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 / 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:

  1. # of findings of noncompliance between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2007.
  2. # 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 2007
(2007-08)

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 2007:

62.5 percent of noncompliance issues identified between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2007 through the State's general supervision system (including monitoring, State complaints, hearings, etc.) were corrected within one year of identification.  To date (as of January 26, 2009) 92.6 percent of noncompliance issues have been corrected.

This is a decrease of 29.16 percentage points from 91.41 percent reported in the last APR and a decrease of 32.12 percentage points from the revised 2005-06 data referenced in the Explanation of Progress or Slippage section below.  The table below displays the noncompliance identified through data collection related to the State Performance Plan (SPP) Indicators 4, 9, 10, and 13 in addition to the noncompliance identified from the other monitoring activities to highlight the significant impact of these additional compliance indicators on the State's ability to track and ensure correction of noncompliance within one year.  New York State (NYS) is re-establishing its baseline for correction of noncompliance within one year and enhancing its data systems to accurately track the correction of this additional noncompliance and ensure that all noncompliance is corrected within one year from identification

Issues of Noncompliance FY 2006-07 & Corrected Within One Year

General Supervision System Component

(a) # of findings of noncompliance

(b) # of corrections completed within one year from identification

Monitoring Reviews 

1,147

1,020

SPP Indicator Reviews 4, 9, 10, & 13

834

79

60 day complaints

379

370

Total

2,360

1,469

Percent = [1469(b) divided by 2360(a)] = .62245 times 100 = 62.25 %

Charted below by SPP Indicator are findings of noncompliance under the general supervision components of monitoring activities and dispute resolution activities.  These findings represent monitoring activities conducted in 526 school district/agency programs and dispute resolution activities in 236 school district/agency programs.

Indicator/ Indicator Clusters

General Supervision System Components

# of LEAs Issued Findings in FFY 2006 (7/1/06 to 6/30/07)

(a) # of Findings of noncompliance identified in FFY 2006 (7/1/06 to 6/30/07)

(b) # of Findings of noncompliance from (a) for which correction was verified no later than one year from identification

(c) # of Findings of noncompliance resolved in greater than 12 months

(d) # of Findings of Noncompliance Pending as of 1/26/09

1.   Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high school with a regular diploma.

2.   Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school.

14. Percent of youth who had IEPs, are no longer in secondary school and who have been competitively employed, enrolled in some type of post-secondary school, or both, within one year of leaving high school.

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

45

120

81

12

27

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

9

11

7

2

2

3.   Participation and performance of children with disabilities on statewide assessments.

7.   Percent of preschool children with IEPs who demonstrated improved outcomes.

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

44

44

36

3

5

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

6

6

6

0

0

4A. Percent of districts identified as having a significant discrepancy in the rates of suspensions and expulsions of children with disabilities for greater than 10 days in a school year.

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

71

304

62

219

23

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

14

21

18

2

1

5.   Percent of children with IEPs aged 6 through 21 -educational placements.

6.   Percent of preschool children aged 3 through 5 – early childhood placement.

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

133

495

449

17

29

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

106

210

208

0

2

8.   Percent of parents with a child receiving special education services who report that schools facilitated parent involvement as a means of improving services and results for children with disabilities.

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

11

12

12

0

0

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

32

36

36

0

0

9.   Percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education that is the result of inappropriate identification.

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

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

24

69

16

52

1

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

0

0

0

0

0

11. Percent of children who were evaluated within NYS’ established timeline to complete the initial evaluation

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

40 *

98

96

1

1

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

19

29

29

0

0

12. Percent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3, who are found eligible for Part B, and who have an IEP developed and implemented   by their third birthdays.

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

0*

--

---

---

---

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

---

---

---

---

---

13. Percent of youth aged 15 and above with IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable student to meet the post-secondary goals.

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

158

601

129

402

70

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

7

12

12

0

0

Other areas of noncompliance:

Monitoring Activities:  Self-Assessment/ Local APR, Data Review, Desk Audit, On-Site Visits, or Other

99

238

218

8

12

Dispute Resolution: Complaints, Hearings

43

54

54

0

0

Sum the numbers down Column a and Column b

2360

1469

717

174

Percent of noncompliance corrected within one year of identification = (column (b) sum divided by column (a) sum) times 100.
1469(b) / 2360(a) = .62245 X 100 = 62.25

(b) / (a) X 100 =

62.25%

   
* Notifications of noncompliance for SPP Indicators 11 and 12 based on 2005-06 and 2006-07 data did not occur until July 17, 2007 and December 14, 2007, respectively. The correction of this noncompliance will be reported in the next APR.

