O S E P Office of Special Education Programs United States Department of Education Aligning the State Performance Plan, Improvement Strategies, and Professional.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Virginia - March 2014 (Content adapted from 2014 MSRRC Forum) Preparing for the State Systemic Improvement Plan.
Advertisements

Site-Based Decision Making Campus Planning. Restructuring A process through which a district or school alters the pattern of its structures (vision, rules,
What do the Federal Regulations Require?. The federal regulations have been revised to include a number of new systems/reports that are intended to drive.
August 2006 OSEP Project Director's Conference 1 Preparing Teachers to Teach All Children: The Impact of the Work of the Center for Improving Teacher Quality.
Teaching and Learning Special Education Secondary Programs Transition Services.
Researchers as Partners with State Part C and Preschool Special Education Agencies in Collecting Data on Child Outcomes Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI International.
Chapter 56 Workgroup Orientation Session The Road to Chapter 60 June 30, 2007.
Final Determinations. Secretary’s Determinations Secretary annually reviews the APR and, based on the information provided in the report, information.
IDEA Partnership State – State Meeting March , 2006 Connecting to Data and strategies Connecting to Data and strategies Using Quantitative Data Using.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education Overview of Results Driven Accountability Assuring Compliance and Improving Results August.
Refresher: Background on Federal and State Requirements.
Presented at: Annual Conference of the American Evaluation Association Anaheim, CA - November 3, 2011 Performance Management in Action: A National System.
Presented at Annual Conference of the American Evaluation Association Anaheim, CA, November 2011 Lessons Learned about How to Support Outcomes Measurement.
Presented at Division for Early Childhood National Harbor, Maryland November, Child Outcomes: What We Are Learning from National, State, and Local.
Special Education Accountability Reviews Let’s put the pieces together March 25, 2015.
1 Program Performance and Evaluation: Policymaker Expectations 2009 International Education Programs Service Technical Assistance Workshop Eleanor Briscoe.
Results-Driven Accountability OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS 1.
1 Early Childhood Special Education Connecticut State Department of Education Early Childhood Special Education Maria Synodi.
Verification Visit by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) September 27-29, 2010.
2013 Office of Special Education (OSE) Fall Forum Tuesday, November 4, 2013  10:15 am – 11:45 am  Ballroom E Jayme Kraus Data Analyst, Performance Reporting.
State Performance Plan: A Two-Way Street Ruth Ryder Larry Wexler Division of Monitoring and State Improvement Planning.
Systems Performance Review & Improvement (SPR&I) Training Oregon Department of Education Fall 2007.
1 Early Childhood and Accountability OSEP’s Project Director’s Meeting August 2006.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction State Performance Plan (SPP) & Annual Performance Report.
Accountability for Results State Performance Plan improving educational results and functional outcomes for all children with disabilities…
Using State Data to Inform Parent Center Work. Region 2 Parent Technical Assistance Center (PTAC) Conference Charleston, SC June 25, 2015 Presenter: Terry.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA General Supervision.
Welcome to the Regional SPR&I trainings Be sure to sign in Be sure to sign in You should have one school age OR EI/ECSE packet of handouts You.
2011 OSEP Leadership Mega Conference Collaboration to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career 2.0 Participation of the State Advisory Panel and State Interagency.
Significant Changes to the Monitoring Process  Self-assessment by school districts.  Greater involvement of parents and other stakeholders.  Improved.
SHAME FEAR I AM NOT SEEN ACCESS I AM SEEN SYSTEMS CHANGE I AM A SPECIAL CITIZEN ACCOUNTABILITY and BUILD CAPACITY I BELONG AND MEANINGFUL LIFE EFFECTIVENESS.
STATE MONITORING VISIT Montgomery County Schools Week of April 18, 2016.
National Consortium On Deaf-Blindness Families Technical Assistance Information Services and Dissemination Personnel Training State Projects.
RESULTS-DRIVEN ACCOUNTABILITY IN SPECIAL EDUCATION Ann Moore, State Director Office of Special Education (OSE) January 2013.
SPR&I: Changes, New Measures/Targets, and Lessons Learned from Focused Monitoring Visits David Guardino, SPR&I Coordinator Fall 2009 COSA Conference.
JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction Welcome Stakeholders December 5, 2007 Improving Special Education Services (ISES) December 5,
1 General Supervision. 2 General Supervision (and Continuous Improvement) 1.What are the minimum Components for General Supervision ? 2.How do the Components.
An Introduction to the State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report.
State Performance Plan (SPP) Annual Performance Report (APR) Dana Corriveau Bureau of Special Education Connecticut State Department of Education ConnCASEOctober.
SSIP Process A Suggested Pathway, Timeline and Gantt Chart WRRC Regional Forum Eugene October 31 and November 1, 2013.
ANNUAL AND FINAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS 524B FORM REPORTING PERIOD BUDGET EXPENDITURES INDIRECT COST RATE PERFORMANCE MEASURES.
National High School Center Summer Institute What’s the Post-School Outcomes Buzz? Jane Falls Coordinator, National Post-School Outcomes Center Washington,
Arizona Early Intervention Program (AzEIP) Team-Based Early Intervention Services Overview for Administrators ADMINISTRATIVE.
Continuous Improvement and Focused Monitoring System US Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Overview of the OSEP Continuous Improvement.
IDEA 2004 Part B Changes to the Indicator Measurement Table.
New Indicator 14 Frequently Asked Questions Frequently Asked Questions 3 rd Annual Secondary Transition State Planning Institute Charlotte, NC May12-14,
2009 OSEP Project Directors Meeting Martha Diefendorf, Kristin Reedy & Pat Mueller.
Texas State Performance Plan Data, Performance, Results TCASE Leadership Academy Fall 2008.
Indicator #14 SPP/APR Region VIII Employment Conference October 17, 2006 Dr. Greg Cooch BHSU.
Ohio Improvement Process (OIP) Facilitating District-wide Improvement in Instructional Practices and Student Performance.
OSEP Project Directors’ Conference Managing Your Grants 101 Terry Jackson – OSEP Shedeh Hajghassemali – OSEP July 22, 2008.
National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center Connecting TA for Part B Indicators 1, 2, 13, & 14: Working Together to Support States OSEP Project.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Special Education State Performance Plan and Annual Performance.
OSEP-Funded TA and Data Centers David Guardino, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs General Supervision: Developing an Effective System Implications for States.
State Performance Plan ESC-2 Presentation For Superintendents September 19, 2007.
U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA General Supervision.
March 23, SPECIAL EDUCATION ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEWS.
Part C State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report:
Perkins Overview 9/22/2018.
Guam Department of Education
Using Data To Guide Continuous Improvement: Data Analysis
Measuring Outcomes for Programs Serving Young Children with Disabilities Lynne Kahn and Christina Kasprzak ECO/NECTAC at FPG/UNC June 2,
G-CASE Fall Conference November 14, 2013 Savannah, Ga
SPR&I Regional Training
Measuring Outcomes for Programs Serving Young Children with Disabilities Lynne Kahn and Christina Kasprzak ECO/NECTAC at FPG/UNC June 2,
Researchers as Partners with State Part C and Preschool Special Education Agencies in Collecting Data on Child Outcomes Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI International.
Refresher: Background on Federal and State Requirements
Measuring Child and Family Outcomes Conference August 2008
Using Data to Build LEA Capacity to Improve Outcomes
Presentation transcript:

