U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA General Supervision

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Concepts of General Supervision Accountability for Implementation & Improved Results

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA The BIG 8 of General Supervision (and Continuous Improvement) 1.What are the minimum components for General Supervision ? 2.How do the components form a state system ? 3.What are the annual processes operating within the system ?

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Difference between Concepts & a Model Each state develops Its Own Model of General Supervision based on what’s required and desired

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA State Performance Plan Policies, Procedures, and Effective Implementation Data on Processes and Results Targeted Technical Assistance & Professional Development Effective Dispute Resolution Integrated Monitoring Activities Improvement, Correction, Incentives & Sanctions Components of General Supervision Ask Yourself How Each Piece Operate s and Fits Into the Whole Fiscal Management

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Requirements: State Performance Plan (SPP)  34 CFR §§ and Annual performance reports (APRs)  34 CFR § Performance goals and indicators  34 CFR § SPP  34 CFR § (c) and (d) Monitoring and enforcement  34 CFR § Targets and reporting State Performance Plan

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA State Performance Plan  Stakeholders should be actively involved in all aspects of the SPP.  The development and implementation of the SPP leads to improved results.  Reporting is critical to ensuring accountability to the public.  The SPP is the blueprint for systems change. State Performance Plan

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Requirements: Policies, Procedures & Effective Implementation  20 U.S.C. § 1232d(b)(1) Program administered in accordance with rules  20 U.S.C. § 1232e(b)(1) local educational agency (LEA) administers program in accordance with rules  34 CFR § Compliance with statutes  34 CFR § State policies and procedures (state plan)  34 CFR § Methods of ensuring services  34 CFR §§ LEA policies and procedures Policies, Procedures & Effective Implementation

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Policies, Procedures & Effective Implementation  Aligned with IDEA  Implemented by local programs  Methods to detect noncompliance and ensure correction of noncompliance  Program improvement through improvement planning and incentives  Current interagency agreements and memoranda of understanding (MOU) when required to ensure IDEA implementation  Mechanisms to determine effectiveness of agreements and MOU Policies, Procedures & Effective Implementation

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Requirements: Effective Dispute Resolution  34 CFR § Procedural safeguards  34 CFR §§ Complaint procedures  34 CFR § Procedural safeguards  34 CFR § Procedural safeguards notice Effective Dispute Resolution

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Effective Dispute Resolutions  Are timely  Track issues  Inform onsite and offsite monitoring activities  Periodically evaluate effectiveness of resolutions  Determine that parents and families and students understand their rights, especially in cases where there are few or no complaints, hearings, or other resolutions Effective Dispute Resolution

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Requirements: Data on Processes & Results  20 U.S.C. § 1232d(b)(4) Evaluate effectiveness  20 U.S.C. § 1232e(b) LEAs report to the state educational agency (SEA), board, Secretary  34 CFR § (b) Data collection  34 CFR § Targets and reporting  34 CFR § Annual report of children served Data on Processes & Results

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Data on Processes & Results  Collection and verification 618 Dispute resolution Previous monitoring reports other  Examination and analyses Areas of state concern Clusters of related indicators  Reporting APR (state) LEA Performance compare to state targets  Status determination  Improvement Data are used to plan and revise activities Data on Processes & Results

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Requirements: Integrated Monitoring Activities  20 U.S.C. §1232d(b)(3)(A) Proper methods of monitoring  34 CFR § Monitoring least restrictive environment (LRE)  34 CFR § SEA responsibility for general supervision  34 CFR § State monitoring Integrated Monitoring Activities

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Integrated Monitoring Activities  Stakeholders involved  Focus on specific hypotheses for area  Teams include family members  Investigation related to noncompliance and program improvement  Multiple methods and data sources to monitor every program, every year  Activities include continuous examination of performance for compliance and results  Written reports specify evidence of correction and of improvement  Internal and external technical assistance and professional development support improvement and correction Integrated Monitoring Activities

