We Lead in an Age of Effectiveness History of Change in Special Education 1990 to 2010 NOW 1970 to 1990 EFFECTIVENESS Results 1960’s Before 1950 ACCESS SYSTEMS ACCOUNTABILITY and BUILD CHANGE CAPACITY Outcomes SHAME FEAR I AM I AM SEEN I AM A SPECIAL CITIZEN I BELONG AND MEANINGFUL LIFE I AM A CONTRIBUTING MEMBER OF SOCIETY NOT SEEN (Mark Wolak Ed.D, President, Board of School Superintendents, History of Change in Special Education) RESULTS DRIVEN ACCOUNTABILITY IN SPECIAL EDUCATION Ann Moore, State Director Office of Special Education (OSE) April 2013 What Is IDEA? • The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) • Federal law that guarantees a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) to each child with a disability • Governs how states and public agencies provide early intervention, special education, and related services • Approximately 7 million infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities across the nation are eligible under IDEA. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 3 Focus on Procedural Compliance From the very beginning in 1975 with the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (also known as Public Law 94-142), the Federal Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has required states to focus our resources on procedural compliance through rigorous monitoring efforts and extensive reporting procedures. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 4 IDEA 2004 When the IDEA was reauthorized in 2004, each state was required to have in place a performance plan to evaluate the state's implementation of Part B and to describe how the state will improve such implementation. •Based upon these regulations, OSEP established 20 indicators to guide State Education Agencies (SEAs) in their implementation of the IDEA and how SEAs report progress and performance. •The Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) is submitted to OSEP annually and is required to be posted on the state's Web site. •This reporting process also allows OSEP to monitor and supervise state implementation in specific areas as well as report concrete data back to Congress. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 5 IDEA 2004 • Although the OSEP indicators include both compliance and results indicators, state determinations have been based only on the compliance indicators. • Thus, the system for general supervision and accountability under IDEA continued to place a heavy emphasis on monitoring procedural compliance with regulations without consideration of how those requirements impact student learning outcomes. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 6 Primary Goal of IDEA and Accountability • Under the IDEA 2004 requirements, the primary goal for providing services to individuals with disabilities is to prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living. • Thus, improving educational results and functional outcomes for students and their families should be the main focus of the accountability system. • However, the continued over emphasis on regulatory procedural compliance without consideration of results has created a bureaucratic process for states to implement. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 7 The National Association of State Directors of Special Education • The National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE) has consistently urged OSEP officials to also consider results and outcomes rather than continuing the heavy emphasis on the compliance indicators alone. • Furthermore, the NASDSE Board of Directors has frequently expressed concerns with OSEP leaders concerning the stringent emphasis on procedural compliance requirements established through OSEP directives and guidance documents, including Memorandum 09-02. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 8 U.S. Department of Education The U.S. Department of Education recognized that the educational outcomes of children and youth with disabilities have not improved as much as expected even with intensive Federal regulatory oversight and significant funding provided to address closing achievement gaps through programs such as No Child Left Behind and IDEA. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 9 U.S. Department of Education and OSEP • In spring of 2011, OSEP began making plans to include a review of selected results indicators as part of the Verification Visits to States. • In fall 2011 our Verification Visit with OSEP included a day to focus on results with stakeholders. • These first attempts to focus on results and outcomes went through several changes as OSEP visited a number of states with scheduled Verification Visits. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 10 Historic Changes Announced in 2012 On March 2, 2012, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced historic changes in Federal policy: • To help close the achievement gap for students with disabilities, • To move away from a one-size-fits-all, compliancefocused approach, and • To craft a more balanced system that looks at how well students are being educated in addition to continued efforts to protect their rights. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 11 U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan "For too long we've been a compliance-driven bureaucracy when it comes to educating students with disabilities." "We have to expect the very best from our students—and tell the truth about student performance—so that we can give all students the supports and services they need. The best way to do that is by focusing on results." RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 12 Other National and State Initiatives • The recent OSEP initiative is aligned with other current changes being implemented at the State and national level, including the ESEA Flexibility Waivers. • The academic rigor and expectations for all students has been increased with the adoption of the Common Core State Standards. • Currently, our State accountability system is under intensive review with stakeholders and is being revised to focus on improving results for all students and implementing accountability measures for states, local districts, and schools. • Mississippi is designing a new educator evaluation system that will include accountability measures for student achievement and growth for all school instructional personnel and administrative leaders. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 13 Results-Driven Accountability (RDA) A New Model to Strengthen Accountability for Students with Disabilities • Moving away from a Regulatory Emphasis on Procedural Compliance to a Results Driven Accountability (RDA) Model • Focusing on Improving Educational Results and Functional Outcomes for Children and Youth with Disabilities RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 14 A More Balanced Approach for Results and Compliance RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 15 Redesigning the IDEA Accountability System • During the past year, OSEP has been working closely with stakeholder groups to redesign its accountability system to shift the balance from a system that has focused primarily on compliance to one that puts more emphasis on results and outcomes. • The new Federal directives from OSEP will guide states in the direction of focusing their efforts and resources through a Results-Driven Accountability (RDA) model to improve educational results and functional outcomes for students with disabilities and their families. