Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

See Overview of the Development of the Annual Performance Report in the Introduction section, page 1.
 

Monitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Part B / General Supervision

Indicator 15: General supervision system (including monitoring, complaints, hearings, etc.) identifies and corrects noncompliance as soon as possible but in no case later than one year from identification.

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

Measurement:

Percent of noncompliance corrected within one year of identification:

a.      # of findings of noncompliance.

b.      # of corrections completed as soon as possible but in no case later than one year from identification.

Percent = [(b) divided by (a)] times 100.

For any noncompliance not corrected within one year of identification, describe what actions, including technical assistance and enforcement actions that the State has taken.

FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

FFY 2006

(2006-07)

100% of noncompliance issues identified through the State’s general supervision system (including monitoring, complaints, hearings, etc.) will be corrected within one year from identification.

Actual Target Data for FFY 2006:

The percent of issues of noncompliance identified that were corrected within one year of the report being issued is 91.41 percent.

Issues of Noncompliance FY 2005-06 & Corrected Within One Year

 General Supervision System Component

a. # of findings of noncompliance

b. # of corrections completed within one year from identification

Monitoring Reviews

1,338

1,183

60 day complaints

595

584

Total

1,933

1,767

Percent = [1767(b) divided by 1933(a)] = .9141 times 100 = 91.41 %

Charted below by SPP Indicator are findings of non-compliance under the general supervision components of quality assurance monitoring reviews or 60-day complaints. These findings represent quality assurance monitoring reviews conducted in 142 school district/agency programs and 60-day complaint investigations in 197 school district/agency programs.

Issues of Non Compliance Identified in FY 2005-06 by SPP Indicator

OSEP Grouping

SPP Indicator

(a) # of Findings of Non-Compliance Identified in FFY 2005 (7/1/05-6/30/06)

(b) # of Findings from (a) for Which Correction was Verified No Later than One Year from Identification

Graduation & Post-School Transitions

  1 Graduation Rates

167

136

  2 Drop Out Rates

0

NA [2]

13 Secondary Transition

47

37

14 Post School Outcomes

0

NA

Achievement

  3 Assessment

33

29

  7 Preschool Outcomes

1

1

Least Restrictive Environment

  5 LRE - School Age

1094

994

  6 LRE - Preschool

34

30

Parents

  8 Parental Involvement

106

104

Disproportionality

  9 Disproportionality in Special Education by Race/Ethnicity

0

NA

10 Disproportionality in Classification and Placement by Race/Ethnicity

0

NA

Timeliness

11 Child Find

228

221

12 Early Childhood Transition

0

NA

Suspension

  4 Suspension/ Expulsion

119

116

Other

Other*

104

99

Column Totals

1933

1767

Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2006:

Explanation of Progress or Slippage

While NYS did not reach the target of 100 percent, the percent of identified noncompliance issues that were corrected within one year from identification increased 7.7 percentage points from 83.71 percent in 2005-06 to 91.41 percent in 2006-07.

Thirty-six school districts or agencies had instances of noncompliance identified in 2005-06 that continued beyond 12 months (35 as a result of program monitoring reviews and one as a result of a complaint investigation). For all 36 school district or agencies, the follow-up monitoring activities that were conducted by SEQA staff included phone calls, off-site review of materials and/or on-site visits. In addition, technical assistance was provided to 21 of the institutions by one or more of VESID’s funded networks and/or SEQA staff. For one district, IDEA funds were reviewed and redirected as needed to address areas of noncompliance. Written communication outlining enforcement actions were issued to 11 institutions. State approval for placement of NYS students was terminated for one private school.

As of January 18, 2008, 1,903 (98.44 percent) of the 1,933 noncompliant issues identified during 2005-06 were brought into compliance. The remaining 30 non-compliant issues were found in one public school district and 24 private school programs.  Twenty-eight of the 30 issues remaining unresolved are issues related to staff certification in approved private preschool and school age programs.

As of January 18, 2008, 1,767 (99.71 percent) of the 1,772 non compliant issues identified during 2004-05 were brought into compliance. The remaining noncompliant issues were found in two preschool programs and are related to staff certification issues.

Improvement Activities Completed in 2006-07

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets / Improvement Activities / Timelines / Resources for FFY 2006 [If applicable]

Changes in Proposed Timelines

Activities

Timelines

Resources

Implement new revised “Procedures for Ensuring the Identification and Resolution of Compliance Issues” to address overdue compliance assurance documentation.  The procedures will include progressively shorter deadlines with increased involvement of higher-level district and regional administrators.

June 2008

(was January 2006)

SEQA staff


Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

See Overview of the Development of the Annual Performance Report in the Introduction section, page 1.

Monitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Part B / General Supervision

Indicator 16:  Percent of signed written complaints with reports issued that were resolved within 60-day timeline or a timeline extended for exceptional circumstances with respect to a particular complaint.

(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))
 

Measurement:
Percent = [(1.1(b) + 1.1(c)) divided by 1.1] times 100.


FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

FFY 2006

(2006-07)

100 percent of signed written complaints will be resolved within the 60-day timeline or a timeline extended for exceptional circumstances with respect to a particular complaint.

