Overview of the State Performance Plan Development
See Overview of the State Performance Plan Development preceding Indicator
#1.
Monitoring Priority: FAPE in the LRE 
Indicator
#3: Participation and performance of children with disabilities on statewide
assessments:
Percent of districts meeting the State’s Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) objectives for progress for disability subgroup.
Proficiency rate for children with IEPs against grade
level standards and alternate achievement standards.
(20
U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))
Measurement:A. Percent = # of districts meeting the State’s AYP objectives for progress for the disability subgroup (children with IEPs) divided by the total # of districts in the State times 100. Note: For this measure, NYS also computes the percent of districts meeting the State’s AYP objectives for progress for the disability subgroup (students with IEPs) divided by the number of districts that were required to make AYP (met the minimum size criteria). B. Participation rate = a. # of children with IEPs in grades assessed; b. # of children with IEPs in regular assessment with no accommodations (percent = b divided by a times 100); c. # of children with IEPs in regular assessment with accommodations (percent = c divided by a times 100); d. # of children with IEPs in alternate assessment against grade level standards (percent = d divided by a times 100); and e. # of children with IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate achievement standards (percent = e divided by a times 100). Account for any children included in a but not included in b, c, d, or e above. Overall Percent = b + c + d + e divided by a. C. Proficiency rate = a. # of children with IEPs in grades assessed; b. # of children with IEPs in grades assessed who are proficient or above as measured by the regular assessment with no accommodations (percent = b divided by a times 100); c. # of children with IEPs in grades assessed who are proficient or above as measured by the regular assessment with accommodations (percent = c divided by a times 100); d. # of children with IEPs in grades assessed who are proficient or above as measured by the alternate assessment against grade level standards (percent = d divided by a times 100); and e. # of children with IEPs in grades assessed who are proficient or above as measured against alternate achievement standards (percent = e divided by a times 100).
Account for any children included in a but not included in b, c, d, or e above. Overall Percent = [(b+c+d+e) divided by (a)]. Note:

NYS’ accountability system for all students that is approved by USED under NCLB is characterized as follows:
The accountability system applies to all public school districts (including Special Act School Districts) and public schools (including charter schools) and includes all students educated in these institutions or students placed in outofdistrict placements by school districts.
Schools must make AYP in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics at the elementary, middle and secondary levels; in science at the elementary and middle levels; and in graduation rate at the secondary level.
Districts and schools are responsible for AYP of students in the following accountability groups, assuming sufficient enrollment in the group:
 all students,
 students with disabilities,
 limited English proficient students,
 economically disadvantaged students,
 American Indian students,
 Asian students,
 Black students,
 Hispanic students, and
 White students.
The failure of one group to make AYP in ELA or mathematics means that the district or school does not make AYP in that subject.
Districts and schools must meet two requirements to make AYP in ELA and mathematics:
the school district must test 95 percent of students in each accountability group with 40 or more students; and
the performance of each group with 30 or more continuously enrolled students must meet or exceed its Effective Annual Measurable Objective (Effective AMO) or the group must make “safe harbor.
To make AYP in science, only the “all students” group is required to meet the performance requirement; there is no participation requirement.
To make AYP on graduation rate, the “all students” group must achieve a graduation rate of at least 55 percent or improve by one percentage point over its previous year’s performance.
Assessment performance is defined at four levels:
 Level 1 = Basic
 Level 2 = Basic Proficiency
 Level 3 = Proficient
 Level 4 = Advanced Proficiency
A PI is a value from 0 to 200 that is assigned to an accountability group, indicating how that group performed on a required State test (or approved alternative) in ELA, mathematics, or science. PIs are determined using the following equations:
For elementary and middle level assessments, the PI = [(number of continuously enrolled tested students scoring at Levels 2, 3, and 4 + the number scoring at Levels 3 and 4) ÷ number of continuously enrolled tested students] X 100 . Beginning with assessments administered during the 200506 school year, NYS has a single PI for grades 38 in English and another in math.
 For high school assessments, the PI = [(number of cohort members scoring at Levels 2, 3, and 4 + the number scoring at Levels 3 and 4) ÷ number of cohort members] X 100.
The State has established standards on the third indicators, elementary and middlelevel science and high school graduation rate, that districts and schools must meet to make AYP.
An accountability group whose performance in ELA and mathematics does not equal or exceed its Effective AMO in a subject can make “safe harbor” if its performance improves by a specified amount over its previous year’s performance and if its performance on the third indicator equals or exceeds the State standard or improves by 1.0 percentage point on graduation rate and one point on science over the previous year.
The following
table identifies the State’s AMOs through the 200405 school year:
School Year 
Elementary Level 
Middle Level 
Secondary Level 

