MDE Shift to Results-Driven (or
Based) Accountability
(RDA or RBA) Listening Tour
Erin Levin
Program Monitoring Supervisor
Marikay Litzau
Compliance & Assistance Director
(and usually Loraine Jensen and Robyn Widley
from Special Education)
“Leading for educational
excellence and equity. Every
day for every one.”
RBA listening tour?
Purpose
To the extent possible, how can MDE revamp its
special education and compliance systems to best
support district RBA efforts while satisfying
existing compliance requirements?
Options
Learning about other states’ efforts can short
circuit Minnesota’s search, but we still need
district input.
Result?
No guarantees MDE will be able to implement
everyone’s favorite changes.
2
education.state.mn.us
MNCIMP Program Eval Reboot
Recommendations May 2015
• Districts need a single plan tied to RBA measurable
results
– Accountability (State and Federal)
– Compliance improvements and results
• Districts want resources from MDE (financial and
logistical) to ensure accountability, but not making
accountability punitive
• Districts want MDE to coordinate with them
education.state.mn.us
3
Three Main Themes
1.
DATA FOCUS
– Combine and integrate data.
– Make data meaningful.
– Clear expectations and flexibility.
2.
DISTRICT – MDE RELATIONS
–
–
–
–
–
3.
Focus on high-priority initiatives first.
Recognize districts may not be uniform in performance.
Training to ensure decision-makers utilize data effectively.
MDE provide trend and comparative analysis data.
MDE “facilitator” and “coaching” role rather than “enforcer.”
PLANS WORK TOGETHER
–
–
–
–
–
Unity of effort.
Integrate general and special education.
Remove overlap and redundancy.
Target fewer goals.
Individualized goals may be individualized to each district
based on district needs.
education.state.mn.us
4
On the Horizon?
• Federal monitoring of states now includes
results-based accountability
– Compliance remains and results are added
– Minnesota meets requirements
• MN joined 15 state collaborative; lots of ideas
• Shift as well for districts monitored by MDE?
– Likely
– MDE significantly decreased paperwork review
requirements this year
– Clearing way for better look at student results
education.state.mn.us
5
Record review reduction
Year
Part B LEAs
Part B record
review (files)
Part B review
length (pages)
Part B total pages
Part B citations to
review
Part B total citations
to review
15-16
163
1,612
20
32,240
35
56,420
16-17
164
1,693
11
18,623
19
32,167
Reduction
n/a
n/a
-9
-13,617
-16
-24,253
% Reduction
n/a
n/a
-45%
-42%
-46%
-43%
Part C LEAs
Part C record
review (files)
Year
Part C review
length (pages)
Part C total pages
Part C citations to
review
Part C total citations
to review
15-16
66
277
13
3,601
21
5,817
16-17
60
250
9
2,250
13
3,250
Reduction
n/a
n/a
-4
-1,351
-8
-2,567
% Reduction
n/a
n/a
-31%
-38%
-38%
-44%
Year
Combined B
& C LEAs
Combined B & C
record review
(files)
Combined B & C
review length
(pages)
Combined B &
C total pages
Combined B & C
citations to review
Combined B &
C total citations to
review
15-16
163
1,889
33
35,841
56
62,237
16-17
164
1,943
20
20,873
32
35,417
Reduction
n/a
n/a
-13
-14,968
-24
-26,820
% Reduction
n/a
n/a
-39%
-42%
-43%
-43%
education.state.mn.us
6
Door #1
education.state.mn.us
7
Modify current cyclical system
• Keep 6 year compliance cycle and assigned
monitors
• Use review findings to initiate TA & support from
MDE
– Compliance
– Special Education
– Others?? Title? Fiscal?
• Develop more and better training based on what
surfaces?