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 16 OSEP’s Vision for RDA • In order to fulfill the IDEA’s requirements, a more balanced approach to determining program effectiveness in special education is necessary. • The Office of Special Education Programs’ (OSEP) vision for Results Driven Accountability (RDA) is that all components of accountability will be aligned in a manner that best supports states in improving results for infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities, and their families. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 17 OSEP’s Rationale for Change and Background Points • Children with disabilities are part of, not separate from, the general education population. Thus, special education accountability should strengthen and compliment other ED reform initiatives, including ESEA flexibility. • An emphasis on compliance over results in special education fails to acknowledge those states where children with disabilities are achieving and being prepared for a range of college and career options appropriate to their individual needs and preferences. • The accountability system under the IDEA should provide meaningful information to the public regarding the effectiveness of states and local educational agencies in educating children with disabilities. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 18 Core Principles of RDA 1. A system that is developed in partnership with our stakeholders 2. A system that is transparent and understandable to states and the general public, especially individuals with disabilities and their families 3. A system that drives improved outcomes for all children and youth with disabilities regardless of their age, disability, race/ethnicity, language, gender, socioeconomic status, or location RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 19 Core Principles of RDA 4. A system that ensures the protection of the individual rights of each child or youth with a disability and their families, regardless of his/her age, disability, race/ethnicity, language, gender, socioeconomic status, or location 5. A system that provides differentiated incentives, supports, and interventions based on each state’s unique strengths, progress, challenges, and needs RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 20 Core Principles of RDA 6. A system that encourages states to direct their resources to where they can have the greatest positive impact on outcomes – and the protection of individual rights for all children and youth with disabilities – and minimizes state burden and duplication of effort 7. A system that is responsive to the needs and expectations of the ultimate consumers (i.e., children and youth with disabilities and their families) as they identify them RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 21 NEW RDA MODEL A more balanced approach for determining program effectiveness in special education will be implemented in 2013. • An annual review of all indicator data for both compliance and results from the State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual Performance Report (APR) will be required. • The state as well as local districts will be held accountable jointly to improve results and demonstrate growth over time. This new focus on joint responsibility for accountability will require states and local districts to establish collaborative models that will address improving educational results and student learning outcomes. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 22 State Accountability and Annual Determinations The designation “Meets Requirements” should acknowledge a state’s effectiveness in improving outcomes for children and youth with disabilities relative to other states and to the nation as well as ensuring that states meet the IDEA program requirements. • Mississippi is one of the few states that achieved a “Meets Requirements” determination for four consecutive years based on the compliance indicators in the SPP/APR. • OSEP is constructing a new matrix for making annual determinations that will address student achievement and growth as well as other student outcome measures such as graduation rates. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 23 Moving Forward in 2013 with RDA • Our Annual Performance Report was submitted to OSEP on February 15, 2013, and State Determinations will be announced in late June or early July 2013. • Each local school district will now receive an annual determination based on the district’s overall performance results on a set of priority indicators and other relevant data rather than only compliance indicators beginning in fall of 2013. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 24 Office of Special Education Primary Functions • The Office of Special Education assures that programs and services for students with disabilities meet State and Federal requirements. • This involves both compliance and technical assistance functions. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 25 Compliance Functions Compliance functions include: • • • • • • • • continuous monitoring through data reports, administering the due process system, providing mediation services, conducting complaint investigations, conducting fiscal audits, approving policies and procedures, conducting focused and comprehensive reviews, and approving nonpublic special education programs. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 26 Technical Assistance Technical assistance functions involve: • providing information and guidance on regulations and policies, • providing information and guidance on promising practices in educating students with disabilities, • administering the comprehensive system of personnel development for special education, including Statewide and regional trainings, and • managing multiple grant programs to school districts, state agencies, and private schools for special education service delivery. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 27 New Vision for the Office of Special Education Improving educational results and functional outcomes for EVERY child and youth with disabilities In the new RDA model, all components of accountability will be aligned in a manner that best supports the local education agencies (LEAs) in improving educational results and functional outcomes for Every student with a disability. Bartlett, John C., Attitudes for Excellence, Principal Leadership, Sept. 2012. