1. Dispute Resolution Overview of State Performance Plan Indicators 16 – Citizen Complaints, 17 – Due Process, 18 – Resolution Settlement Agreements, and 19 – Mediation Agreements

2. This power point includes: 1. A description of each indicator; 2. The SPP targets for each year and whether our State met the targets; 3. Any additional pertinent information related to the indicator (if applicable); 4. A list of some of the improvement activities included in the States SPP/APR for the indicator;

3. 5. A description of how the indicator might impact a districts determination level (as described in WAC 392-172A- 07012); and 6. Contact information for questions about the indicator.

4. Citizen Complaints Indicator 16: Percent of signed written complaints with reports issued that were resolved within the 60-day timeline (or a timeline extended for exceptional circumstances or because the parent and the public agency agree to extend the time to engage in mediation or other alternative means of dispute resolution). (20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(B)) Data for this indicator are generated and maintained by OSPIs Special Education department.

5. State Targets – Indicator 16 YearTargetActualMet Target? 2005-06100%98% No 2006-07100%93% No 2007-08100% Yes 2008-09100%77% No 2009-10100%TBD 2010-11100%TBD Note: Since this is a Compliance Indicator, States are federally-required to set the target at 100% for all years.

6. Due Process 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 or in the case of an expedited hearing, within the required timelines). (20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(B)) Data for this indicator are generated and maintained by OSPI (Administrative Resources and Special Education departments).

7. State Targets – Indicator 17 YearTargetActualMet Target? 2005-06100% Yes 2006-07100% Yes 2007-08100%93% No 2008-09100% Yes 2009-10100%TBD 2010-11100%TBD Note: Since this is a Compliance Indicator, States are federally-required to set the target at 100% for all years.

8. Resolution Settlement Agreements Indicator 18: Percent of hearing requests that went to resolution sessions that were resolved through resolution session settlement agreements (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B)) Data for this indicator are generated by Washingtons Office of Administrative Hearings and maintained by OSPIs Special Education department.

9. State Targets – Indicator 18 YearTargetActualMet Target? 2005-06(baseline year)18.5%(baseline year) 2006-0720%19.3% No 2007-0822%41.9% Yes 2008-0925%32.9% Yes 2009-1025%TBD 2010-1125%TBD Note: Since this is a Results Indicator, States are permitted to set their own targets.

10. Mediation Agreements Indicator 19: Percent of mediations held that resulted in mediation agreements. (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B)) Data for this indicator are collected by Sound Options Mediation Group and maintained by OSPIs Special Education department.

11. State Targets – Indicator 19 YearTargetActualMet Target? 2005-0685%87% Yes 2006-0785%82% No 2007-0886%79% No 2008-0987%89% Yes 2009-1088%TBD 2010-1189%TBD Note: Since this is a Results Indicator, States are permitted to set their own targets.

12. SPP/APR Improvement Activities Here are some of the improvement activities included in our SPP/APR to address these four indicators: Model state forms were created/updated, including forms related to due process and resolution agreements; Regional WAC trainings were conducted in the fall of 2007, including an overview of the new requirements related to dispute resolution;

13. Improvement Activities (cont.) Ongoing training related to dispute resolution continues to be provided to school administrators, regional ESDs, parents, advocates, other agencies, etc.; Data tracking systems were created/updated to ensure accurate data collection and reporting; OSPI staff continue to provide ongoing training to Administrative Law Judges (ALJs);

14. Improvement Activities (cont.) The States contracted mediator, Sound Options Mediation Group, provides trainings to regional ESDs, parents, and others; Develop/collect technical assistance resources across all twenty performance indicators and make available to LEAs and the general public on OSPIs website; AND MORE…

15. Impact on Determinations Indicators 17, 18, and 19 do not currently impact a districts determination level. An individual districts compliance with citizen complaint corrective actions (associated with indicator 16) will impact the districts performance on criteria 2 of the determinations process (timely correction of non-compliance). See the next slide for more information…

16. Determination Criteria 2 – Timely Correction of Non-compliance DescriptionDetermination Level The district complied with all corrective actions that were ordered as a result of a citizen complaint in a timely manner. 1 (Meets Requirements) The district complied with all corrective actions that were ordered as a result of a citizen complaint, but did not complete the actions within one year of notification. 3 (Needs Intervention) The district did not comply with all corrective actions that were ordered as a result of a citizen complaint. 4 (Needs Substantial Intervention) Note: There are no determination level 2 criteria for this indicator.

17. Contact Information For questions about indicators 16, 17, 18, and 19, contact Pam McPartland at: Pamela.McPartland@k12.wa.us Pamela.McPartland@k12.wa.us For information about the Office of Administrative Hearings, visit: http://www.oah.wa.gov/ http://www.oah.wa.gov/ For information about mediations, visit the Sound Options Mediation Group website at: http://www.somtg.com/ http://www.somtg.com/