Part B Annual Performance Report for 2007-08 - New York State
February 2009

Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

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

Monitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Part B / Effective Transition

Indicator 13:  Percent of youth aged 15* and above with an individualized education program (IEP) that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet the post-secondary goals.

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

* The federal indicator is age 16. New York State (NYS) has elected to measure this beginning at age 15, since NYS law and regulations require that transition services be indicated on a student’s IEP to be in effect when the student turns age 15.

Measurement:
Percent = [(# of youth with disabilities aged 15 and above with an IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet the post-secondary goals) divided by the (# of youth with an IEP age 15 and above)] times 100.

 

FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

FFY 2007
(School year 2007-08)

100 percent of youth* aged 15 and above will have IEPs that include coordinated, measurable annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet the post-secondary goals.

*i.e., percent of youth with IEPs reviewed.

Actual Target Data for FFY 2007:

During the 2007-08 school year, 58.6 percent of youth aged 15 and above had IEPs that included coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the students to meet the post-secondary goals.

Of the 106 school districts:

Data on compliance with each of the eight regulatory citations is reported in the chart below for three years.  Major findings include:

Compliance Rates for Individual Regulatory Citations – Transition Content in IEPS

Requirement

2005-06
Number & Percent of 108 Districts in Compliance on Citation

2006-07
Number & Percent of 109 Districts in Compliance on Citation

2007-08
Number & Percent of 106* Districts in Compliance on Citation

#

%

#

%

#

%

When the CSE met to consider transition service needs, the school district invited the student. If the student did not attend, the district ensured that the student's preferences and interests were considered

62

57.41%

66

60.6%

79

74.5%

Under the student's present levels of performance, the IEP includes a statement of the student's needs, taking into account the student's strengths, preferences and interests, as they relate to transition from school to post-school activities.

26

24.07%

47

43.1%

68

64.2%

The IEP includes appropriate measurable post-secondary goals based upon age appropriate transition assessments relating to training, education, employment and, where appropriate, independent living skills.

25

23.15%

53

48.6%

66

62.3%

The IEP includes measurable annual goals consistent with the student's needs and abilities, including (if applicable) benchmarks or short-term objectives.

58

53.70%

72

66.1%

77

72.6%

The IEP includes a statement of the transition service needs of the student that focuses on the student's courses of study.

45

41.67%

62

56.9%

78

73.6%

The IEP indicates the recommended special education program and services to advance appropriately toward meeting the annual goals relating to transition needs.

76

70.37%

87

79.8%

94

88.7%

The IEP includes needed activities to facilitate the student's movement from school to post-school activities, including: instruction, related services, community experiences, the development of employment and other post-school adult living objectives, and when appropriate, acquisition of daily living skills and functional vocational evaluation.

35

32.41%

58

53.2%

69

65.1%

The IEP includes a statement of the responsibilities of the school district and, when applicable, participating agencies, for the provision of such services and activities that promote movement from school to post-school opportunities, or both.

40

37.04%

62

56.9%

78

73.6%

*In the 2007-08 school year, the sample size was 108 school districts, however, two school districts had not submitted their data for this indicator by the time this report was prepared.

Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2007:

Explanation of Progress or Slippage

NYS showed progress in meeting the State's target for this indicator.  In 2007, 58.6 percent of youth aged 15 and above had IEPs that included coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that would reasonably enable the student to meet the post-secondary goals compared to 45.8 percent in 2006.  This improvement is particularly significant since NYS measures its performance for this indicator each year based on a different representative group of school districts (except that NYC is included in this representative sample each year).

As displayed in the tables below, there were significant improvements in most regions of the State in that fewer school districts reported 0 IEPs out of compliance and far greater number of school districts reported having 80-100 percent of IEPs in full compliance. These regional data are used by the technical assistance networks to prioritize their work with the school districts with the lowest rates of compliance and to assist the State to identify effective improvement activities.

