Transcript Document

Office of the Independent
Monitor
2003 - 2004 Monitoring Activities
Monitoring
 Data Systems
 Performance Outcomes
2
Overview of Data
Systems Monitoring
3
Data Systems
 Concerns of accuracy of the data based on
discrepancies found between data sources:
SIS, SESAC, and Welligent
 Discrepancies highlighted by AIR study, suspension
data and disproportionality study.
 We conducted a survey of the implementation of the
Welligent system to determine accuracy of data
(2/17/04 – 2/27/04).
4
Data Systems
 Welligent Survey Findings
Results from 460 Schools identified as fully training
60% schools were fully implementing
21% schools partially implementing
19% schools not implementing
 Top Reasons for Not Implementing Welligent
Technical Problems
Lack of Training
Access to the System
Changes in Administration
 District continues to address these areas and improvement has
been noted.
5
Overview of Outcomes
Monitoring
6
Process for Developing New
Outcomes
 Review of data
 Expert consultation/reports
 Scientific studies
 Negotiations with parties
7
Outcome #1: Participation on Statewide Assessments
 Goal is to increase the number of students with disabilities
participating in the state-wide assessments.
 2003-2004 data expected September 2004.
School Year
Outcome
Benchmark
Status
2003-04
75%
65%
No Data
65%
91.8%
2002-03
8
Outcome #2: Performance on
Statewide Assessments
 The parties agreed to the following outcome:
By June 30, 2006, the Percentage of Students with disabilities in
grades 2-11 participating in the California Standards Test (CST)
whose scores place them in the combined rankings of Basic,
Proficient and Advanced will increase to at least 32.4% in
English Language Arts and at least 32.8% in Mathematics.
 2003-2004 data will be available September 2004.
Status (2002-2003):
# of Special
Education
Students
# of SPED Students
Ranked as Basic or
Above
Outcome
%
English
Language Arts
50,605
11,318
32.4%
22.4%
Mathematics
50,605
10,060
32.8%
19.9%
Category
9
Outcome #3: Special Education
Graduation Rate
 The goal is to increase the number of students with
disabilities that receive a high school diploma.
 The rate of students with disabilities who graduated
declined from 2001-2002 to 2002-2003.
 Data will be available September 2004.
School Year
Outcome
Benchmark
Status
2003-2004
55%
45%
No Data
2002-2003
33.4%
2001-2002
40.0%
10
Outcome #4: Special Education
Completion Rate
 This outcome measures special education students that
complete high school with a diploma or certificate and tracks
drop-out.
 Data will be available September 2004.
School Year
Outcome
Benchmark
Status
2003-04
Increase
49.7%
No Data
2002-03
46.7%
2001-02
72.6%
11
Outcome #5a: Long-Term Suspensions
(over 6 days)
 Goal is to reduce the percent of long-term suspensions to no
more than 2% of the total number of special education students
suspended.
School Year
Outcome
Status
2003-04*
2%
8.5%
2002-03
9.9%
2001-02
9.1%
* Data from 7/1/03 to 6/15/04
12
Outcome #5b: Overall Suspensions and Suspensions in
Comparison to Non-Disabled Students

The parties agreed to the following outcome:
By June 30, 2006, the District will reduce the risk of suspension for the
population of students with disabilities by 30% from the rate of 14.7% in the
2002-03 school year, to a rate lower than 10.3%.
By June 30, 2006, the District will reduce disproportionality in the District-wide
rate of suspension of students with disabilities in comparison to their nondisabled peers to a relative risk ratio of no more than 1.75X discrepant, such
that the population of students with disabilities is nor more than 1.75 times more
likely to be suspended than the population of their non-disabled peers.
School Year
Outcome 1
Reduction in % of all
SPED Students
Suspended
2003-04*
2002-03
* Data from 7/1/03 to 6/15/04
10.3%
Status 1
Outcome 2: Reduction in Ratio
of Sped Students Suspended vs.
General Education Students
Suspended
Status 2
12.7%
1.75 Special Education Suspension
to 1.00 General Education
Suspension
2.24 to 1
14.7%
2.30 to 1
13
Outcome #6: Least Restrictive
Environment
 Students with Learning Disabilities and Speech and
Language Impairments placed at least 60% of their
school day in general education.
School Year
Outcome
Benchmark
Status*
2003-04
74%
63%
63.2%
2002-03
66.1%
* CASEMIS Data
14
Outcome #7: Least Restrictive
Environment
 Students with all other disabilities spending at least
60% of their school day in General Education.
