Special Education
Performance Profiles
and SPP Compliance
Indicator Reviews
Office for Exceptional Children
Intended Outcomes
Participants will understand:
• How the OSEP visit and the SEA
Determination have impacted ODE and
LEAs
• Critical elements of OEC’s SPP
Compliance Indicator Reviews and
actions they must take
Reasons for Changes
• October 2009 – OSEP Verification Visit
and Focused Monitoring
• March 2010 – OSEP Letter of Findings
• June 2010 – SEA Determination
OSEP Report Highlights
Identified critical areas in which ODE
must improve:
Ensure accurate and reliable data
Expand monitoring system
Monitor spending of Part B funds
Ensure LRE
Other Important Findings
OSEP also found ODE noncompliant
with SPP Indicators 5, 11, 12, and 13
Indicator 5 – LRE
Indicator 11 – Child Find
Indicator 12 – Transition from Part C to B
Indicator 13 – Post secondary transition
The Big Picture
Indicators 5, 11, 12 and 13
represent the entire life span of a
student with a disability while
he/she is in school.
SEA Determinations
• Meets Requirements 31 states
• Needs Assistance 27 states
• Needs Intervention (Ohio & DC)
• Needs Substantial Intervention 0 states
ODE’s Corrective Action Plan
ODE’s Corrective Action Plan
(CAP) submitted to OSEP
addresses the issues identified
and is designed to improve
ODE’s federally required system
of general supervision of IDEA.
OEC’s Comprehensive System of Monitoring
for Continuous Improvement
As part of ODE’s CAP:
• All LEAs will be reviewed annually at varying
levels of intensity
• IDEA on-site reviews include fiscal, early
childhood and data verification
• Selection and scheduling of LEAs for on-site
reviews coordinated with PACTS (Federal
Program Reviews)
OEC’s Comprehensive
Monitoring System for Continuous Improvement
Monitoring Methods
Few LEAs
Selective
Reviews
Level of Intensity
More Intensive
Some LEAs
IDEA On-site Reviews
All LEAs
Compliance Indicator Reviews
(SPED Profiles)
Due Process
Less Intensive
OEC’s Comprehensive
Monitoring System for Continuous Improvement
Monitoring Methods
Few LEAs
Selective
Reviews
Level of Intensity
More Intensive
Some LEAs
IDEA On-site Reviews
All LEAs
SPP Compliance Indicator
Reviews (SPED Profiles)
Due Process
Less Intensive
SPP Compliance Indicator Review
Purpose of the SPP Compliance
Indicator Review is to ensure that
LEAs meet SPP targets and are
compliant with IDEA in order to
improve services and results for
students with disabilities.
State Performance Plan (SPP)
• Accountability for 20 Indicators
• Drives the work of OEC
• Progress on indicator targets measured
yearly
• Results on performance reported to
OSEP through Annual Performance
Report or APR
SPP Indicators
Compliance Indicators
Results Indicators
9 & 10: Disproportionality
11: Child find
12: Early childhood transition
13: Secondary transition
15: General supervision
16: Complaint timelines
17: Due process timelines
20: Data submission
1: Graduation
2: Dropout
3: Assessment
4: Discipline
5: School-age LRE
6: Preschool LRE
7: Preschool outcomes
8: Parent involvement
14: Postsecondary outcomes
18: Resolution sessions
19: Mediations
Are young children with
disabilities entering
kindergarten ready to
learn?
Are children with
disabilities achieving at
high levels?
Are youth with disabilities
prepared for life, work and
postsecondary education?
Does the district
implement IDEA to
improve services and
results for children with
disabilities?
• Indicator 6
Preschool Educational Environments
• Indicator 7
Preschool Outcomes
• Indicator 12
Early Childhood Transition from Part C to Part B
• Indicator 3
Statewide Assessment
• Indicator 4
Suspension/Expulsion
• Indicator 5
School-age Educational Environments
• Indicator 1
Graduation
• Indicator 2
Dropout
• Indicator 13
Secondary Transition
• Indicator 14
Postsecondary Outcomes
• Indicator 8
Facilitated Parent Involvement
• Indicator 9
Disproportionality (Across Disability Categories)
• Indicator 10
Disproportionality (Specific Disability Categories)
• Indicator 11
Child Find
• Indicator 15 Timely Correction of Noncompliance Findings
• Indicator 20 Timely and Accurate Data
Review of Data
SEAs must review data at least
annually for the purpose of
identifying noncompliance with
IDEA.
