Changes to the Part B Indicator measurement Table

1
Changes to the Part B Indicator measurement Table

• Ruth Ryder
• OSEP Leadership Conference
• August 17, 2009

2
Agenda

• Update on Feb 2009 APR/SPP review
• 2010 APR/SPP submission
• Oct 17, 2008 memo on timely correction
• Reminders

3
SPP/APR Balancing Results and Compliance

• The primary focus of Federal and State monitoring
  activities shall be on
• improving education results and functional
  outcomes for all children with disabilities and
• ensuring that States meet the program
  requirements, with emphasis on those most closely
  related to improving results

4
Update on Feb 2009 APR/SPP Review
5
SPP/APR Response Letters and Determinations

• Issued on June 1, 2009
• Letter, with Determination, and Response Table
• Looked at the States APR as a whole
• Valid and reliable data correct year and
  measurement
• Substantial compliance - at or above 95 or
  demonstrated correction of noncompliance
• Considered other information special
  conditions, audit findings, verification
  information

6
IDEA Determinations
7
Determinations Indicators Not in Meets
Requirements

• of States
• Indicator 9 13
• Indicator 10 23
• Indicator 11 29
• Indicator 12 19
• Indicator 13 36
• Indicator 15 48
• Indicator 20 32

8
Part B Indicator 11 Timely Initial Evaluations
9
Part B Indicator 12 Early Childhood Transition
10
Part B Indicator 15 Timely Correction
11
Enforcement Actions

• Enforcement actions required based on June 1,
  2009 determinations
• 17 States for Part B and 19 States for Part C in
  2 consecutive years as needs assistance NA2
• 3 States for Part B and 1 State for Part C in 3
  consecutive years as needs intervention NI3
• No States in needs substantial intervention
  this year

12
Accessing TA

• NA2 States must report in the Feb 1, 2010 APR
• The TA sources from which the State received
  assistance and
• What actions the State took as a result of that
  TA
• Some States that were NA3 are required to report
  on Oct 1, 2009 on how the TA being accessed
  addresses the determination issue

13
2010 SPP/APR Submission
14
Take Aways

• States will need to revise the SPP and APR for
  Feb 2010 for these indicators 1, 2, 3, 5, 7,
  11, 12, 16, and 17
• States are not required to report on indicators
  4B, 6, 13 or 14 in Feb 2010

15
Indicators 1 and 2

• No longer required to report compared to all
  youth
• Use data collected for ESEA reporting in the
  Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR)
• Some States data lag one year for CSPR reporting
• May need to do the same reporting method for
  Indicator 2 as have used in the past
• In 2010-11 will begin using the adjusted cohort
  graduation rate (will be reported in 2012 or 2013
  if lagged)

16
Indicator 3

• For 3B account for all children with IEPs
• For 3C report on children with IEPs enrolled for
  a full academic year
• Include where to find public reports on assessment

17
Indicator 4

• 4A (results) for the FFY 2008 APR due in Feb 2010
• Examine 2007-2008 data using one of the two
  comparisons required under 612(a)(22)
• If significant discrepancies are identified,
  review and if appropriate revise policies,
  procedures and practices related to development
  and implementation of IEPs, the use of PBIS, and
  procedural safeguards
• Report 2007-2008 data in the APR due Feb 2010
• 4B (compliance) for the FFY 2009 SPP due Feb 2011
• Baseline will be the percent of districts with a
  significant discrepancy and bad policies,
  procedures or practices

18
Indicators 5 and 6

• Indicator 5
• Revise indicator and measurement language in the
  SPP and the APR
• Indicator 6
• No reporting for FFY 2008 (Feb 2010) or FFY 2009
  (Feb 2011) SPP/APRs
• OSEP will be using the current (not proposed)
  collection for the 2009-2010 reporting year

19
Indicator 7
20
Indicators 9 and 10

• We will be carefully reviewing States
  definitions of disproportionate representation
• Ensure that the States definition is clear as to
  how the State does its calculation to determine
  the LEAs with disproportionate representation

21
Indicators 11 and 12

• Indicator 11 simplified measurement
• Revise measurement in SPP and APR
• Indicator 12 added (e)
• States can subtract children who were referred
  from Part C less than 90 days before their
  birthday
• Revise measurement in SPP and APR

22
Indicators 13 thru 20

• Not required to report on Indicators 13 and 14
• Collect data using the new measurement in
  2009-2010
• Report correction of Indicator 13 noncompliance
• Submit Attachment 1 for Indicator 15
• Revise indicator language in SPP and APR for
  Indicators 16 and 17
• States may express targets in a range for
  Indicators 18 and 19
• Submit Attachment 2 with Indicator 20

23
Oct 17, 2008 Memo on Reporting on Correction of
Noncompliance
24
Issue 1 Demonstrating Correction

• All noncompliance must be identified and
  corrected
• Account for all instances of noncompliance from
  any component of the States general supervision
  system
• Determine nature of noncompliance (extent,
  location, root causes)
• Require correction as soon as possible
• Verify correction as soon as possible and no
  later than one year from identification

25
Correction

• Correction of noncompliance will vary depending
  on the nature of the noncompliance (extensive,
  longstanding, denial of basic right vs. isolated,
  few instances)
• Two components to correction
• Ensure that local program is correctly
  implementing the specific regulatory requirement
• Correct the noncompliance for each affected child

26
Issue 2 Factoring Correction into Evaluation of
Substantial Compliance

• To be in substantial compliance a State must
  either be
• at or above 95 compliance or
• at or above 75 compliance with correction of
  previously identified noncompliance

27
States with Indicators Below 75 Compliance

• Part B
• Indicator 13 22 of 60 States below 75
• Indicator 11 7 of 60 States below 75
• Indicator 12 7 of 60 States below 75

28
Reporting Correction in the APR

• Each instance of noncompliance identified in
  previous APR must be corrected
• Noncompliance from all sources must be corrected
• Data base, self-assessment, on-site monitoring

29
Reminders
30
State Tasks

• Update your SPP to include needed changes as
  discussed above and any State-determined
  revisions or additions to baseline, targets and
  improvement activities
• Report to the public on the performance of LEAs
  on the targets in your SPP
• Complete determinations for LEAs and take
  enforcement action for any NA2 or NI3 LEAs

31
FFY 2007 Reporting to the Public

• Should have been completed by June 2, 2009 as
  required by 34 CFR 300.602(b)(1)(i)(A)
• Part B must report on Indicators
• 1, 2, 3, 4A, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14
  (not 4B, 6, 7, or 15-20)
• State contacts will be looking for States
  public reports

32
State Determinations of Local Performance

• MUST consider
• Performance on compliance indicators
• Valid, reliable, timely data
• Uncorrected noncompliance from other sources
• Audit findings
• COULD consider
• Performance on outcomes indicators
• Other information

33
State Enforcement Based on Determinations

• If you have local programs in needs assistance
  for the second consecutive year or needs
  intervention for the third consecutive year, you
  will need to take enforcement action
• If you have local programs that are in needs
  substantial intervention you will likely need to
  withhold funds in whole or in part
• For the above you must take one of the
  enforcement actions in 616(e) (34 CFR
  300.600(a)(3))

34
Thank you for yourhard work!

• As you can see by the data, youre making a
  difference