School Year
Outcome
Benchmark
Status*
2003-04
52%
20.8%
28.8%
2002-03
34.5%
* CASEMIS Data
15
Outcome #8: Placement of Students with
Disabilities at their Home School
 The parties agreed to the following outcome:
8a: The District will ensure that the percentage of
students with disabilities with the eligibilities of
specific learning disabilities (SLD) and speech and
language impaired (SLI) who are in their home
school does not fall below 92.9% by June 30, 2006.
Status:
Total
% in Home School
% Not in Home School
32,215
92.5%
7.5%
16
Home School Placement (continued)
 8b: By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of
students with disabilities with all other eligibilities in kindergarten
and sixth grade to 65% and the percentage of students with
disabilities with all other eligibilities in ninth grade to 60%.
Status:
Total
% in Home
School
% Not in
Home School
Kindergarten
609
51.7%
48.3%
Grade 6
979
54.8%
45.3%
Grade 9
950
45.5%
54.5%
17
Home School Placement (continued)
 8c: By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of
students with disabilities in the elementary grades one through five
in their home school to 62.0%. By June 30, 2006, the District will
increase the percentage of students with disabilities in middle school
grades seven and eight in their home school to 55.2%. By June 30,
2006, the District will increase the percentage of students within high
school grades ten and above in their home school to 36.4%.
Status:
Grades
Total
% in Home School
% Not in Home
School
1-5
5,603
59.0%
41.0%
7-8
1,963
52.6%
47.4%
10-PG
2,540
34.7%
65.3%
18
Outcome #9: Students with Transition
Plans
 Students with disabilities who are 14 and older are
required under the law to have an individual transition
plan that will contribute to their ability to transition into
post-school life.
Status:
School Year
Outcome
Benchmark
Status
2003-04
98%
90%
92.1%
19
Outcome# 10: Timely Completion of
Evaluations
 Federal law requires that all assessments be
completed within 50 days.
Within 50 Days Final
Outcome 90%
Service
Within 65 Days Final
Outcome 95%
Within 80 Days Final
Outcome 98%
Benchmark
%
Benchmark
%
Benchmark
%
PsychoEducational
Evaluation
65%
64.6%
75%
81.1%
98%
89.8%
DIS Services
Evaluation
65%
70.6%
75%
83.0%
98%
90.2%
District Totals
65%
66.2%
75%
81.6%
98%
89.9%
20
Outcome #11: Parent Complaint
Response Time
 Based on current performance District is on course to meet
outcome.
Outcome
Within 5
Days
Outcome
Within 10
Days
Outcome
Within 20
Days
Outcome
Within 30
Days
25%
36%
50%
64.4%
75%
91.1%
90%
97.8%
21
Outcome #12: Informal Dispute
Resolution
 The District agreed to establish a systemic
structure for the informal resolution of IEP
disputes prior to due process.
 The District piloted IDR in four local Districts
(B,C,E and H).
 As of 6/23/04, 140 families utilized the
process.
22
Outcome #13: Delivery of Services
 During the 2003-2004 School Year, the Independent Monitor
and the American Institutes for Research conducted a study of
the delivery of special education services in LAUSD.
 Based on the results of the study, the following two-part
outcome was agreed upon by the parties:
By June 30, 2006, 93% of the services identified on
the IEPs of Students with Disabilities in all disability
categories except specific learning disability will show
evidence of service provision. In addition, by June 30,
2006, 93% of the services identified on the IEPs of
students with specific learning disability will show evidence
of service provision.
23
Outcome #13: Study Findings
IEP-Log Service
Agreement
IEP-Site Visits Service
Agreement
# of Service
Observations
% of Services
with evidence of
Provision*
# of Service
Observations
% of Observed
Services
Provided
4,316
42.7%
340
89%
*Exclusion of SLD population increases log to service agreement to 63.7%.
24
Outcome #13 (continued)
 By June 30, 2006, The District will provide evidence that at least
85% of the services identified on the IEPs of students with
disabilities will have a frequency and duration that meets
compliance with the IEP.
IEP-Log Frequency Agreement
IEP-Log Duration Agreement
# of Service
Observations
% of services with
monthly frequency
at least equal to
IEP
# of service
observations
% of services with
monthly duration at
least equal to IEP
2,200
57.2%
1,876
61.5%
25
Outcome #14: Parent Participation
 During the 2003-2004 School Year, the Independent Monitor and
WestEd conducted a study on levels of parent participation.
 Based on the study results and Welligent data, the parties agreed to the
following outcome:
By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the rate of parent
participation in IEP meetings in the area of attendance to 75%.