ELA 
Math 
ELA 
Math 
ELA 
Math 

200304 
123 
136 
107 
81 
142 
132 
200405 
131 
142 
116 
93 
148 
139 
The following table
identifies the State’s AMOs for grades 38 ELA and grades 38 math for the
200506 year and from 200506 through 201314 for high school ELA and math.
School Year 
Grades 38 
Secondary Level 

ELA 
Math 
ELA 
Math 

200506 
122 
86 
154 
146 
200607 
122 
86 
159 
152 
200708 
133 
102 
165 
159 
200809 
Pending 
Pending 
171 
166 
200910 
Pending 
Pending 
177 
173 
201011 
Pending 
Pending 
183 
180 
201112 
Pending 
Pending 
188 
186 
201213 
Pending 
Pending 
194 
193 
201314 
Pending 
Pending 
200 
200 
The following sources
provide additional detailed information about NYS’s Accountability system
for all students, including students with disabilities, which is approved
under NCLB:
http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/stateplans03/index.html
http://www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/655report/2004/Volume1/combined_report.pdf (pages 1225)
http://www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/accountability/schoolanddistrictaccountabilityrulesapril2005.ppt
http://www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/accountability/accountabilityrules_files/flexibilityaypswd.ppt
http://www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/leap/200506/05leapmanual.pdf (Definitions of many of the terms used in this document are provided in this manual, e.g., AYP, SafeHarbor Target, Annual Measurable Objective (AMO), Performance Index, Alternate Assessment, etc.)
http://www.p12.nysed.gov/irs/STEP/home.shtml , click on 200405 STEP Manual. (Definitions of many of the terms used in this document are provided in this manual, e.g., AYP, SafeHarbor Target, AMO, Performance Index, Alternate Assessment).
Baseline Data for FFY 2004 (200405)
AYP Measure
69.9 percent of 216 school districts that were required to make AYP in grade 4 ELA made AYP.
93.4 percent of 213 school districts that were required to make AYP in grade 4 math made AYP.
68.6 percent of 258 school districts that were required to make AYP in grade 8 ELA made AYP.
63.4 percent of 254 school districts that were required to make AYP in grade 8 math made AYP.
48.7 percent of 189 school districts that were required to make AYP in high school ELA made AYP.
52.4 percent of 189 school districts that were required to make AYP in high school math made AYP.
As shown in the table below, in the 200405 school year, the participation rates of students with disabilities in State assessments were 95 percent or higher in elementary and middle school ELA and math assessments. However, at the high school level, 89 percent of the seniors with disabilities participated in a high school English assessment and 90 percent in a high school mathematics assessment.
Assessment 
Enrollment of Students with Disabilities 
Regular Assessment, With or Without Accommodations* 
Alternate AssessmentAlternate Achievement Standards 
Participation Rate in 200405 School Year 
Absent or Administrative Error 
Grade 4 ELA 
30,927 
28,036 
1,803 
96% 
1,088 
Grade 4 Math 
30,534 
28,000 
1,753 
97% 
781 
Grade 8 ELA 
35,572 
32,065 
1,822 
95% 
1,685 
Grade 8 Math 
35,172 
31520 
1,793 
95% 
1,859 
HS EnglishSeniors in 200405 
16,686 
14,851 
0 
89.0% 
0 
High School MathSeniors in 200405 
16,686 
15,017 
0 
90% 
0 
As shown in the table below, in 200405, the students with disabilities accountability group achieved the effective AMO score on the grade 4 mathematics assessment, but did not achieve a PI score sufficient to make safe harbor for any of the other grade 4, grade 8 or secondary level State assessments.
Assessment 
200405 Performance 
200405 Standard 
Students with Disabilities Made AYP in 200405 
200506 

Continuously Enrolled Students with Disabilities in Elementary and Middle Schools and 200001 Accountability Cohort in High School (HS) 
NYS PI 
Effective AMO 
Safe Harbor Target 
Met Third Indicator for Safe Harbor 
Safe Harbor Target 

