Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
Significant Disproportionality
2
Identification of Districts
01 Significant Disproportionality: Why We Measure it and What it Means 02 Identification of Districts CONTENTS 03 Requirements and Responsibilities 04 Significant Disproportionality Resources
3
Significant Disproportionality: Why We Measure it and What it Means
01
4
Why are we addressing significant disproportionality?
“…we need to address racial and ethnic disparities in special education. This important step forward is about ensuring the right services get to the right students in the right way.” — Former US Secretary of Education John B. King Jr. Source: 1.7X 1.9X African American students with disabilities in MA are 1.7 times as likely to receive a disciplinary removal than all other students with disabilities Hispanic students in MA are 1.94 times as likely to be identified as a student with an Intellectual Disability than students in other racial/ethnic groups
5
New Significant Disproportionality Regulations
December 2016 USED released new regulations regarding significant disproportionality requiring: Implementation by July 1, 2018 Use of standard methodology February 2018 USED released a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) which proposed to postpone the compliance date by two years June 2018 USED final rule published in federal register, delays date of compliance March 2019 US district court vacates delay Implementation by 2020 requires 3-5 years olds
6
IDEA and Disproportionality
IDEA requires that states determine disproportionality in respect to: identification of children as children with disabilities and in six specific disability categories placement in particular educational settings of such children disciplinary actions including the incidence, duration, and type, includes both suspensions and expulsions. Source:
7
Identification of Districts
02
8
DESE must calculate disproportionality with respect to…
Identification The identification of children ages 3 through 21, as children with : A disability An intellectual disability A specific learning disability Emotional disturbance Speech or language impairments Other health impairments Autism Placement Placements of children with disabilities ages 6 through 21: Inside a regular class less than 40% of the day Inside separate schools and residential facilities Discipline Discipline incidents, including, for children with disabilities ages 3 through 21: 10. Out-of-school suspensions and expulsions of 10 days or fewer 11. Out-of-school suspensions and expulsions of more than 10 days 12. In-school suspensions of 10 days or fewer 13. In-school suspensions of more than 10 days 14 . Disciplinary removals in total
9
Risk Ratio and Alternate Risk Ratio
comparison between the likelihood that students in a particular racial/ethnic group within an LEA will experience a specific outcome (identification, placement, or discipline), compared to the likelihood that students in all other racial/ethnic groups with an LEA will experience the same outcome Alternate risk ratio Used if comparison group is too small comparison between the likelihood that students in a particular racial/ethnic group within an LEA will experience a specific outcome (identification, placement, or discipline), compared to the likelihood that students in all other racial/ethnic groups across the state will experience the same outcome Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
10
For each of these categories, states must calculate a RISK RATIO.
Example: 80 African American children identified ÷ 400 total African American children in LEA _______________________________________________________________________ 200 non-African American children identified 2,000 total non-African American children in LEA Risk ratio: 2.0 (80/400) / (200/2000) = 0.2 / 0.1 = 2.0 African American students in district A are 2.0 times as likely to be identified as a student with a disability, compared to students in all other racial and ethnic groups in the district. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
11
For districts where the comparison group is small, states must use an alternate risk ratio.
Example: 80 African American children identified ÷ 400 total African American children in LEA _______________________________________________________________________ 150,000 non-African American children identified across the state 900,000 non-African American children across the state Risk ratio: 1.2 (80/400) / (150,000/900,000) = 0.2 / 0.17 = 1.2 African American students in district B are 1.2 times as likely to be identified as a student with a disability, compared to students in all other racial and ethnic groups across the state. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
12
Identification of Disproportionality
States have flexibility to set: Risk ratio threshold Minimum cell size and n size Number of years of historical data Definition of “reasonable progress” Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
13
Significant Disproportionality Requirements and Responsibilities
DESE Identified LEAs With stakeholder input, select method for measuring and identifying significant disproportionality Identify LEAs Ensure identified LEAs: Use 15% of IDEA funds for CCEIS Review policies, practices and procedures (PPPs) Publically report on any changes to PPPs Support LEAs in identifying and addressing factors that may be contributing to significant disproportionality Review of PPPs Publicly report revisions of PPPs Reserve 15% of IDEA funds for CCEIS Ages 3-21 Students with or without disabilities Identify and address factors that may be contributing to significant disproportionality
14
Requirements and Responsibilities
03
15
Timeline SY15-16 SY16-17 SY17-18 SY18-19 SY19-20 SY20-21
Discipline Data Year 1 Placement and Identification Data Year 1 Discipline Data Year 2 Placement and Identification Data Year 2 Discipline Data Year 3 Placement and Identification Data Year 3 DESE identifies LEAs with significant disproportionality and supports identified districts in planning for CCEIS Disproportionate LEAs reserve 15% of Part B Funds for CCEIS in FY21 Fund Code 240
16
Significant Disproportionality Calculations and Data
Summer 2019 (SY19-20) Calculate risk ratio for all 14 categories Threshold of 4.0 in each category Minimum cell size of 6, minimum N size of 20 Use 3 years of historical data Summer 2020 (SY20-21) Gradually lower thresholds in each category Cell size, minimum N size and use of 3 years of historical data remain the same
17
Planned Webinars
18
Webinars, Identification and Supports
Planned Webinars May 24, 2019 Significant Disproportionality Calculations June 12, 2019 Significant Disproportionality Fiscal Responsibilities Significant Disproportionality Identification and Supports Summer 2019 Notify LEAs Fall 2019 Convening of identified LEAs SY Working group/PLC FY21 grants Target Comprehensive Coordinated Early Intervening Services using 15% of Fund Code 240
19
Timelines and Identification
MA DESE plans to notify and provide data to all LEAs These are current MA DESE plans/timelines, but possible changes if we receive different guidance from OSEP and USED
20
Significant Disproportionality Resources
04
21
Significant Disproportionality Resources
IDEA Data Center (IDC): Equity Requirements requirements/files/resources/59088ede150ba0dd678b4573/ f150ba01b1a8b456b/idc-equity- comparison/2017/05/09/idc-equity-comparison.pdf IDEA Significant Disproportionality: Essential Questions and Answers CIFER Center for IDEA Fiscal Reporting (CIFER): Comprehensive Coordinate Early Intervening Services IDC Success Gaps Toolkit
22
Equity Requirements in IDEA
23
IDEA Significant Disproportionality: Essential Questions and Answers
24
IDC Success Gaps Toolkit
25
What are you left wondering?
Questions What are you left wondering? What questions do you have about Significant Disproportionality?
26
THANK YOU specialeducation@doe.mass.edu www.doe.mass.edu
75 Pleasant Street, Malden, MA 02148
Similar presentations
