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:  FAPE in the LRE

Indicator 5:  Percent of children with IEPs aged 6 through 21:

  1. Removed from regular class less than 21% of the day;
  2. Removed from regular class greater than 60% of the day; or
  3. Served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements.
    (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A))

 

 Measurement: 

A. Percent = # of children with IEPs removed from regular class less than 21% of the day divided by the total # of students aged 6 through 21 with IEPs times 100.

B. Percent = # of children with IEPs removed from regular class greater than 60% of the day divided by the total # of students aged 6 through 21 with IEPs times 100.

C. Percent = # of children with IEPs served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements divided by the total # of students aged 6 through 21 with IEPs times 100. 

 

Overview of Issue/Description of System or Process

Section 200.4 of the Commissioner’s Regulations sets forth the requirements for placement of students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment.

NYS Education law and regulations also establish procedures for students with disabilities determined to be at future risk for residential placement:  These procedures require, where a student is determined to be at risk of a future placement in a residential school, that the CSE request in writing that a designee of the appropriate county or State agency participate in any proceeding of the CSE to make recommendations concerning the appropriateness of residential placement and other programs and placement alternatives, including but not limited to, community support services that may be available to the family. The CSE must notify the local social services district when a student who is in a foster care placement is at risk of a future placement in a residential school.

Section 200.2(g) of the Commissioner’s Regulations establishes the procedures for development and submission of “Special Education Space Requirements Plans.”  The purpose of the plan is to determine the need for additional facilities space for all special education programs in the geographic area served by the BOCES, including programs provided by the public school districts, approved private schools for students with disabilities and State-supported schools which are located within the geographic boundaries of the BOCES supervisory district.  The plan must ensure that students with disabilities are educated in age appropriate settings and to the maximum extent appropriate with students who are not disabled.  The annual progress report must provide the actual and projected numbers and projected percentages of students with disabilities in settings with nondisabled peers in the region.  The Department publishes annual data on the progress regions are making to improve their rates of placements of students with disabilities in integrated settings. 

Section 200.7 of the Commissioner’s Regulations relating to the approval of new or expanded private schools to serve students with disabilities requires documentation of regional need and sufficient evidence to establish that the proposed program will serve only those students who, because of the nature or severity of their disability, would require a separate facility.

Baseline Data for FFY 2004 (2004-2005)

  1. 53.6 percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class less than 21 percent of the day (i.e., in general education programs for 80 percent or more of the school day).
     

  2. 27.3 percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, were removed from regular class greater than 60 percent of the day (i.e., in general education programs for less than 40 percent of the school day).
     

  3. Seven (7.0) percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, were served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements.

Discussion of Baseline Data

·       Disaggregation of the data indicates that, compared with the rest of the State, the Big Five Cities where the special education population is the highest and resources are the lowest, place almost twice as many of their students with disabilities in programs in which they are removed from general education classes for more than 60 percent of the day or are in separate educational settings. 

·       Trend data shows that the rate of students with IEPs who participate daily in general education programs for 40 percent or more of the day has increased steadily from 1997-98 to 2003-04 (56.1 percent to 65.7 percent). 

·      71 school districts are below the current 65.7 percent statewide average for students participating in general education programs 40 percent or more of the day. 

Measurable and rigorous targets

 

FFY

Measurable and Rigorous Target

2005
(2005-06)

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class less than 21 percent of the day will be greater than 54 percent.

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class greater than 60 percent of the day will be less than 27.3 percent. 

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements will be less than 7.0 percent.

2006
(2006-07)

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class less than 21 percent of the day will be greater than 55 percent.

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class greater than 60 percent of the day will be less than 26 percent. 

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements will be less than 6.5 percent.

2007
(2007-08)

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class less than 21 percent of the day will be greater than 56 percent.

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class greater than 60 percent of the day will be less than 25 percent. 

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements will be less than 6.0 percent.

2008
(2008-09)

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class less than 21 percent of the day will be greater than 57 percent.

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class greater than 60 percent of the day will be less than 23 percent. 

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements will be less than 5.5 percent.

2009
(2009-10)

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class less than 21 percent of the day will be greater than 58 percent.

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class greater than 60 percent of the day will be less than 21 percent. 

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements will be less than 5.0 percent.

2010
(2010-11)

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class less than 21 percent of the day will be greater than 60 percent.

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, removed from regular class greater than 60 percent of the day will be less than 20 percent. 

The statewide percent of students with disabilities, ages 6-21, served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements will be less than 4.5 percent.

 

Improvement Activities/Timelines/Resources

Activity

Timeline

Resources

Conduct focused monitoring reviews using a “Least Restrictive Environment” (LRE) protocol, designed to evaluate a school district’s performance regarding placement of students with disabilities in the LRE, including a review of the districts’ LRE data and policies and practices and determination of root causes for high rates of placements in the most restrictive settings. 

2005-11

SEQA, SETRC, RSSC

Target technical assistance and professional development network activities to focus on districts identified with high rates of placement of students with disabilities in separate sites. 

2005-10

State Improvement Grant, NYS Metro Center, SETRC, RSSC, Parent Centers

Provide Quality Assurance Review grants to large city school districts to offset the costs that these school districts may incur to participate in the focused monitoring reviews. 

2005-11

$60,000 for 2005-06 for all focused reviews (see indicator #1)

Provide Quality Assurance Improvement grants to school districts to implement improvement activities identified through the focused review monitoring process.

2005-11

$3,080,000 for 2005-06 for all focused reviews (see indicator #1)

Use a data-driven strategic planning model to develop annual improvement plans and professional development programs for the Big Four Cities (Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester and Yonkers).

2005-11

Urban Initiative (see indicator #1)

Implement regional space planning requirements to ensure regional planning that results in students with disabilities educated in age appropriate settings and to the maximum extent appropriate with students who are not disabled. 

2005-11

District superintendents, VESID staff, Office of Management Services

Revise State policy relating to the continuum of special education programs and services to provide more instructional delivery designs in general education classes. 

2006

State regulations

Regents State Aid Proposal

Share information with school districts/agencies about innovative instructional delivery designs in general education settings; early intervening services and strategies to ensure student access to the general curriculum.

2006-11

National technical assistance centers:

·        National Institute for Urban School Improvement

·        LRE Part B Community of Practice

·        The Access Center

·        National Center for Special Education Accountability Monitoring

Require school districts identified with significant disproportionality to reserve 15 percent of its IDEA funds to provide coordinated early intervening services to address the disproportionality issue. 

2006-11

LEA Application