Notification of Noncompliance
• SEAs must notify LEAs of
noncompliance with IDEA in writing
• ODE’s written notification =
the “Summary Report”
(for Compliance Indicator Reviews)
• LEAs must correct noncompliance
within one year of notification
SPP Compliance Indicator Review
• All LEAs receive a
Special Education
Performance
Profile annually
• Profile identifies
LEAs’ performance
on ALL indicators
• Includes longitudinal
data on ALL targets
• LEAs receive a
Summary Report
that outlines
corrective action
activities required
for compliance on
missed indicator
targets
Indicators Requiring Action by LEAs
• Indicator 4 (Discipline Discrepancy)
• Indicators 9 & 10 (Disproportionality)
• Indicator 11 (Initial Evaluations)
• Indicator 12 (Early Childhood Transition)
• Indicator 13 (Secondary Transition Planning)
• Indicator 15 (Timely Correction)
• Indicator 20 (Timely and Accurate data)
Compliance
with
submitting
surveys
• Indicator 8 (Parent Involvement)
• Indicator 14 (Postschool Outcomes)
Special Education Profile
Review of Sample Profile
LEAs with Required Action
Statewide
450
383
400
347
336
350
300
250
200
154
150
100
50
26
21
2
3
Ind 10
Dispro
Ind 11
Ind 12
Ind 13
Child Find EC Transition Secondary
Transition
2
0
Ind 4
Discipline
Ind 8
Parent
Survey
Ind 14
Ind 15
Postschool
Timely
Outcomes Correction
Survey
Ind 20
Data
Reporting
LEAs with Required Action
Region 15
20
18
18
16
14
13
12
10
8
7
6
4
4
2
0
0
Ind 4 Discipline
0
Ind 8 Parent
Survey
Ind 10
Ind 11 Child Find
Disproportionality
0
Ind 12 EC
Transition
0
Ind 13 Secondary Ind 14 Postschool
Transition
Outcomes
0
Ind 15 Timely
Correction
Ind 20 Data
Reporting
Timeline
–
OEC reviews
final 2009-2010
data, discovery of
noncompliance
– LEA
determinations
(based on 20092010 data)
– Special
Education Profiles &
Summary Reports
(findings issued)
Compliance Indicator
Reviews – LEAs develop &
implement action plans,
OEC reviews data to verify
correction
Components of Monitoring
1) Review Data/Student Records
2) Identification of Noncompliance
3) Corrective Actions
4) Verification of Correction (2 prong)
a) Individual Cases of Noncompliance
b) Systemic Noncompliance
5) Verification of Accurate and Timely
Reporting
6) Clearance or Sanctions Applied
Corrective Action Plan
• The Corrective Action Plan (CAP) must
address individual and systemic issues
• Activities must ensure 100% correction
• Plan must be submitted 30 days from
written notification
Verification of Correction 2 Prong Approach
• Prong 1 – LEA must correct each
individual case of noncompliance;
and
• Prong 2 – LEA must show that it is
correctly implementing the specific
regulatory requirements, i.e. it has
achieved 100% compliance, based
on a review of updated data.
Verification of Correction
Required by OSEP
Can OEC verify correction:
• When a CAP is submitted?
NO
• When a CAP is approved?
NO
• When the CAP activities are completed?
No
• When new policies and/or procedures are approved?
No
• When OEC has documentation that individual cases have
been corrected and LEA practice has changed?
YES!!
Verification of Accurate and
Timely Reporting
• In addition to verifying correction by reviewing
updated student records, OEC will also verify
that the information in the records matches
the data reported in EMIS
• Example: Indicator 11 – OEC will compare
the dates reported in EMIS to the dates on
the consent form and initial evaluation team
report
Correction Process
Clearance
LEAs have
demonstrated they have
met the two prongs of
correction within one
year of the finding.