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Requirements: Targeted TA and Professional Development  20 U.S.C. §1232d(b)(3)(B), (C), (D) Provide TA, promising practices and disseminate information  20 U.S.C. §1232e(b)(8) LEA has effective dissemination to teachers and administrators  34 CFR § TA on LRE  34 CFR § Personnel qualifications Targeted T/A & Prof Dev

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Targeted Technical Assistance & Professional Development  Directly connected to the SPP and improvement activities  Provided to correct noncompliance and improve results  Principles of adult learning  Measure effectiveness of implementation  Incorporate various agencies in development and dissemination  Distribute promising practices and evidence based practices to local programs Targeted T/A & Prof Dev

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Requirements: Improvement, Correction, Incentives, & Sanctions  20 U.S.C. §1232d(b)(3(A) and (E) Proper methods – correction and enforcement  34 CFR §80.12 Special conditions  34 CFR §80.43 Enforcement  34 CFR § LEA compliance  34 CFR § State monitoring and enforcement  34 CFR §§ Determinations and enforcement actions  34 CFR § Enforcement Improvement & Correction, Incentives & Sanctions

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Improvement, Correction, Incentives & Sanctions  Explicit state authority to enforce regulations, policies, and procedures  TA to ensure correction of noncompliance  Improvement planning to meet targets  Corrective action planning and follow- up tracking of correction and improvement  Range of formalized strategies and/or sanctions for enforcement with written timelines  Determines the status of local programs annually Improvement & Correction, Incentives & Sanctions

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Requirements: Fiscal Management  34 CFR §§ and Distribution of funds  34 CFR § Treatment of charter schools  34 CFR § Private schools proportionate share  34 CFR §§ and Maintenance of effort  34 CFR §§ and Excess cost/supplement not supplant  34 CFR § Early intervening services 15%  OMB Circular A-133 – Single Audits Fiscal Management

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Fiscal Management  States distribute funds in accordance with federal requirements.  Funds are used in accordance with federal and state requirements.  States provide oversight on the use of funds.  Funds are aligned to problem areas in the SPP/APR Fiscal Management

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA Describing a ‘System’ of General Supervision Problems in Description (beginning list) Equating general supervision as only onsite monitoring Viewing administration as a collection of separate and isolated functions Defining accountability as an event rather than a ‘state’ and process Others?

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA State Performance Plan Policies, Procedures, and Effective Implementation Data on Processes and Results Targeted T/A & Professional Development Effective Dispute Resolution Integrated Monitoring Activities Improvement, Correction, Incentives & Sanctions Fiscal Manage- ment What is ‘System ?’

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA It’s about Better Results

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA State Performance Plan Policies, Procedures, and Effective Implementation Data on Processes and Results Targeted Technical Assistance & Professional Development Effective Dispute Resolution Integrated Monitoring Activities Improvement, Correction, Incentives & Sanctions Fiscal Management General Supervision Big 8

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Introduction Federal and State Responsibilities for Monitoring, Technical Assistance and Enforcement Key requirements set forth at: – Section 616 of IDEA 2004 – 34 CFR §§ –

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Monitoring and Enforcement Primary focus of federal and state monitoring activities must be on: –Improving education results and functional outcomes –Ensuring that public agencies meet program requirements, particularly those most closely related to improving educational results

28 State Monitoring and Enforcement (TB 1-1) 34 CFR (a) requires that a state: –Monitor the implementation of Part B –Enforce, and –Report annually on performance

29 Performance Measurement (TB 1-1) Each state must use quantifiable indicators and such qualitative indicators as are needed to adequately measure performance in the priority areas, and the indicators established by the Secretary for the state performance plans

30 State must Monitor LEAs The state must monitor its LEAs, using quantifiable indicators in each of the following priority areas, and using such qualitative indicators as are needed to adequately measure performance in those areas:

31 Monitoring Priority Areas  Provision of FAPE in the LRE  State exercise of general supervision, including child find, effective monitoring, the use of resolution meetings, mediation, and a system of transition services as defined in 34 CFR and in 20 U.S.C. 1437(a)(9) and

