Transcript Bureau of Indian Education Special Education Academy

THE APR AND SPP--LINKING
SPECIAL EDUCATION DATA TO
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR EDUCATION
RESULTS
Building a Brighter Tomorrow through Positive and
Progressive Leadership
2012 BIE Summer Learning Institute
Colorado Convention Center
Denver, Colorado
June 12 & 13, 2012
The APR and SPP—Linking
Special Education Data to
Accountability for Education
Results
Presented by: Gloria J. Yepa and Dr. Eugene Thompson
Division of Performance and Accountability
Bureau of Indian Education
• BIE Annual Performance Report
• Report on BIE’s progress on the BIE State
Performance Plan
• Indicators applicable to the BIE are: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
8, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20
• Submitted 2/1/2012 to Department of Education,
Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
• Based on 2010-2011 data
Indicator 1: Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high
school with a regular diploma (results indicator).
SWD
All
Gap
FFY 2010
55.18%
59.07%
3.89%
FFY 2009
52.44%
57.73%
5.29%
FFY 2008
47.08%
52.45%
5.37%
The BIE met its 2010 target of reducing the gap in the
graduation rate between students with disabilities and all
students by .5% over the previous year.
Indicator 2: Percent of Youth with IEPs dropping out
of high school (results indicator).
FFY
2008
T #s /T
DOs
FFY
2009
T #s/T
Dos
FFY
2010
T #s/T DOs
G or
S
SWD
9.87
%
1,863/184 8.12% 1,810/147 12.62%
1,624/205
No
Gain
All
8.08
12,224/98 9.68% 13,460/13 10.97%
8
03
13,017/142
8
Slipp
age
The BIE did not meet its target that the drop-out rate
of students with disabilities attending BIE operated
high schools will not exceed 9.0%.
Indicator 3: Participation and performance of children with
IEPs on statewide assessments (results indicator):
FFY 2010
Total #
meeting
“n” size
& met
AYP
Percent
Number
of
Schools
Total #
meeting
the “n”
size
173
33
7
21.21%
3A: Percent of schools with a disability subgroup that
meets the State’s minimum “n” size that meet the State’s
AYP targets for the disability subgroup. Of the schools
with sufficient “n” size for calculation, increase the
amount of SWD subgroup achieving AYP by 3% over the
previous year’s percentage (9%).
The BIE met its target of the schools with sufficient “n”
for calculation.
3B: Participation rate for children with IEPs.
R/LA
G-3
G-4
G-5
G- 6
G-7
G-8
HS
Total
T Asst. 561
565
544
562
541
526
343
3642
%
Asst.
98.7
98.6
98.9
98.0
98.5
97.9
96.0
98.25
T Asst. 560
565
542
561
541
522
353
3644
%
Asst.
98.6
98.7
97.7
98.1
97.2
63.0
93.15
Math
98.5
The BIE did meet its target of 96% participation rate for
Reading/LA and not met for Math.
3C: Proficiency rate for children with IEPs against grade level,
modified and alternate academic achievement standards.
R/LA
FFY2008
FFY2009
All
37.55%
SWD
Gap
Math
FFY2008
FFY2009
39.45%
33.26%
30.48%
15.17%
16.52%
15.71%
16.84%
22.38%
22.93%
17.55%
13.64%
The BIE did not meet its target in Reading/LA by
reducing the gap by 20% (gap = 22.93%), results
showed the gap increased by 0.55%; and the BIE
did meet its target in Math by reducing the gap by
20% (gap = 13.64%), results showed the gap
decreased by 4.27 %.
4: Rates of Suspension and expulsion (results indicator):
4A: Percent of schools identified as having a significant discrepancy
in the rates of suspensions and expulsions of children with IEPs for
greater than 10 days in a school year.
# of Schools with Significant
Discrepancy for BIE Average
Elementary Schools
06
High Schools
13
The BIE did not meet its target of no more than 2 of the BIE
High Schools or 5 BIE elementary schools will report
suspensions and expulsion rates greater than two times the
BIE average for that group of schools.
Indicator 5: Percent of children with IEPs aged 6
through 21 served (results indicator):
Inside the regular class 80% or more of the day;
B. Inside the regular class less than 40% of the day; and
C. In separate schools, residential facilities, or
homebound/hospital placements
A.
FFY 2008
FFY 2009
FFY 2010
FFY 2010
Target
% Inside
regular class
≥ 80%
69.48
71.16
74.08
71.87
Meets
Target
% Inside
regular class
˂ 40%
7.41
7.32
6.34
7.28
Meets
Target
% Served in
separate
setting
.81
.98
1.12
.98
Did Not
Meet Target
Indicator 8: 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 (results indicator).
FFY 2010
Total Number of
Parent
Respondents
4,014
Number Reporting
Schools
Facilitated Their
Involvement
1,529
Percentage
Reporting Schools
Facilitated Their
Involvement
38.34%
FFY 2010 Target
38.15%
Meets Target
Indicator 11: Percent of children who were evaluated within
60 days of receiving parental consent for initial evaluation or, if
the State establishes a timeframe within which the evaluation
must be conducted, within that timeframe (compliance
indicator).
Number of children for
whom parental consent
to evaluate was
received.
724
Number of children
whose evaluations were
completed within 60
days.
689
Percent of children with
parental consent to
evaluate, who were
evaluated within 60
days.
95.0%
The BIE did not meet
the required 100%
compliance.
