An Overview of the State Performance Plan SPP

1
An Overview of the State Performance Plan (SPP)

• A Summary of State Performance Plan Requirements
  for Part B of IDEA 2004

2
Presidents Commission on ExcellencePrecursor to
IDEA 2004
Reauthorization of IDEA was preceded in 2004 by a
blue ribbon panelthe Presidents Commission on
Excellence in Special Education. The Commission
concluded

• The focus on compliance and bureaucratic
  imperatives in the current system, instead of
  academic achievement and social outcomes, fails
  too many children with disabilities. Too few
  successfully graduate from high school or
  transition to full employment and post-secondary
  opportunities,Parents want an educational system
  that is results oriented and focused on the
  childs needs in school and beyond.
• A New Era Revitalizing Special Education for
  Children and Families

3
IDEA 2004Section 616
With the advent of IDEA 2004, Section 616
stipulates that states

• Must develop a State Performance Plan (SPP).
• Focus on improving educational results and
  functional outcomese.g., results.
• Are still required to meeting compliance
  requirements, particularly those most closely
  related to results.

Key Point ?While Section 616 of IDEA 2004 focuses
on results, it continues to emphasize the
importance of maintaining compliance as wellboth
results and compliance must be addressed in the
SPP
4
State Performance Plan (SPP)Facts about the SPP
Facts about the State Performance Plan (SPP)

• Each state must submit an SPP to the Secretary of
  Education by December 2, 2005.
• The SPP must set rigorous and measurable
  targets to address monitoring indicators.
• The SPP must be developed with broad stakeholder
  input and public dissemination.
• States are to annually report to the Secretary
  and the public on the performance of each Local
  Education Agency (LEA).

5
State Performance PlanPerformance Indicators
OSEP has identified 20 performance indicators for
Part B in the following monitoring priorities

• Free and Appropriate Public Education in the
  Least Restrictive Environment (i.e., FAPE in the
  LRE)
• Disproportionality
• General Supervision Part B
• Child Find
• Effective Transition
• Effective General Supervision

6
State Performance Plan (SPP)Priorities and
Indicators
OSEPs Performance Indicators include

• Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high
  school with a regular diploma compared to percent
  of all youth in the state graduating with a
  regular diploma.
• Percentage of youth with IEPs dropping out of
  school compared to the percentage of all youth in
  the state dropping out of school.
• Participation and performance of children with
  disabilities in statewide assessments.
• Rates of suspension and expulsion. NEW

Key Point ?Indicators marked as New require
data the SEA is not currently required to
collect. In these cases, the SEA has until
February, 2007 to provide the data. The December
2004 SPP must describe how the data will be
collected.
7
State Performance Plan (SPP)Priorities and
Indicators
OSEPs Performance Indicators include (cont.)

• Percent of children with IEPs aged 6 through 21
  (a.) removed from regular class less than 21 of
  the day (b.) removed from regular class greater
  than 60 of the day or (c) served in public or
  private separate schools, residential placements,
  or homebound or hospital placements.
• Percent of preschool children with IEPs who
  received special education and related services
  in settings with typically developing peers
  (e.g., early childhood settings, home, and
  part-time early childhood/part-time early
  childhood special education settings).

8
State Performance Plan (SPP)Priorities and
Indicators
OSEPs Performance Indicators include (cont.)

• Percent of preschool children with IEPs who
  demonstrate improved (a) positive
  social-emotional skills (b) acquisition and use
  of knowledge and skills (c) and use of
  appropriate behaviors. NEW
• Percent of parents with a child receiving special
  education services who report that schools
  facilitated parent involvement as a means of
  improving services and results for children with
  disabilities. NEW
• Percent of districts with disproportionate
  representation of racial and ethnic groups in
  special education and related services that is
  the result of inappropriate identification. NEW

9
State Performance Plan (SPP)Priorities and
Indicators
OSEPs Performance Indicators include (cont.)

• Percent of districts with disproportionate
  representation of racial and ethnic groups in
  specific disability categories that is the result
  of inappropriate identification. NEW
• Percent of children with parental consent to
  evaluate, who were evaluated and eligibility
  determined within 60 days (or the state
  established timeline). NEW
• Percent of children referred by Part C prior to
  age 3, who are found eligible for Part B, and who
  have an IEP developed and implemented by their
  third birthdays.
• Percent of youth aged 16 and above with an IEP
  that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP
  goals and transition services that will
  reasonably enable the student to meet the
  post-secondary goals. NEW

10
State Performance Plan (SPP)Priorities and
Indicators
OSEPs Performance Indicators include (cont.)

• Percent of youth who had IEPs, are no longer in
  secondary school and who have been competitively
  employed, enrolled in some type of postsecondary
  school, or both, within one year of leaving high
  school. NEW
• General supervision system (including monitoring,
  complaints, hearings, etc.) identifies and
  corrects noncompliance as soon as possible but in
  no case later than one year from identification.
• Percent of signed written complaints resolved
  within 60-day timeline or a timeline extended for
  exceptional circumstances with respect to a
  particular complaint.

11
State Performance Plan (SPP)Priorities and
Indicators
OSEPs Performance Indicators include (cont.)

• Percent of due process hearing requests fully
  adjudicated within the 45-day timeline or a
  timeline that is properly extended by the hearing
  officer at the request of either party.
• Percent of hearing requests resolved through
  resolution session settlement agreements. NEW
• Percent of mediations resulting in mediation
  agreements.
• State reported data (618 and State Performance
  Plan and Annual Performance Report) are timely
  and accurate.

12
State Performance PlanPerformance Indicators
For performance indicators related to compliance
(i.e., Indicators 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, and 20)

• The target cannot be less than 100.
• A clear description of the difference must be
  included in the APR if the data indicates less
  than 100.
• 100 means that when noncompliance is
  identified, it must be corrected within
  one-yearand that it remains corrected.

13
State Performance PlanBottom Lines for the SPP
Bottom line, or minimum requirements, for the SPP
include

• Improvement activities that are designed to meet
  targets.
• Targets aligned with the indicator that are
  measurable and reflect improvement.
• Baseline data is present, clear, and measurable.
• Data are valid and reliable.
• Required information is included, i.e., the
  states definition of significant discrepancy,
  accounting for untimely evaluations, etc.