Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) for 2005-2010

Overview of the State Performance Plan Development

See Overview of the State Performance Plan Development preceding Indicator #1.

Monitoring Priority:  Disproportionality

Indicator #10A: Percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories that is the result of inappropriate identification.

Indicator #10B. Percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education placements that is the result of inappropriate policies, procedures and practices.

(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(C))

Measurement:

Percent = # of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories that is the result of inappropriate identification divided by # of districts in the State times 100.

Include State’s definition of “disproportionate representation.”

Describe how the State determined that disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories was the result of inappropriate identification, e.g., monitoring data, review of policies, practices and procedures under 618(d), etc.

NYS Measurement:

NYS will compare the percent of total enrollment of each race/ethnic group that is identified by particular disabilities or percent of each race/ethnic group of students with disabilities that is in particular special education placement categories compared to other race/ethnic groups combined.  For notifications of school districts during the 2005-06 school year based on 2004-05 school year data, the State will use the following definition of “disproportionate representation” and in subsequent years may revise the definition by lowering the relative risk ratio, weighted relative risk ratio as well as the minimum numbers of students:

  • At least 75 students with disabilities enrolled on 12/1/04;

  • A minimum of 30 students (disabled and nondisabled) of particular race/ethnicity enrolled on first Wednesday in October 2004;

  • At least 75 students (disabled and nondisabled) of all other race/ethnicities enrolled on first Wednesday in October 2004;

  • At least 10 students with disabilities of particular race/ethnicity and disability (or placement in particular setting)  enrolled in district on 12/1/04; and
  • Either:
  • Both the relative risk ratio and weighted relative risk ratio for any minority group  is 4.0 or higher (2.5 or higher for placement in particular setting); or

  • All students with disabilities in a specific disability category (or placement in a particular setting) are of only one minority group regardless of the size of the relative risk ratio and weighted relative risk ratio.

The State will evaluate disproportionality in the identification of students by the following particular disabilities: learning disability; emotional disturbance; mental retardation, speech and language impairment; autism; and other health impairment.

The State will also evaluate disproportionality in the following special education placement categories: removed from regular classes for less than 20 percent of the school day; removed from regular classes for more than 60 percent of the day; and all separate settings combined.

Overview of Issue/Description of System or Process

IDEA section 618(d) requires States to collect and examine data to determine if significant disproportionality based on race and ethnicity is occurring in the State and the local educational agencies of the State with respect to:

In the case of a determination of significant disproportionality with respect to the identification of children as children with disabilities, or the placement in particular educational settings of such children the State shall:

Furthermore, IDEA section 616(a)(3) requires the Secretary to monitor states and the States to monitor LEAs using quantifiable and qualitative indicators to measure disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services, to the extent the representation is the result of inappropriate identification.

As a result of the passage of NYS legislation in 1999 (Chapter 405 of the Laws of 1999), the State has been identifying school districts for disproportionality based on race and ethnicity issues among other special education issues since the 2000-01 school year.  It has conducted three such notifications, in 2000-01, 2002-03 and 2004-05 school years. Identified school districts were assigned to one of three levels of technical assistance: “self-review”; “regional review”; and “targeted”:

In the first two notifications (2000-01 and 2002-03), NYS used the chi‑square formula with the addition of some minimum numbers of students in the total enrollment and in each expected value cell of the chi‑square formula. In the third notification, after review of our methodology, we revised how the chi‑square statistic was calculated and added the relative risk ratio calculation to our methodology to identify school districts that had significant disproportion.  Only school districts with significant chi‑square results, relative risk ratios of 1.2 or higher (or 0.5 or lower for the "removed from regular classes for less than 20 percent of the day placement category") and minimum numbers of enrollment were identified for significant disproportion.

Because of the requirement to establish a baseline if the disproportionality is a result of inappropriate policies, practices and procedures, NYS will revise its methodology for addressing disproportionality to the following beginning in 2005‑06 school year (using 2004‑05 school year data).

Plan to collect baseline data

By February 2006, NYS will analyze data and send notifications to school districts whose data indicate "significant disproportion" based on the above definition, providing them with a State developed "Disproportionality Self-Review” monitoring protocol. The notifications will also trigger a re‑direct of 15 percent of the school district's IDEA funds to support early intervening services.

By May 2006, these school districts will be required to submit their completed self‑review monitoring protocols of relevant school district policies, practices and procedures to the Department.  The district must include community representatives from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds in the review of the policies, procedures and practices.

Based on this self-review, if a school district determines that one or more of its policies, procedures and/or practices require revision, it must revise them and publicly post such revisions and report the corrective action to the Department.  If a school district determines its policies, procedures and/or practices are appropriate and do not require revision, the Department will arrange for verification of this determination.  If the State determines that the school district's policies, procedures and practices are in compliance with federal and State requirements, the school district will not be required to complete another review of its policies, procedures or practices during the remaining period of the SPP.  However, IDEA funds will continue to be redirected if data indicates discrepancy, based on the State’s definition. Furthermore, if school district’s data do not improve, the State may conduct another review of school district’s policies, practices and procedures.

 

School districts that are found to have inappropriate policies, procedures and/or practices through the self-reviews or Department verification reviews will be reported in the baseline data for the 2005-06 school year.


Baseline Data for FFY 2005 (2005-06)

 

NYS’ baseline data (before completion of the verification procedures in 10 school districts that reported 100 percent compliance) is that six out of 684 school districts (0.9%) have significant disproportionate representation in specific disability categories that is the result of inappropriate policies, practices and procedures and four  out of 684 (0.6%) school districts have significant disproportionate representation in particular settings that is the result of inappropriate policies, practices and procedures.

 

Explanation of Baseline Data 

Measurable and Rigorous Targets

FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

2005
(2005-06)

The percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories or placements that is the result of inappropriate policies, procedures and/or practices will be 0.

2006
(2006-07)

The percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories or placements that is the result of inappropriate policies, procedures and/or practices will be 0.

2007
(2007-08)

The percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories or placements that is the result of inappropriate policies, procedures and/or practices will be 0.

2008
(2008-09)

The percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories or placements that is the result of inappropriate policies, procedures and/or practices will be 0.

2009
(2009-10)

The percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories or placements that is the result of inappropriate policies, procedures and/or practices will be 0.

2010
(2010-11)

The percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories or placements that is the result of inappropriate policies, procedures and/or practices will be 0.

 

Improvement Activities/Timelines/Resources:

 

Activity

Timelines

Resources

See Activities for Indicator 9