Grade 4 ELA 
29,028 
102 
130 
107 
Yes 
No 
NA 
Grade 4 Math 
28,754 
141 
141 
NA 
NA 
Yes 
NA 
Grade 8 ELA 
33,006 
85 
115 
92 
Yes 
No 
NA 
Grade 8 Math 
32,041 
82 
92 
91 
Yes 
No 
NA 
HS Eng. 2001 cohort 
19,140 
104 
147 
109 
No 
No 
114 
HS Math 2001 cohort 
19,140 
108 
138 
107 
No 
No 
117 
Discussion of Baseline Data
Adequate Yearly Progress:
In 200405, 48.3 percent of 290 school districts made AYP for the
students with disabilities subgroup in all the subjects in which they were
required to. This is significant improvement compared to 25.1 percent of 299
school districts in 200304. NYS has established a minimum enrollment of 40
students for participation and 30 for performance.
The majority of school districts were not required to make AYP for the students with disabilities accountability subgroup because they did not have a minimum enrollment of 30 students with disabilities. In 200405:
 69.9 percent of 216 school districts made AYP in grade 4 ELA;93.4 percent of 213 school districts made AYP in grade 4 math;68.6 percent of 258 school districts made AYP in grade 8 ELA;63.4 percent of 254 school districts made AYP in grade 8 math;48.7 percent of 189 school districts made AYP in high school ELA; and
 52.4 percent of 189 school districts made AYP in high school math.
Beginning in the 200506 school year, many more school districts will be required to make AYP for the students with disabilities subgroup since they will have the minimum numbers of students with disabilities enrolled in grades 38 combined. NYS will have AYP calculations in grades 38 combined for ELA, grades 38 combined for math, high school ELA and in high school math.
Participation:
As shown in the table above under the participation heading, in the 200405 school year, the participation rates of students with disabilities in State assessments were 95 percent or higher in elementary and middle school ELA and math assessments. However, at the high school level, 89 percent of the seniors with disabilities participated in a high school English assessment and 90 percent in a high school mathematics assessment. The participation rates in 200405 were better compared to rates in the 200304 school year.
Proficiency:
102 on the Grade 4 ELA examination, five points short of the required safeharbor target of 107 and twentyeight points short of the 200405 effective AMO for all students of 130. 141 on the Grade 4 mathematics examination, which was the effective AMO in 200405 for all students. 85 on the Grade 8 ELA examination, seven points short of the required safeharbor target of 92 and thirty points short of the 200405 effective AMO for all students of 115. 82 on the Grade 8 mathematics examination, nine points short of the required safeharbor target of 91 and ten points short of the 200405 effective AMO for all students of 92. 104 on the high school English examination, five points short of the required safeharbor target of 109 and 43 points short of 200405 effective AMO for all students of 147. 108 on the high school mathematics examination, one point above the required safeharbor target of 107 and 30 points short of 200405 effective AMO for all students of 138. The group did not make AYP because the group did not meet the third indicator for safe harbor, which is a graduation rate of at least 55 percent or a onepercentage point increase in the graduation rate compared to the previous year.
* NYS is not able to provide data disaggregated for students with disabilities who received testing accommodations and those who did not. We expect to be able to report this disaggregated data once SIRS includes all State assessment data.
NYS
will implement State testing in ELA and mathematics in grades 38 during the
200506 school year. The State plans to develop two new State PI to replace
the four indices that currently exist for elementary and middle level
assessments; one new index is planned for grades 38 ELA and the other for
grades 38 mathematics. Creation of the two new indices will require the
State to establish new AMOs and safeharbor targets for school buildings and
school districts.
Measurable and Rigorous Targets
The targets established for the three measures
relating to the participation and performance of students with disabilities
on statewide assessments use the same data that are used for accountability
as described in the State’s approved plan under NCLB.
School Year
Measurable and Rigorous Target
2005
(200506)AYP: There will be an increase annually in the number and percent of school districts that make AYP in grades 38 ELA, grades 38 math, high school ELA and high school math.
Participation:95 percent in grades 38 and high school in ELA and math.
Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 38 ELA: 91
Grades 38 Math: 100
High School ELA: 114
High School Math: 1242006
(200607)AYP: There will be an increase annually in the number and percent of school districts that make AYP in grades 38 ELA, grades 38 math, high school ELA and high school math.
Participation:95 percent in grades 38 and high school in ELA and math.
Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 38 ELA: 96
Grades 38 Math: 105
High School ELA: 119
High School Math: 1292007
(200708)AYP: There will be an increase annually in the number and percent of school districts that make AYP in grades 38 ELA, grades 38 math, high school ELA and high school math.
Participation: 95 percent in grades 38 and high school in ELA and math.
Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 38 ELA: 101
Grades 38 Math: 110
High School ELA: 124
High School Math: 1342008
(200809)AYP: There will be an increase annually in the number and percent of school districts that make AYP in grades 38 ELA, grades 38 math, high school ELA and high school math.
Participation: 95 percent in grades 38 and high school in ELA and math.
Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 38 ELA: 106
Grades 38 Math: 115
High School ELA: 129
High School Math: 1392009
(200910)AYP: There will be an increase annually in the number and percent of school districts that make AYP in grades 38 ELA, grades 38 math, high school ELA and high school math.
Participation: 95 percent in grades 38 and high school in ELA and math.
Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 38 ELA: 111
Grades 38 Math: 120
High School ELA: 134
High School Math: 1442010
(201011)AYP: There will be an increase annually in the number and percent of school districts that make AYP in grades 38 ELA, grades 38 math, high school ELA and high school math.
Participation: 95 percent in grades 38 and high school in ELA and math.
Performance: The State’s average performance on the performance indices (PI) which represent the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 2 (basic proficiency) and above plus the percent of students with disabilities performing at Level 3 (proficiency) and above will be as follows:
Grades 38 ELA: 116
Grades 38 Math: 125
High School ELA: 139
High School Math: 149
Improvement Activities/Timelines/Resources
Activity 
Timeline 
Resources 
The required sanctions for schools and districts not making AYP are defined in federal and State law and include a continuum of consequences. 
200511 
SEQA, EMSC, SETRC and RSSC 
Beginning in 200607: For school districts that had at least 30 students with disabilities in the 2001 total cohort:
For school districts with less than 30 students with disabilities enrolled in grades 4 or 8 in the 200405 school year:
Each school district, as a result of this designation, was required to engage in one or more of the following activities to improve its graduation rates:

