2. Where’s Your Focus What we FOCUS on is what IMPROVES 2

3. 3

4. 4

5. 5

6. 6

7. 7

8. 8

9. 9

10. The State Team The State Team includes – The State Lead Performance Accountability Implementation Team Member Fiscal Accountability Implementation Team Member Data Accountability Implementation Team Member Program Accountability Implementation Team Member Customer Service Implementation Team Member Associate Division Director 10

11. Engagement Decision Tree Results Determination Matrix Percentage Any factors that may contribute to elevated risk TA accessedState capacity to improve results Additional data neededFinal IT recommendation re: level of monitoring and TA Compliance Determination Matrix Percentage Any factors that may contribute to elevated risk TA accessedState capacity to identify and correct Additional data neededFinal IT recommendation re: level of monitoring and TA Special focus: State-level Dispute Resolution System Organizational Assessment Score Any factors that may contribute to elevated risk TA accessedState capacity to implement a compliant system Additional data neededFinal IT recommendation re: level of monitoring and TA Fiscal Organizational Assessment Score Any factors that may contribute to elevated risk TA accessedState capacity to implement a compliant system Additional data neededFinal IT recommendation re: level of monitoring and TA SSIP Challenges or barriers to implementation TA accessedState capacity to implement the SSIP Additional data neededFinal IT recommendation re: level of monitoring and TA 11

12. Decision Tree Examples - Universal Results State ABC Determination Matrix Percentage Any factors that may contribute to elevated risk TA AccessedState Capacity to Improve Results Additional data needed Final IT recommendation re: level of monitoring and TA 81Low scores on NAEP in 8 th grade; no data submitted Contract with Wayne Ball on assessments; engagement with outcomes collaborative; NCSI involvement Stable leadership Work collaboratively with Title programs Engaged in improvement activities Data weren’t submitted because there was a data breach SiMR tied to reading Universal – State score is green; is addressing concerns raised in decision tree and, have infrastructure to continue to carry out the work and sustain 12

13. Decision Tree Examples - Intensive Results State XYZ Determination Matrix Percentage Any factors that may contribute to elevated risk TA AccessedState Capacity to Improve Results Additional data needed Final IT recommendation re: level of monitoring and TA 20Poor NAEP and Statewide assessment scores Not willing to accept TA outside what is provided by the State Poor systems in place Significant leadership turnover High number of LEAs Lack of staff Poor funding Acceptable inclusion rates on some assessments Intensive – going to have be creative about what we deliver and how we deliver 13

14. Decision Tree Examples - Intensive Results State LMNOP Determination Matrix Percentage Any factors that may contribute to elevated risk TA AccessedState Capacity to Improve Results Additional data needed Final IT recommendation re: level of monitoring and TA 58Poor NAEP and Statewide participation rates working with NCSI and IDC – on data quality Small staff CSSO left SiMR isn’t aligned to elevated risk factor Know that participation is down because of lack access to the general curriculum Intensive – not addressing the critical issue of participation, but more importantly State director has asked for intervention since the CSSO is new and our presence will keep this working in the forefront 14

15. Levels of Engagement Universal Provided to all states Targeted Issues are limited to a few areas Intensive Systemic issues 15

16. Types of Engagement Monitoring and Technical Assistance VirtualOnsite Document Review, Desk Audit, FAQs, Templates, Self-Assessments Content and length determined by needs and questions to be answered 16

17. For more information, contact: Your OSEP State Lead - http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/monitor/state-contact-list.html 17

18. Q&A