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

Explanation of Progress or Slippage

NYS did not reach the target of 100 percent, for the percent of identified noncompliance issues that were corrected within one year of identification.  When comparing the same general supervision components (special education monitoring reviews and State complaints) the 91.09 percent of noncompliance issues corrected within one year of identification is only 0.32 percentage points lower than the 91.41 percent reported in the 2008 APR and 2.96 percentage points lower than the revised data identified below.

The 62.25 percent of noncompliance issues corrected within one year of identification reported in this APR includes the general supervision components reported in 2008 and the additional findings of noncompliance identified through data collection and other monitoring activities related to SPP Indicators 4, 9, 10, and 13.  The additional noncompliance added as a result of SPP Indicators resulted in a decrease in the percentage of noncompliance corrected within one year of notification of 32.12 percentage points.

The slippage was caused primarily by the Office of Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities’ (VESID) resource limitations to respond to a significant increase in data management and general supervision responsibilities, specifically:

  1. new responsibilities associated with SPP reviews for Indicators 4, 9, 10, and 13, which required development, implementation and revision of monitoring and follow-up procedures for noncompliance identified through the self-review and self-reporting processes; the development of procedures for monitoring activities for districts whose subsequent year data required further oversight;
  2. a significant increase in the number of monitoring reviews during 2006-07 (144 reviews were conducted in 2005-06 and 318 reviews were conducted in 2006-07, an increase of 174 reviews), resulting in a significant increase in follow-up related to identified noncompliance; and
  3. a significant increase in the number of complaint investigations conducted by Special Education Quality Assurance (SEQA) staff during 2007-08 (380 complaints received in 2007-08, compared to 210 received in 2006-07).

Slippage is also explained in part by the increasing complexity of data reporting and general supervision requirements and their impact on the ability of districts and agencies to efficiently and effectively correct noncompliance in a timely manner, as well as its impact on the ability of the State Education Department (SED) to fully implement procedures for ensuring resolution of noncompliance that include meaningful and effective consequences when compliance is not achieved.

One hundred sixty-six school districts or agencies had instances of noncompliance identified in 2006-07 that continued beyond 12 months, resulting from special education monitoring reviews, complaint investigations, and/or SPP reviews of Indicators 4, 9, 10 and 13. This represents an increase of 121 more institutions (e.g., school districts, approved private schools) requiring follow-up, compared to 36 institutions last year. 

As of January 26, 2009, 2,186 (92.62 percent) of the 2,360 noncompliant issues identified during 2006-07 were brought into compliance.

The Comprehensive Special Education Information System (CSEIS) was implemented during the 2006-07 school year.  As the system has been fine tuned and SEQA staff have worked to verify the accuracy of the transferred data, there have been adjustments to the compliance data for noncompliance identified in 2005-06.  The table below displays the adjustment of the data.  The most current data shows that the rate for correction of noncompliance for 2005-06 was actually 94.37 percent rather than the 91.41 percent reported in the February 2008 APR.

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

1,375

1,266

60 day complaints

596

594

Total

1,971

1,860

Percent = [1860(b) divided by 1971(a)] = .94368 times 100 = 94.37 %


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

For all school districts and agencies with noncompliance resulting from special education monitoring reviews and State complaint investigations, follow-up monitoring activities were conducted by SEQA staff, including:  phone calls, written communication, off-site review of materials, on-site visits, and/or technical assistance.  In addition, where technical assistance resources were available, they were directed to school districts to assist them in the correction of noncompliance.

As of January 26, 2009, 1,952 (99.04 percent) of the 1,971 noncompliant issues identified during 2005-06 were brought into compliance or resolved:

As of January 26, 2009 1,770 (99.89 percent) of the 1,772 noncompliant issues identified during 2004-05 were brought into compliance.  The remaining noncompliant issues were found in one preschool program and are both related to staff certification issues.

For actions taken for continuing noncompliance beyond 12 months identified through data collection and self-review monitoring processes, see the APR sections for Indicators 4, 9 and 10.  There were no instances of continuing noncompliance beyond 12 months for Indicators 11 and 12 identified in 2006-07.

Improvement Activities Completed in 2007-08

Activities Completed:

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

None