Actual Target Data for FFY 2006:

The percentage of signed written complaints resolved within the 60-day timeline or a timeline extended for exceptional circumstances with respect to a particular complaint was 82.82 percent.

7/1/2006 - 6/30/2007
Table 7: Section A, Written Signed Complaints

(1)  Signed, written complaints total

210

     (1.1)  Complaints with reports issued

198

           (a)  Reports with findings

169

           (b)  Reports within timeline

162

           (c)  Reports within extended timelines

2

     (1.2)  Complaints withdrawn or dismissed

10

     (1.3)  Complaints pending             

2

           (a)  Complaint pending a due process hearing

0

Percent = 162 [1.1(b)] + 2[1.1(c)] = 164 divided by 198 [1.1] times 100 = 82.82%.


Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2006:

Explanation of Slippage

Five of the seven Regional Offices completed the investigation of complaints at a 95 or higher percentage rate.

The percentage of timely issuance of complaint findings dropped in two Regional Offices because of circumstances that were unique to the Regional Offices and not systemic statewide.

Improvement Activities Completed

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets / Improvement Activities / Timelines / Resources for FFY 2006 [If applicable]

None at this time.



Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

See Overview of the Development of the Annual Performance Report in the Introduction section, page 1.

Monitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Part B / General Supervision

Indicator 17:  Percent of fully adjudicated due process hearing requests that were fully adjudicated within the 45-day timeline (or 30-day timeline for preschool students) or a timeline that is properly extended by the hearing officer at the request of either party.

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

Measurement:
Percent = [(3.2(a) + 3.2(b)) divided by 3.2] times 100.


FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

FFY 2006

100 percent of impartial hearing decisions will be rendered within regulatory timelines.

Actual Target Data for FFY 2006:

The percent of due process hearing requests that were fully adjudicated within the 45-day timeline (or 30-day timeline for preschool students) or a timeline that was properly extended by the impartial hearing officer (IHO) at the request of either party was 79.62 percent.

7/1/2006 - 6/30/2007
SECTION C: Hearing Requests

(3)  Hearing requests total

5990

     (3.2)  Hearings (fully adjudicated)

  810

           (a)  Decisions within timeline

  175

           (b)  Decisions within extended timeline

  470

     (3.3)  Resolved without a hearing

4846

Percent = 175 [3.2(a)] + 470 [3.2(b)] divided by 810 [3.2] = 79.62 times 100 = 79.62%.

Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2006:

Explanation of Slippage

The percentage of adjudicated hearing completed in a timely manner decreased from 83.39 percent to 79.63 percent. This decrease is attributed to the following factors:

Improvement Activities Completed

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets / Improvement Activities / Timelines / Resources for FFY 2006 [If applicable]

The following improvement activity has been added:

Activity

Timeline

Resources

Provide an extension calculator for IHO use

2008-09

IHRS



Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

See Overview of the Development of the Annual Performance Report in the Introduction section, page 1.

Monitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Part B / General Supervision

Indicator 18:  Percent of hearing requests that went to resolution sessions that were resolved through resolution session settlement agreements.

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

Measurement:
Percent = (3.1(a) divided by 3.1) times 100.

FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

FFY 2006

The percent of hearing requests that go to resolution sessions and are resolved through resolution session settlement agreements will increase by 1%.

Actual Target Data for FFY 2006:

10.63 percent of hearing requests that went to resolution sessions were resolved through resolution session settlement agreements.

7/1/2006 - 6/30/2007
Table 7 Section C: Hearing Requests

(3)  Hearing requests total

5990

(3.1)  Resolution sessions

5664

(a)  Settlement agreements

  587

Percent = 587 [3.1(a)] divided by 5664 (3.1) times 100 = 10.63%.

Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2006:

Explanation of Slippage

The percentage of resolution sessions ending in agreement decreased from 17.73 percent to 10.63 percent. However, since this is the first full year of data collection in this area, this year’s data is considered a more accurate result since it reflects an entire annual cycle rather than the one quarter reported last year.

Improvement Activities

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets / Improvement Activities / Timelines / Resources for FFY 2006 [If applicable]

The following activities have been added:

Activity

Timelines

Resources

Update the SED publication Parent’s Guide to Special Education to include information on resolution sessions

2008

Policy staff

Add to the contract requirements for State funded parent centers the goal of promoting the use of mediation and resolution sessions   

2008-09

State funded parent centers


Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

See Overview of the Development of the Annual Performance Report in the Introduction section, page 1.
 

Monitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Part B / General Supervision

Indicator 19:  Percent of mediations held that resulted in mediation agreements.

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

Measurement:
Percent = [(2.1(a)(i) + 2.1(b)(i)) divided by 2.1] times 100.


FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

FFY 2006

95 percent of mediations held will result in mediation agreements.


Actual Target Data for FFY 2006:

The percent of mediation sessions held in 2004-05 that resulted in mediation agreements to resolve the dispute was 90.64 percent.