Progressive Sanctions
LEAs have NOT met the
two prongs within one
year:
1. Required PD/TA from
the SST
2. Revision of CAP to
address identified
issues
3. Redirect Part B funds
to areas of need
4. Withhold funds
Data Verification
Ensuring Timely &
Accurate Reporting
Basic Questions
Why do we have to do this?
• Compliance with Federal Law – IDEA
requires reporting
Why EMIS?
• Ohio Revised Code defines EMIS as the
state data system for student records
• Student special ed data can be linked to
Report Card, financial, and additional data
required for federal reporting
So, now what do I have to do?
• Remember some basics: Your check
ledger is not an IRS 1040 form and…
• Your district software IS NOT EMIS
• EMIS deadlines are not negotiable
The EMIS Coordinator
• Keeps abreast of EMIS communications.
• Disseminates any new EMIS information
within the district
• Monitors general issues and other EMIS
reports:
– Dec Child Count
– Student Disab Not Funded
– General Issues
• COMMUNICATEs with special education staff
34
EMIS Coordinator and
Monitoring
• Translate SSIDs to student names
• Extract records from district software
• Identify dates of district submission to
EMIS
The Special Education
Administrator
• Provides SSIDs of monitored records to
EMIS staff
• Pulls records of students with requested
IDs
• Examines records to understand reason
for non-compliance, if it exists
• Ensures requested copies are provided
to ODE
Preventing Data Goofs
• Reports generated by OEC and sent via
“gen issues”
• Data that will be used for Indicators 11,
12 and13
• Meant to HELP districts identify data
errors, and ODE to identify additional
business rules
Most Frequent Data Errors
•
•
•
•
Fat finger errors
Missing non-compliance reasons
Missed reporting timelines
Data in district software, but not
uploaded to EMIS
Compliance Timeline Codes
• Describes reasons why an activity (e.g.
ETR) was not completed according to
the federally mandated timelines
• Some provide reasons to remove a
missed timeline from non-compliance
calculations
39
Reporting Cut-Offs
Why the “prior to June 1” cut-off for
reporting events?
• SPED staff need time to communicate
with EMIS staff
• EMIS staff need time to enter and verify
data
• EMIS & SPED staff may be off during
summer months
40
District Software isn’t EMIS
• District records contain much more than
ODE needs for reporting
• Entering into DASL or ESIS or IEP
Anywhere is only first step
• Not all systems have automatic weekly
uploads
Data Resources
Visit www.education.ohio.gov, search
using the following keywords:
EMIS Manual
EMIS Newsflash
Data Collection Tool for Students with
Disabilities
It’s not just about Compliance
SPP & Continuous Improvement
• Profile promotes continuous
improvement of results for students with
disabilities
• Provides longitudinal data on targets for
all indicators
• SSTs will provide TA/PD to improve
performance of children with disabilities
How does this connect to the
Ohio Improvement Process?
As part of ODE’s State System of
Support (SSOS), SST/OIP facilitators
must focus District Leadership Teams’
attention to the required aspects of their
special education service delivery
system by assisting them in reviewing
their performance on SPP Indicators.
Does the SPP connect to OIP?
• SST/OIP facilitators will assist district
leadership teams in review of
performance on SPP indicators
• All districts can seek technical
assistance on SPP indicators from
SSTs
Using the Profile for
Continuous Improvement
• Review SPP data and identify
“systemic” issues – targets that have
not been met over multiple years
• Put in place plans that will correct
systemic issues
• Monitor progress in correcting systemic
issues
LEAs Missing Performance Targets
Statewide
900
819
811
800
700
600
500
373
400
300
241
252
200
142
119
100
0
Ind 1
Graduation
Ind 2
Dropout
Ind 3a
AYP
Ind 3b
Participation Rate
Ind 3c
Math
Proficiency Rate
Ind 3c
Reading
Proficiency Rate
Ind 5
LRE
LEAs Missing Performance Targets
Region 15
35
29
30
29
24
25
20
15
12
13
10
5
5
2
0
Ind 1 Graduation
Ind 2 Dropout
Ind 3A AYP
Ind 3B Participation Ind 3C Proficiency Ind 3C Proficiency
Math
Reading
Ind 5 LRE
OEC Regional Contact
Region 15
Jana Perry, (614) 752-1187, [email protected]
Questions
Comments
Concerns
Thank you!