SPR&I: Changes, New Measures/Targets, and Lessons Learned from Focused Monitoring Visits David Guardino, SPR&I Coordinator Fall 2009 COSA Conference

Today's Objectives Overview of changes to SPR&I system Review new targets and changed measures from SPP/APR Discuss process of and findings from focused monitoring visits Get feedback on areas still under refinement within SPR&I

Changes to the SPR&I database and process Multiple years of content  Remember to use school year drop down menu  Some B4 CAPs still require follow up from last year PCR (file review)  Made several small revisions to form and data entry process based on what we learned from last year Improved lock in screen questions to show/hide standards Removed/added standards Enhanced guidance and clarified required corrective action Final Determinations  Available as separate report with supporting documents

New Targets and Changed Measures from SPP/APR B1-2  Due to changing calculations and reporting requirements, no thresholds will be applied this year B4 New measure:  >3 students suspended/expelled for greater than 10 days; and  >2.0 risk ratio (sped. vs. gen. ed.)

New Targets and Measures from SPP/APR continued B5  69.5% of children (or more) with IEPs are included in the regular class at least 80% of the day while ensuring a continuum of placement options is offered to students with disabilities, based on individual need.  10.9% of children (or less) with IEPs are included in the regular less than 40% of the day while ensuring a continuum of placement options is offered to students with disabilities, based on individual need.  2.1% of children (or less) with IEPs are served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound and hospital placements; while ensuring a continuum of placement options is offered to students with disabilities, based on individual need.

Findings from Focused Monitoring Visits During Monitoring Priority Areas Purpose District selection Pre-site Activities On-site Activities Outcomes

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

8 Purposes of Focused Monitoring  Determining what factors are contributing to a district's low level of performance in a specific priority area;  Identifying what barriers may be impeding the district’s progress in improving performance or compliance;  Identifying improvement strategies and problem solving with the district.

9 Purpose of Verification  Verification of the effectiveness of the systems needed to implement IDEA  Focus areas:  Procedural Compliance Review (Self Assessment) - past corrections and current reporting  Data Collection – Accurate and Timely submissions  Final Determination status - NA II status

District Selection Based on determination status (NAII) Combined focused monitoring and verification into one visit with focus on TA (reasons districts were NAII) Will continue to focus on determination status and all relevant data when selecting districts (e.g., compliance and performance indicators, legal findings, trend data)

Pre-site Activities  Call Special Education Director  Send official notification to Superintendent and Director of upcoming visit  Send agenda and preparation guide for the visit to Director  ODE and district staff review critical elements of SPR&I and prepare pre-site packet  Review 3 years (05-06, 06-07, 07-08) of PCR reports, corrective action and correction documentation  Review performance report data  Review any legal issues over the last 3 years  Review previous determinations data

On-site Activities  Listen  District staff describe context and unique characteristics of the district and SPED process  Analyze Systems  Analyze the components of the district’s compliance and data systems  Determine whether they are reasonably designed to ensure compliance and improve performance with IDEA requirements  Provide Technical Assistance on performance indicators  Verify PCR data  Review files from current and previous reviews  Discuss findings with district staff  Provide Technical Assistance on compliance issues

13 On-site Activities continued Debrief  ODE summarizes the information the district has provided during the visit and presents it back to the district for clarification  Address any questions from the district, collect any additional data, and note any outstanding documentation or information needed from the district.

Post-visit Follow up ODE staff sent TA report to district that included recommendations on performance indicators and compliance review systems discussed during visit ODE provided resources and documents to support improvement ODE collected any documentation needed to address noncompliance identified during visit

Discussion/Feedback on areas of refinement within SPR&I PCR review  Form  Data entry  Nonsystemic versus systemic noncompliance and corrective actions Improvement planning  Reporting versus planning  Format