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: Disproportionality

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

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

Measurement:
Percent = [(# of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that is the result of inappropriate identification) divided by the (# 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 special education and related services was the result of inappropriate identification, e.g., monitoring data, review of policies, practices and procedures under 618(d), etc.

New York State’s (NYS) Measurement:

NYS will compare the percent of total enrollment of each race/ethnic group in special education with the percent of total enrollment of all other race/ethnic groups in special education combined.  For notifications of school districts during the 2006-07 and 2007-08 school years based on 2005-06 and 2006-07 school year data, respectively, NYS 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.  (The State’s definition of significant disproportion is the same as the definition of disproportion.)

For Over-representation in special education:

  • 75 students with disabilities enrolled on 12/03/07;
  • A minimum of 30 students (disabled and nondisabled) of particular race/ethnicity enrolled on first Wednesday in October 2007;
  • At least 75 students (disabled and nondisabled) of all other race/ethnicities enrolled on first Wednesday in October 2007;
  • At least 10 students with disabilities of particular race/ethnicity enrolled in district on 12/03/07; and
  • Either:
    • Both the relative risk ratio and weighted relative risk ratio for any race/ethnic group is 2.5 or higher; or
    • All students with disabilities in special education are of only one race/ethnic group regardless of the size of the relative risk ratio and weighted relative risk ratio.

For Under-representation in special education:

A district must meet the following criteria for three consecutive years (2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08):

  • At least 75 students with disabilities enrolled in the district on child count date;
  • Both the relative risk ratio and weighted relative risk ratio for minority group is less than or equal to 0.25;
  • ([District enrollment of race] times [Risk of Other Races]) divided by 2.5 is greater than or equal to 10; and
  • Minimum district enrollment of other races is 75.
  • A district’s risk of race is less than 50% of the Statewide risk of race.

 

FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

FFY 2007
(School year 2007-08)

The percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that is the result of inappropriate identification will be 0.

 

Actual Target Data for FFY 2007:

The percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that was the result of inappropriate identification for 2006-07 was 0.3 percent.  Data for 2007-08 will be reported in April 2009.

Below are summary data on the number of school districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that is the result of inappropriate identification and the status of making corrections to policies, practices, procedures.

School Year Data

Monitoring Year

Number of Districts Identified Based on Their Data

Number and Percent of Districts Reporting Inappropriate Policies, Practices, Procedures

Number of Districts that Corrected their Policies, Practices and Procedures Within One Year of Notification

Number of Districts that Corrected their Policies, Practices and Procedures After One Year

Number of Districts that have not Corrected their Policies, Practices and Procedures to Date

2004-05

2005-06

10

8 (1.2%)

2

6

0

2005-06

2006-07

7
(5 identified in previous year)

1 (0.1%) Possibly one more after verification review.

0

1

0

2006-07

2007-08

5
(2 identified the previous year)

2 (0.3%) Possibly one more after verification review

1

0

1*

2007-08**

2008-09

5
(1 identified the previous year)

These data will be reported in this APR in April 2009

These data will be reported in the next APR

*This district still has time remaining within one year from notification to report correction of its noncompliance.
** The State Education Department (SED) began collecting special education data at the individual student level for the first time during the 2007-08 school year. The United States Education Department (USED) was notified that NYS’ 12/3/07 child count and educational environments data would be submitted late (by July 1, 2008). These data were submitted to the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) on July 2, 2008. Disproportionality calculations (including under-representation for three years - 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08) were completed and notifications sent to school districts in November 2008. Four school districts are expected to report results of their self-review monitoring reviews by the end of February 2009, which is not in time to be included in this APR by February 2, 2009.

Please note: SED has informed USED in writing that it will change its child count date from December 1 to the first Wednesday in October beginning in the 2008-09 school year.  This was done in order for the State to be able to complete disproportionality calculations sooner and conduct a review of school district's policies, procedures and practices in the same year and  report in the next APR whether the finding of disproportionality by race/ethnicity in data is the result of inappropriate policies, practices and procedures.

Based on 2004-05 school year data, NYS identified ten school districts as having data with significant disproportionate over-representation of students in special education by race/ethnicity.  In compliance with 34 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §300.646(b), all 10 school districts were required to reserve 15 percent of their Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) funds for coordinated Comprehensive Early Intervening Services (CEIS).  They also completed the State-developed self-review monitoring protocol.

Based on 2005-06 school year data, NYS identified seven school districts as having data with significant disproportionate over-representation of students in special education by race/ethnicity.  In compliance with 34 CFR §300.646(b), all seven school districts were required to reserve 15 percent of their IDEA funds for coordinated CEIS.

Based on 2006-07 school year data, NYS identified five school districts as having data with significant disproportionate over-representation of students in special education by race/ethnicity.  In compliance with 34 CFR §300.646(b), all five school districts were required to reserve 15 percent of their IDEA funds for coordinated CEIS.

NYS completed its analysis of 2005-06, 2006-07, and 2007-08 school year data to determine under representation of students in special education by race/ethnicity.  The criteria, which are explained under the measurement section of this indicator, were developed in-house after a lengthy review of our State’s data.  No school districts met the criteria to be identified for under-representation in special education for any race/ethnicity category.

The review of 2007-08 data for over-representation resulted in identification of five school districts, one of which was also identified in the previous year for the same issue.  SEQA will conduct a review of this district.  In compliance with 34 CFR §300.646(b), all five school districts were required to reserve 15 percent of their IDEA funds for coordinated CEIS.

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

Explanation of Progress or Slippage

As the data above indicate, NYS did not achieve its target of 0 districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that is the result of inappropriate identification; however, we track the correction of noncompliance for all school districts that report having inappropriate policies, practices and procedures until compliance is achieved.  As shown in the above table, one school district remains with some outstanding noncompliance out of 11 that have reported some noncompliance in the past three years and this school district still has time remaining within one year from notification to report correction of its noncompliance.

Improvement Activities Completed in 2007-08

The Office of Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities (VESID) accessed technical assistance to further inform its activities relating to disproportionality by race/ethnicity.  This included a review of information and resources, including but not limited to information available through the National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems (NCCRESt).

Also see technical assistance obtained for indicators 1, 2, 3 and 4.

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

Beginning in the 2008-09 school year, the State has changed its annual child count date from December 1 to the first Wednesday in October just so we can complete the required data analysis of 2008-09 school year data earlier and collect the results of the review of policies, practices and procedures in time to report results in the next APR, due on February 1, 2010.