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 28 New Mission of Service The primary function of the Office of Special Education (OSE) will be refocused to provide a more service-oriented organization that seeks to improve the educational results and functional outcomes for EVERY child and youth with disabilities. We will strive to nurture a dedicated staff through professional development opportunities, field experience, and individual accountability. We will coordinate services, including training, technical assistance, and supports to local school districts as well as parents and families to provide effective educational programs and services to students with disabilities, ages 3-20, who need special education and related services. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 29 General Supervision and IDEA Requirements The Office of Special Education will continue efforts to monitor and enforce the IDEA program requirements and to protect the rights of students with disabilities and their families. • The IDEA requires states to monitor LEAs, but it does not specifically require on-site monitoring of each LEA. • The Office of Special Education will fulfill its statutory responsibility to monitor all local educational agencies (LEAs) through the Annual Performance Reports (APR) and monitoring of compliance with fiscal requirements. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 30 Monitoring and Compliance • A differentiated system of monitoring and technical assistance will be developed and implemented to support LEAs with the most significant needs for improvement. • The Office of Special Education will continue to investigate Formal State Complaints, as required by the IDEA regulations, and protect the rights of students with disabilities and their families. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 31 Monitoring and Technical Assistance • All school districts will be monitored through ongoing review of the required data reports, including fiscal data reports. • Performance data will be used to determine the appropriate level of monitoring, technical assistance, and additional support for districts that do not receive an annual designation of Meets Requirements. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 32 Monitoring and Technical Assistance Using data on priority indicators, districts with identified needs may receive an on-site visit that will be designed to provide targeted technical assistance and supports – utilizing a collaborative approach to analyze data, and – jointly planning strategies for program improvement. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 33 Next Steps for Mississippi in 2013 • Engage stakeholders in developing the State’s RDA model. • Revise State policies to: – incorporate the RDA model, and – establish a differentiated system of monitoring and technical assistance (TA) based on the performance indicator data. • Redesign internal work processes to better support local districts in improving results. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 34 Next Steps for Mississippi in 2013 • Develop service models to better support local school districts in improving results and outcomes. • Establish and train service teams to implement a differentiated system of monitoring, technical assistance, and support for local school districts. • Provide targeted technical assistance and supports to districts and schools with the most significant needs for improvement. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 35 References • For more information about the work of the U.S. Department's Office of Special Education Programs, see http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/index.html • For more information on the 20 Part B Indicators, see http://www.nichcy.org • Bartlett, John C., Attitudes for Excellence, Principal Leadership, September 2012 • Mark Wolak Ed.D, President, Board of School Superintendents, History of Change in Special Education RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 36 SPP/APR • State Performance Plan (SPP) • Annual Performance Report (APR) [The State] must annually report to the secretary and the public on the progress of the State, and of children with disabilities in the State, toward meeting the goals established under §300.157(a) for the performance of children with disabilities in the State, that may include elements of the reports required under Section 1111(h) of the ESEA. [34 CFR 300.157(c)] [20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(15)(C)] RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 37 State Performance Plan (SPR) • Updates and revisions are due February 1st of each year • Spans a six year period • Covers 20 indicators established in IDEA 2004 • Requires baseline data and goals (targets) for the state RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 38 February 1, 2011 APR • Indicator 1 Graduation – Target – 66%/Actual 20% • Indicator 2 Drop Out – Target – 18%/Actual 22% • Indicator 3 - Assessment – Target/Actual • 3A – 50% of districts meet AYP/23% of Districts • 3B – 95%/97.5% • 3C – 66.3% Reading 68% Math/20% and 29.1% RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 39 February 1, 2011 APR • Indicator 4a – Suspensions and Expulsions % LEAs – Target – 0 Districts/Actual 28.95% • Indicator 4b – Significant Discrepancy – Target – 0%/Actual 0% • Indicator 5 – Least Restrictive Environment – Target/Actual • 5A – 57.97%/66.97% • 5B – 17.48%/12.89% • 5C – 2.23%/2.17% • Indicator 6 – New Indicator. Will report baseline data in February 2012. RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 40 February 1, 2011 APR • Indicator 7 – Preschool Assessment – Target/Actual • Summary Statement 1 – Outcome A: 49%/47% – Outcome B: 51%/47% – Outcome C: 40%/43% • Summary Statement 2 – Outcome A: 82%/78% – Outcome B: 70%/61% – Outcome C: 78%/72% RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 41 February 1, 2011 APR • Indicator 8 – Parent Survey – Target – 71.46%/Actual 95.79% • Indicator 9 – Disproportionate Representation by Child Count – Target – 0 Districts/Actual 0 • Indicator 10 – Disproportionate Representation by Disability – Target – 0 Districts/Actual 0 RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 42 February 1, 2011 APR • Indicator 11 – Child Find – Target – 100%/Actual 99.09% • Indicator 12 – C to B Transition – Target – 100%/Actual 93.94% • Indicator 13 – Secondary Transition with IEP Goals – Target – 100%/Actual 99.95% RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 43 February 1, 2011 APR • Indicator 14 – Post-Secondary – Target/Actual • 14a – 26%/24% • 14b – 63%/59% • 14c – 80%/77% • Indicator 15 – Monitoring, Complaints, Hearings – Target – 100%/Actual 100% • Indicator 16 – Written Complaints – Target – 100%/Actual 100% RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 44 February 1, 2011 APR • Indicator 17 – Due Process Hearings – Target – 100%/Actual 94.12% • Indicator 18 – Hearing Requests – Target – 50%/Actual 100% • Indicator 19 – Target – 75%/Actual 62.50% • Indicator 20 – Timelines for State Submitted Data/Reports – Target – 100%/Actual 100% RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 45 SPP/APR Web Page SPP and APRs along with Public Reporting data for each district have been published on the State’s website: http://www.mde.k12.ms.us/specialeducation/special-education-spp-apr RDA and SPP/APR Indicators Office of Special Education 46