200611 
SEQA Regional Offices 42 SETRC For schools also identified under NCLB: 7 RSSC  RSSC includes a fulltime special education specialist on staff funded by IDEA discretionary funds 
Improvement activities identified for graduation and drop out rates are also targeted to improve achievement results for students with disabilities.  See Indicators #1 & 2  
Conduct “IDEA Effective Instructional Practices” focused monitoring reviews of school districts with achievement rates that are the furthest from State targets.  200511  SEQA, SETRC, RSSC 
New York State Alternate Assessment (NYSAA) for Students with Disabilities:

200511 
Contract with Measured Progress 
Develop an alternate assessment aligned against grade level standards. 
200608 
EMSC & VESID 
Conduct regional forums for school leaders from urban school districts to provide professional development, sharing of ideas and problem solving to improve student performance in city school districts. 
200511 
SEQA staff assist in planning and coordination 
Provide technical assistance to assist targeted school districts to improve math instruction of students with disabilities. 
200506 
IDEA Part B Funds – Math experts on RSSC 
Develop State criteria and identify effective practices to promote the use of “responsetointervention” identification processes for students with learning disabilities, with an emphasis on implementation in early grades 13 statewide. See the description of these improvement activities referenced in Indicator #1. 
200509 
See Indicator #1 
Provide financial assistance to the State schools for the deaf and blind to improve academic achievement for their students. 
200508 
IDEA Part B Funds 
Provide resources to ensure students with disabilities have their instructional materials in accessible formats:

200508 
NYS Resource Center for the Blind Center for the Preparation of Educational Interpreters Helen Keller Services for the Blind 
Provide technical assistance regarding assistive technology for students with disabilities, including individual student technology consultations, an Internet Web Page, a newsletter, reference and software libraries, an assistive technology device loan and training service, and turnkey training for the State guidelines. 
200510 
Technology Resource Center (TRE)

Provide universal design for assessment training for State assessment test item writers 
200811 
Office of State Assessment 
Provide staff development on universal design for learning to each of the large 5 cities and other targeted lowperforming schools. 
200508 
TRE 