By June 30, 2006, 95% of the records of IEP meetings in which
the parent does not attend will provide evidence of recorded
attempts to convince the parent to attend the IEP meeting in
accordance with Section 300.345(d) of the IDEA regulations.
Status:
# in
Welligent
Attended
IEP
%
Met with
Staff
%
No Data
%
59,659
29,612
49.6%
8,746
14.7%
21,301
35.7%
26
Outcome #14: Parent ParticipationWestEd Study Overview
 Telephone survey was conducted to
determine levels of parent participation within
LAUSD.
 A representative sample was drawn based on
District demographics (ie. ethnicity, disability
type, local district, school level).
 627 respondents, from a sample of 1,164.
 Survey was conducted in 8 languages.
27
Study Results
 80% of the respondents reported attending
their child’s last IEP.
 93.5% of parents report feeling like an equal
part of the IEP.
 54% of parents not attending the IEP report
giving the school permission to proceed with
the IEP.
 65.7% of parents report being presented with
different placement options.
28
Outcome #15: Timely Completion of
Future Translations
 The District has not met the 2003-04 benchmark.
 The Office of the Independent Monitor has directed
the District to complete those translations over 60
days by August 4, 2004.
# of IEP
Translation
requested
#
Completed
Outcome
30 days
Completed
30 days
Outcome
45 days
Within 45
days
Outcome
60 days
Within 60
days
13,543
7,947
85%
7.6%
95%
13.3%
98%
17.6%
29
Outcome #16: Qualified Special
Education Teachers
 The goal is to increase the percentage of
qualified SPED teachers and reduce the gap
between qualified SPED and General
Education teachers.
School Year
% Qualified
Gen. Ed
Teachers
% Qualified
SPED
Teachers
Difference
Outcome
2003-2004
85.7%
70.6%
15.1%
3.4%
2002-2003
78.7%
68.3%
10.4
30
Outcome #17: Behavioral
Interventions
 The Office of the Independent Monitor presented the parties with
information regarding the present levels of behavior support
plans district-wide.
 The parties agreed to the following outcomes:
By June 30, 2006, the percentage of students with autism
with a behavior support plan will increase to 40% and the
percentage of students with emotional disturbance with a
behavior support plan will increase to 72%.
Total # of
Students
Outcome
% of Students
with Behavior
Plans
Autism
3,382
40%
20.1%
Emotionally
Disturbed
2,326
72%
41.1%
Eligibility
31
Outcome #18: Disproportionality
 The parties agreed to the following outcome:
By June 30, 2006, 90% of African American
students identified as emotionally disturbed
during an initial or triennial evaluation, will
demonstrate evidence of a comprehensive
evaluation as defined by the Independent
Monitor and consideration for placement in the
least restrictive environment as determined by
the Independent Monitor.
32
Outcome #18: Disproportionality
African American Students Identified as ED
 The OIM conducted a District-wide study to identify factors that
may contribute to disproportionality.
 The OIM consulted with the following experts:
Dr. Gwendyln Cartledge, Ohio State University
Dr. Stanley Trent, University of Virginia
Dr. Dan Reschly, Vanderbilt University
 African Americans are 4.4 times more likely to be identified ED
than all other ethnicities.
 African Americans are 4.9 times more likely to be placed in a
more restrictive placement (non-public schools) than all other
ethnicities.
Current rate of Identification for African Americans:
African American % of
total population
African American SPED %
African American ED %
12.1%
18.0%
36.0%
33
Disproportionality: District-wide
Study Overview
 Review of 270 ED students cumulative files from 32
middle schools and 207 identifying schools.
 Sample consists of 123 African American, 118 Latino,
24 White, and 5 other students. Sample is
representative of the District’s ED population.
 Study reviewed the following areas: Pre-referral
interventions; Co-morbidity or additional eligibilities;
Assessment practices; Justification of ED; Service
Provision; and other considerations for determination.
34
Study Findings
 32% of African American students demonstrated




evidence of an SST vs. 54.2% of White students.
65.9% of African American and 66.9% of Latino
students had evidence of a full psychological
evaluation, compared to 83.3% of White students.
37.4% of all students newly identified as ED,
demonstrated justification of ED with an eligibility
statement.
Approximately 50% of all students had a behavior
support plan upon identification.
Systematic deficits found in the identification process
for all groups.
35
Other Activities
 Selection of DVR parent members.
 Recruitment of Parents’ Council Members
 Annual Hearing
 School Site Visits
 Collection of feedback from Teachers,
Parents, and Administrators
36