Indicator 13 – Numbers of School Districts and Range of Compliance by Transition Coordination Site (TCS) Region

TCS Region

2006-07

2007-08

# of School Districts Reviewed

Number of Districts
By Percentage of IEPs
In Compliance

# of School Districts Reviewed

Number of Districts
By Percentage of IEPs
In Compliance

0% of IEPs

1% - 49%

50% - 79%

80 – 100%

0% of IEPs

1% - 49%

50% - 79%

80 – 100%

Eastern

24

5

8

3

8

18

2

3

2

11

Hudson Valley

20

4

7

2

7

20

3

5

5

7

Long Island

17

5

6

5

1

19

3

3

2

11

Mid-State

13

2

4

2

5

18

2

7

2

7

Mid-West

15

2

4

4

5

17

2

3

3

9

NYC

1

0

1

0

0

1

0

1

0

0

Western

19

4

6

4

5

13

1

8

2

2

Total # of School Districts

109

22

36

20

31

106

13

30

16

47

 

Indicator 13 – Summary of Changes in Compliance by TCS Region

TCS Region

2006-07

2007-08

Total # of School Districts Reviewed

Regional Percent of IEPs Found in 90-100% Compliance Range

Total # of School Districts Reviewed

Regional Percent of IEPs Found in 90-100% Compliance Range

Eastern

24

46.4%

18

65.2%

Hudson Valley

20

44.9%

20

54.4%

Long Island

17

31.5%

19

68.1%

Mid-State

13

62.5%

18

54.0%

Mid-West

15

56.5%

17

65.1%

NYC

1

3.0%

1

46.0%

Western

19

42.6%

13

42.6%

Total # of School Districts

109

45.8%

106

58.6%

Technical assistance personnel from the Office of Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities’ (VESID) funded TCSs and/or Special Education Training and Resource Center (SETRC) facilitated the self-review monitoring process in most of the school districts.  The participation of TCS staff in this review process is one of the State's actions to improve compliance for this indicator, by providing technical assistance during the compliance review.  TCS staff reported to the State that for many student IEPs reviewed, school districts reported to be providing transition programs and services, but not documenting the required information that reflects the Committees on Special Education (CSE) recommendations for these transition programs and services on the students' IEPs.

Since the 2005-06 school year, three representative samples of school districts in NYS have reviewed a sample of IEPs by using the State-developed self-review monitoring protocol and reported compliance with each of eight regulatory requirements related to transition IEPs.  Results of the self-review and correction of noncompliance is reported through a web-based data submission system. The results of the reviews and status of compliance with regulatory requirements is displayed in the table below.

School Year

Number of School Districts

Conducted Reviews of IEPs

Reported Some Non Compliance

Corrected Non Compliance Within one Year from Notification

Corrected Non Compliance After one Year from Notification

Not in Compliance to Date

2005-06

108

108

15

76

17*

2006-07

109

100

54

7

39**

2007-08

106***

68

10

 

58****

*Of the 17 school districts, 13 made progress during the 2007-08 school year and corrected some noncompliance; however, they have not corrected compliance with all eight regulatory citations.
**Of the 39 school districts 27 made progress during the 2007-08 school year and corrected some noncompliance; however, they have not corrected compliance with all eight regulatory citations.
***38 of the 106 school districts have reported having 100 percent of their IEPs in full compliance. The State will conduct a verification review of these districts and report any revisions to the number of school districts with noncompliance in the next APR. 
****These 58 school districts must report correction of noncompliance within a year from notification. They still have time remaining within one year from notification.

Actions taken to correct noncompliance:

  1. Upon submission of results of the self-review monitoring protocol where noncompliance was indicated, each school district received a written notification that it:
  2. The State directed its TCS to provide technical assistance to the school districts with noncompliance.  86 of the districts listed in the table above as improving their compliance did so with the provision of TCS technical assistance.
  3. The New York City Department of Education’s (NYCDOE) corrective actions included a requirement for a written improvement plan to include professional development and development of additional transition services.  VESID provided direct technical assistance to NYCDOE to improve NYC's transition planning results.  In May 2008, the State Education Department (SED) and Cornell University presented the use of TransQUAL to NYC IEP specialists, and TCS initiated the TransQUAL workgroup in NYC.

Improvement Activities Completed in 2007-08

VESID accessed federal technical assistance to further inform its activities to improve transition planning for students with disabilities.  This included a review of information and resources, including but not limited to information available through the following Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) technical assistance centers:  National Post-School Outcome Center (NPSO), National Dropout Prevention Center for Students with Disabilities (NDPC-SD), and National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center (NSTTAC).  Also see resources accessed as identified for indicator 1.

Activities Completed:

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets / Improvement Activities / Timelines / Resources for FFY 2007 [If applicable]