7/1/2006 - 6/30/2007
Table 7: Section B, Mediation Requests

(2)  Mediation requests total

436

   (2.1)  Mediations [held]

278

        (a)  Mediations [held] related to due process

23

              (i)   Mediation agreements

15

        (b)  Mediations [held] not related to due process

255

              (i)  Mediation agreements

237

    (2.2)  Mediations not held (including pending)

158

Percent = 15[(2.1(a)(i)] + 237[2.1(b)(i)] = 252 divided by 278 [2.1] = .9064 times 100 = 90.64%.

Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2006:

Explanation of Progress or Slippage

The percent of mediation sessions held in 2006-07 that resulted in agreement was 90.64 percent, down from 94.98 percent from the previous year.  There were 436 total mediation requests in 2006-2007.  

Improvement Activities Completed

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets / Improvement Activities / Timelines / Resources for FFY 2006 [If applicable]

The following activities have been added:

Activity

Timelines

Resources

Add to the contract requirements for State funded parent centers the goal of promoting the use of mediation and resolution sessions  

2008-08

State funded parent centers

Pilot use of IEP facilitators through the mediation process

2010-11

State funded mediation contractor

Revise and widely disseminate informational materials on the benefits of using mediation

2008-09

State funded mediation contractor

Benchmark with other States and seek technical assistance from the national center on dispute resolution to increase the use of mediation prior to requesting impartial hearings.

2009

VESID policy staff in collaboration with State funded mediation contractor


Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

See Overview of the Development of the Annual Performance Report in the Introduction section, page 1.

Monitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Part B / General Supervision

Indicator 20: State reported data (618 and State Performance Plan and Annual Performance Report) are timely and accurate.

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

Measurement:
State reported data, including 618 data and annual performance reports, are:

a.  Submitted on or before due dates (February 1 for child count, including race and ethnicity; placement; November 1 for exiting, discipline, personnel; and February 1 for Annual Performance Reports); and

b.  Accurate (describe mechanisms for ensuring error free, consistent, valid and reliable data and evidence that these standards are met).

FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

FFY 2006

100 percent of State reported data, including 618 data and annual performance reports, are submitted on or before due dates and are accurate.

Actual Target Data for FFY 2006:

The following is a rubric developed by USED to evaluate States’ performance on this indicator. The scores below represent NYS’ self evaluation on each APR indicator and in the 618 data submission requirements. A score of 1 indicates a positive score in the cell and a 0 indicates the State was not able to provide the all the required information by the due date.

As described below, NYS’ self review score indicates that 92.2 percent of USED data submission requirements were met by the State.

SPP/APR DATA – Indicator 20

APR Indicator

Valid and Reliable

Correct

Calculations

Followed

Instructions

Total

1

0

 

0

0

2

0

0

0

3A

1

1

1

3

3B

1

1

1

3

3C

1

1

0

2

4A

1

1

1

3

5

1

1

1

3

7

1

1

1

3

8

1

1

1

3

9

1

1

0

2

10

1

1

0

2

11

1

1

1

3

12

1

1

1

3

13

1

1

1

3

14

1

1

1

3

15

1

1

1

3

16

1

1

1

3

17

1

1

1

3

18

1

1

1

3

19

1

1

1

3

     

Subtotal

51

APR Score Calculation

Timely Submission Points – If the FFY2006 APR was submitted on-time, place the number 5 in the cell on the right.

5

Grand  Total – (Sum of subtotal and Timely Submission Points) =

56



618 Data – Indicator 20

Table

Timely

Complete Data

Passed Edit

Check

Responded to Data Note Requests

Total

Table 1 – Child Count
Due Date: 2/1/07

1

1

1

1

4

Table 2 – Personnel
Due Date:  11/1/07

1

1

1

1

4

Table 3 – Ed.Environments
Due Date: 2/1/07

1

1

1

1

4

Table 4 – Exiting
Due Date:  11/1/07

1

1

1

1

4

Table 5- Discipline
Due Date:  11/1/07

1

1

1

1

4

Table 6 – StateAssessment
Due Date:  2/1/07

1

0

1

NA

2

Table 7 – DisputeResolution
Due Date:  11/1/07

1

1

1

N/A

3

       

Subtotal

25

618 Score Calculations

Grand Total (Subtotal X 2) -=

50



Indicator #20 Calculation

A. APR Grand Total

56

B. 618 Grand Total

50

C. APR Grand Total (A) + 618 Grand Total (B) =

106

Total N/A in APR

0

Total N/A in 618

4

Base

115

D. Subtotal (C divided by Base*) =

0.922

E. Indicator Score (Subtotal D x 100) =

92.2

*Note any cell marked as N/A will decrease the denominator by 1 for APR and 2 for 618


Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2006:

Explanation of Progress or Slippage

Improvement Activities Completed in 2006-07

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets/ Improvement Activities / Timelines / Resources for FFY 2006 [If applicable]

Activity

Timelines

Resources

NYSED will prepare appropriate data notes in a timelier manner to explain the discrepancies between data from one year to the next as requested by USED.

2008-2011

VESID Staff


[2] NA means not applicable