant The Special Education Child Count (ages 14-21) is used to calculate the IDEA awards to the ISDs for the Transition Coordination (TC) grant 10

11. Public Reporting IDEA requires states publicly report on each local’s performance in meeting specific targets outlined in the SPP MISchoolData.org is used as the tool to publicly report Reminder: Some indicators have a one-year data lag Due to federal and state privacy laws, data are not shown when a local has 10 or fewer students in a subgroup (information is considered personally identifiable) Also available in downloadable Excel spreadsheet format 11

12. Local Determinations States are required to make Determinations annually on the performance of locals per the IDEA States must consider: – Performance on compliance indicators – Whether data submitted by locals is valid, reliable, and timely – Uncorrected noncompliance from other sources – Any audit findings States may also consider: – Performance on results indicators – Other States must use same four categories as the USED uses for state determinations: – Meets Requirements – Needs Assistance – Needs Intervention – Needs Substantial Intervention In Michigan, Local Determinations are issued in the August 15 th CIMS workbook 12

13. Monitoring and Compliance Activities The IDEA requires the use of data when determining the monitoring activities for locals to ensure their compliance with the IDEA and the Michigan Administrative Rules for Special Education (MARSE) Monitoring activities include: – Focused Monitoring – Data Reviews – Results Transmittals Monitoring focuses on: – Improving educational results and functional outcomes for all students with an IEP – Ensuring public agencies meet program requirements under the rules and regulations 13

14. Ad Hoc Reports Miscellaneous data requests come from: Governor’s Office Superintendent’s Office Legislators Parents News Agencies Researchers Districts 14

15. Digging Deeper The Part B APR Indicators that result in the greatest number of questions from the field tend to be: – Indicator 1: Graduation – Indicator 2: Dropout – Indicator 5: Educational Environments – Indicator 6: Preschool Educational Environments* – Indicator 11: Child Find – Indicator 12: Early Childhood Transition – Timely IEPs For each of the above indicators we will discuss: – Description of indicator – Data source for indicator – Unique circumstances related to indicator – Monitoring cycle and activities associated with indicator – Provide sources of additional information for indicator *Indicator 6 data for 2012-2013 SY is being publicly reported for 1 st time in 2014 15