32 Monitoring Priority Areas  Disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services, to the extent the representation is the result of inappropriate identification

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Federal and State Responsibilities –Monitoring – (State Performance Plan (SPP)/Annual Performance Report (APR) –Reporting –Determinations –Monitoring - On-going oversight

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Monitoring Priority Areas  Provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE)  State exercise of general supervision, including child find, effective monitoring, the use of resolution meetings, mediation, and a system of transition services as defined in § and in 20 U.S.C. 1437(a)(9) and

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Analyzing LEA Performance Each state must use the targets in its SPP to analyze the performance of each LEA

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs When must states begin reporting on LEA Performance? Spring 2007 – State must report to public on status of LEAs against SPP targets

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Secretary’s Determinations Secretary annually reviews the APR and, based on the information provided in the report, information obtained through monitoring visits, and any other public information available, the Secretary determines if the state:

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Secretary’s Determinations Meets requirements Needs assistance Needs intervention Needs substantial intervention

39 Additional Requirements (TB 5/6-7) –That the SEA must not make further payments under Part B of the act to specified state agencies or LEAs that caused or were involved in the Secretary’s determination

40 When LEA has Not Met Requirements If an SEA determines that an LEA is not meeting the requirements of Part B of the act, including the targets in the state's performance plan, the SEA must prohibit the LEA from reducing the LEA’s maintenance of effort under 34 CFR for any fiscal year

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs State Enforcement Needs assistance  Advises LEA of available sources of TA, including Provision of advice by experts Professional development, instructional strategies and methods Designating distinguished educators Collaboration with Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs), national technical assistance (TA) centers, and private TA providers

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs State Enforcement Needs intervention  Corrective action or improvement plan  Withholds any further payments under Part B

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Compliance Agreements? Does the SEA have option to use a compliance agreement for an LEA which cannot correct in one year? –No. Compliance agreements apply only to states –If LEA cannot timely correct, state is out of compliance with it general supervisory responsibility –SEA can request to enter in compliance agreement with Secretary

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs State Enforcement Needs substantial intervention  Withholds any further payments under Part B

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Other Enforcement Mechanisms A state is not restricted from utilizing any other authority available to it to monitor and enforce the requirements of Part B

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs OSEP On-going Oversight Will focus on performance and compliance Will primarily identify states for focused monitoring by looking at their performance against the targets Other data sources such as rank orders and audits will also be used

Building the Legacy U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Is CIFMS going away? Verification -General supervision -Data -Financial systems Focused Monitoring Related to Specific Indicators SPP/APR Nope!

IV. State Monitoring and Enforcement (§ ) Section (a) has been amended to require States to: (1) monitor implementation of Part B of the Act; (2) make determinations annually about the performance of each LEA using categories in Section (b)(1); (3) enforce Part B of the Act in accordance with the statutory enforcement mechanisms that are appropriate for States to apply to LEAs; and (4) annually report on the performance of the State and of each LEA under Part B of the Act. These amendments also clarify, in § (e), that a State, in exercising its monitoring responsibilities under § (d), must ensure that when it identifies noncompliance with the requirements of Part B of the Act by its LEAs, the noncompliance will be corrected as soon as possible, and in no case, later than one year after the State’s identification of the noncompliance. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1416(a))

Implementation considerations: States have some discretion in developing a process for making annual determinations on the performance of LEAs. However, States’ annual determination processes must include consideration of: o an LEA’s performance on all State Performance Plan (SPP) compliance indicators; o whether an LEA submitted valid and reliable data for each indicator; o LEA-specific audit findings; and o any uncorrected noncompliance from any source. States are also advised to consider performance on results indicators, such as an LEA’s graduation and dropout rates, or the participation rate of students with disabilities in State assessments when making annual determinations. States must use enforcement mechanisms to enforce this part consistent with § If States are unable to correct noncompliance within one year of identification, States may enter into a compliance agreement with the Department under section 457 of GEPA, if the Department deems a Compliance Agreement is appropriate.

For More Information