Indicator 13: Percent of youth with IEPs aged 16 and
above with an IEP that includes appropriate
measurable postsecondary goals that are annually
updated and based upon an age appropriate transition
assessment, transition services, including courses of
study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet
those postsecondary goals, and annual IEP goals
related to the student’s transition services needs.
There also must be evidence that the student was
invited to the IEP Team meeting where transition
services are to be discussed and evidence that, if
appropriate, a representative of any participating
agency was invited to the IEP Team meeting with the
prior consent of the parent or student who has reached
the age of majority (compliance indicator).
Files Reviewed
# 100%
Compliance
% Compliance
441
129
29.25%
The BIE did not
meet the required
100% compliance
Indicator 14: Percent of youth who are no longer in
secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they
left school, and were (results indicator):
a. Enrolled in high education within one year of
leaving high school.
b. Enrolled in higher education or competitively
employed within one year of leaving high school.
c. Enrolled in high education or in some other
postsecondary education or training program; or
competitively employed or in some other
employment within one year of leafing high school.
Category
Number
Percent
Enrolled in higher
education
45
27.4
Engaged in competitive
employment
51
31.1
Enrolled in other
postsecondary education
or training
16
9.8
Not in any of the above
three categories
52
31.7
Total Number of
Respondents
164
100
Category
Number of
Respondents
Percent
Number of Responders
164
100
Measurement A: Percent of youth enrolled in
higher education within one year of leaving high
school
45
27.4
met
Measurement B: Measurement A + percent of
youth competitively employed within one year of
leaving high school
96
59.0
met
Measurement C: Measurement B + percent of
youth enrolled in any other type of postsecondary
education/training or employed in any other type
of employment
112
68.2
Not met
Indicator 15: General supervision system identifies and
corrects noncompliance as soon as possible but in no case
later than one year from identification (compliance indicator).
FFY 2010
Identified 2009-2010
Corrected Within One
Year
Number of Findings
375
Findings Corrected
Within One Year
285
Percent Corrected Within
One Year
76.00%
The BIE did not meet
the required 100%
compliance
Indicator 16: Percent of signed written complaints with
reports issued that were resolved within 60-day timeline or
a timeline extended for exceptional circumstances with
respect to a particular complaint, or because the parent (or
individual or organization) and the public agency agree to
extend the time to engage in mediation or other alternative
means of dispute resolution, if available in the State
(compliance indicator).
Indicator 17: Percent of adjudicated due process hearing
requests that were adjudicated within the 45-day timeline or
a timeline that is properly extended by the hearing officer at
the request of either party or in the case of an expedited
hearing, within the required timelines (compliance
indicator).
Indicator 18: Percent of hearing request that went to
resolution sessions that were resolved through resolution
session settlement agreements (compliance indicator).
Indicator 19: Percent of mediations held that resulted in
mediation agreements (results indicator).
Indicator
#
Withdrawn Resolved
within the
required
timelines
16: State
Complaint
Investigation
3
0
0
17: Due
Process
Hearings
4
18: Resolution
Sessions
4
0
1
19: Mediations
3
0
3
Compliance
0%
Results
The BIE did
not meet the
required 100%
Compliance
Did not have
any fully
adjudicated
DPH
100%
The BIE met
target.
Indicator 20: State reported data (618 and State
Performance Plan and Annual Performance
Report) are timely and accurate (compliance
indicator).
This was recalculated but have not been informed.
BIEs Determination of Schools for 2012
Based on specific criteria:
• Meets the requirements and purposes of IDEA
• Needs Assistance in implementing IDEA
requirements
• Needs Intervention in implementing IDEA
requirements
• Needs Substantial Intervention in implementing
IDEA requirements
The BIE Picture
(Based on SY 2010-11 data)
2012 Part B IDEA Determinations
No. of
Percent
Schools
Meets Requirements
121
70%
Needs Assistance
26
15%
NA2, 3, 4, 6
20
12%
Needs Intervention
5
3%
Needs Substantial
1
1%
Intervention
TOTAL
173
2012 Levels of Determination
(based on SY 2010-11 data)
ADD-Navajo
MR
NA
NA2
NA3
NA4
NI
Arizona Navajo Central
06
02
01
Arizona Navajo North
09
02
Arizona Navajo South
07
NM Navajo Central
05
02
01
NM Navajo North
06
02
01
01
NM Navajo South
04
03
01
TOTAL = 59
37
08
06
04
01
02
59%
14%
10%
7%
2%
3%
NSI
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
2%
2012 Levels of Determination
(based on SY 2010-11 data)
ADD--West
MR
NA
NA2
NA6
Arizona North
04
02
01
01
Arizona South
10
01
Billings
01
01
New Mexico North
05
01
New Mexico South
08
Sacramento
02
02
Seattle
07
02
01
TOTAL = 52
37
09
04
01
01
71%
17%
8%
2%
2%
01
NI
01
01
2012 Levels of Determination
(based on SY 2010-11 data)
ADD—East
MR
NA
Cheyenne River
03
01
Crow Creek-Lower Brule
06
Minneapolis
09
02
Oklahoma
02
01
Pine Ridge
05
Rosebud
01
01
01
South & Eastern
12
02
01
Standing Rock
03
01
01
Turtle Mountain
05
02
46
74%
10
16%
TOTAL = 62
NA2
NA3
NA4
NI
02
01
01
03
5%
01
2%
01
01
2%
2%