O S E P Office of Special Education Programs United States Department of Education Aligning the State Performance Plan, Improvement Strategies, and Professional Development OSEP 2006 Project Director’s Conference

O S E P Accountability in IDEA 2004 Accountability to the Secretary Accountability to the Public Accountability for Funds Accountability for Results!

O S E P The Focus “The primary focus of Federal and State monitoring activities shall be on improving education results and functional outcomes for all children with disabilities…”

O S E P Blueprint for Improvement  The State Performance Plan (SPP) is the State’s “blueprint” for improvement around priority areas and critical indicators  The Annual Performance Report (APR) promotes accountability by requiring the State to report annually on their performance  States are encouraged to coordinate their technical assistance and professional development resources to support improvement on the critical indicators

O S E P Statutory Requirements: SPP  SPPs in place 1 year after enactment (12/2/05)  Evaluate the States’ efforts to implement the requirements and purposes of this part  Include measurable and rigorous targets for the indicators established under the priority areas

O S E P Statutory Requirements: SPP  Describe how the State will improve implementation  Submitted for approval by the Secretary  Must be reviewed at least once every 6 years and submit any amendments to the Secretary

O S E P Statutory Requirements: APR  State shall collect valid and reliable information as needed to report annually  State shall report annually to the Secretary on the performance of the State on the SPP

O S E P Statutory Requirements  State shall use the targets in the SPP to analyze the performance of each LEA/EIS Program in the State  State shall report annually to the public on the performance of each LEA/EIS Program in the State on the targets in the SPP

O S E P Report Language  State Performance Plans, indicators and targets will be developed with broad stakeholder input and public dissemination

O S E P SPP Content In SPP, States will provide:  Overview of the System or Process  Baseline Data  Discussion of Baseline Data  Measurable and Rigorous Targets and  Improvement Activities/Timelines/Resources

O S E P APR Content In APR, States will provide  Actual performance against the targets  Discussion of improvement activities completed and explanation of progress or slippage  Any revisions to approved targets, improvement activities, timelines or resources – with justifications.

O S E P Monitoring Priority Areas: Part B 20 USC 1416(a)(3)  FAPE in the LRE  Effective General Supervision  Disproportionality

O S E P Reporting  State performance plan must be made available through public means  Statute requires States to report on each indicator for each LEA/EIS Program each year  So that’s every indicator, every LEA/EIS Program, every year

O S E P Challenges for States  Collecting accurate data  Setting measurable and rigorous targets  Identifying and implementing improvement strategies  Reporting annually on the progress of EACH LEA/local provider  Specific indicators, e.g., EC and post secondary outcomes, parent/family involvement

O S E P Benefits for the States  SPP can be used to coordinate efforts at the State level  Since SPP is a Federal requirement, can be used as leverage to garner resources  Public reporting puts the “sunshine” on the performance of all LEAs/EIS programs and can encourage low performers to access needed technical assistance and support

O S E P One State’s Story Let’s hear how one State is making it work! Montana