education.state.mn.us
8
Six Year Schedule
15/16
16/17
17/18
18/19
19/20
20/21
Group A
MDE Review
Self-correction
Free
Free
Self Review
Self-correction
Group B
Self-correction
MDE Review
Self-correction
Free
Free
Self Review
Group C
Self Review
Self-correction
MDE Review
Self-correction
Free
Free
Group D
Free
Self Review
Self-correction
MDE Review
Self-correction
Free
Group E
Free
Free
Self Review
Self-correction
MDE Review
Self-correction
Group F
Self-correction
Free
Free
Self Review
Self-correction
MDE Review
education.state.mn.us
9
NEW Six Year Schedule
15/16
16/17
17/18
18/19
19/20
20/21
Group A
MDE Review
Self-correction
Free
Free
Self Review
Self-correction
Group B
Self-correction
MDE Review
Self-correction
Free
Free
Self Review
Group C
Self-correction
MDE Review
REVIEW
RESULTS;
APPLY RISK
ANALYSIS
Self-correction
Free
APPLY TA
Free
APPLY TA
Group D
Self Review
SELF
ANALYSIS;
CREATE RBA
PLAN
ADDRESSING
ROOT CAUSES
Free
Self Review
Self-correction
MDE Review
Self-correction
Free
Group E
Free
Free
Self Review
Self-correction
MDE Review
Self-correction
Group F
Self-correction
Free
Free
Self Review
Self-correction
MDE Review
education.state.mn.us
10
Results-Based Accountability
Considerations
Most districts
already tracking
student
progress
Keep assigned
lead monitors
and monitoring
cycle
Apply risk
analysis to
results and
target technical
assistance
Let districts
lead on
technical
assistance
decisions
education.state.mn.us
11
Door #2
education.state.mn.us
12
Annual compliance review PLUS
• Minimally, the compliance review necessary for
federal compliance indicator reporting
– C: timely receipt of services, timely eligibility
determinations, transition
– B: Suspension/expulsion rates, child find timelines, C
to B transition timelines, transition
• Plus? Potentially an additional compliance area
– Could reflect widespread areas of confusion
– Could be based on federal focus
– Direct training efforts (MDE’s and districts’)
• Risk analysis to target monitoring resources
education.state.mn.us
13
Annual compliance review PLUS
MDE conducts risk
analysis of all
districts every year
Annual minimum
record review plus
potential additional
compliance area
Risk analysis
findings drive level
of monitoring and
TA
education.state.mn.us
14
Possible Risk Categories
High risk-add
site visit?
Medium risk-add
online interviews?
Low risk-Record reviews
education.state.mn.us
15
Risk analysis—mountain style
education.state.mn.us
16
Value Allocation
Academic Achievement 15%
Academic Growth 50%
Post-Secondary Workforce
Readiness 35%
17
Academic Achievement 15%
Participation in & Performance on
State Assessments (75%)
Preschool Skills (25%)
18
Academic Growth 50%
Median Growth Percentile (20%)
Rise Up (60%)
Keep Up (20%)
19
Post-Secondary Workforce Readiness 35%
Graduation Rate (20%)
Dropout Rate (40%)
Post-School outcomes (40%)
20
Post-school Outcomes
• Attempted: % of the sample the AU attempted to reach with
expectation of 100%
• Participated: % participated in the phone survey in the
sample (we don’t know what to expect yet; to be determined)
• Outcome: %Enrolled in higher education, or in some other
postsecondary education or training program; or
competitively employed or in some other employment
21
Technical Assistance?
Monitoring will
vary based on
risk assessment
Level of technical
assistance based
on monitoring
results
education.state.mn.us
Will include
other divisions at
MDE
22
Door #3
education.state.mn.us
23
Hybrid—Maine System
Splits compliance and RBA.
• Compliance moving up to 3 year cycle
• Self-assessment of 20% of files for indicators
(plus more non-indicator items)
• All districts have a one-day site visit—it’s a file
review visit of 10% of files
• Transition indicator special focus
– Pre-train staff at all high schools
– Self-review files for benchmarks
– Re-review files in spring for indicators
education.state.mn.us
24
Maine System
• Annual RBA being phased in; starting with ten
districts now and scaling up in future
• Three items measured for RBA
– Proficiency in math
– Proficiency in reading
– Dropout rate
• Stakeholder group of five sped directors plus a
few DOE staff meet monthly
• Group will set benchmarks for three tiers and
interventions for each tier
education.state.mn.us
25
Maine System Takeaways
Compliance track
•Maine has more limited resources and far smaller
population; use Excel/thumb drives instead of our MNCIMP
•Three year compliance cycle reflects our status quo and is
okay with OSEP
•Could choose different compliance items
RBA track
• Far less robust than Colorado’s
• Could use different factors
• Scaling up
education.state.mn.us
26
Technical Assistance?
Monitoring will
vary based on
risk assessment
Level of technical
assistance based
on monitoring
results
education.state.mn.us
Will include
other divisions at
MDE
27
Door #4
education.state.mn.us
28
Status quo
• Minnesota meets federal requirements
• Comprehensive monitoring reports
– Quantitative
– Qualitative
• Wait for federal requirements? Guidance?
education.state.mn.us
29
Help! Need your input.
education.state.mn.us
30