Criteria for Notifications for State Performance Plan Indicators 4, 9 and 10
Indicator 4A: Significant Discrepancy in Suspensions/Expulsions of Students with Disabilities
Indicator 4B: Significant Discrepancy in Out of School Suspensions/Expulsions of Students with Disabilities
Indicator 9: Disproportionality in the Identification of Students for Special Education
Indicator 10: Disproportionality by Race/Ethnicity in the Identification of Students by Specific Disabilities or Placement of Students with Disabilities in Particular Settings
Criteria for Notification and Explanation of Data Used
for Indicator 4A
Significant Discrepancy in Suspensions/Expulsions of
Students with Disabilities
Notification Year: 2020-21 School Year, based on 2019-20 Data
Indicator 4A: Percent of districts identified by the State as having a significant discrepancy in the rate of suspensions and expulsions of students with disabilities for greater than 10 days in a school year. (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A); 1412(a)(22))
Indicator 4A Measurement:
The number of students with disabilities suspended out-of-school for more than 10 days in a school year, divided by the October 2, 2019 count of students with disabilities.
Source of Data:
Numbers of suspensions were reported in the PD8 report for the 2019-20 school year in Table 1, Section 3, Column B Total. The October 2, 2019 count of students was reported through the Student Information Repository System (SIRS) and verified in the VR5 report, Section C, Report 14.
Criteria for Notification:
- Minimum of 10 students with disabilities suspended out of school for more than 10 days;
- Minimum of 30 students with disabilities were enrolled on October 2, 2019; and
- The district’s suspension rate is two times or higher than the baseline Statewide average in the 2004-05 (base) school year rate of 1.34.
- Districts with a 4A suspension rate of 2.7 percent or higher are notified they have a significant discrepancy.
Criteria for being “At Risk”:
- Minimum of 10 students with disabilities suspended out of school for more than 10 days;
- Minimum of 30 students with disabilities were enrolled on October 2, 2019; and
- The district’s 4A suspension rate that is above the baseline Statewide average in 2004-05 (base) school year rate of 1.34.
- Districts with a 4A suspension rate above 1.34 and below 2.7 percent are notified that they are At Risk.
Criteria for Notification and Explanation of Data Used for Indicator 4B
Significant Discrepancy in Out of School Suspensions/Expulsions of Students with Disabilities
Notification Year: 2020-21 School Year, based on 2019-20 Data
Indicator 4B:
Percent of districts identified by the State as having a significant discrepancy in the rates of out-of-school suspensions and expulsions of greater than 10 days in a school year of students with disabilities by race and ethnicity. (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A); 1412(a)(22))
Indicator 4B Measurement:
The number of students with disabilities suspended out-of-school for more than 10 days in a school year by race, divided by the October 2, 2019 count of students with disabilities, by race.
Source of data:
Numbers of suspensions were reported in the PD8 report for the 2019-20 school year in Table 1, Section 3, Column B Total. The October 2, 2019 count of students was reported through the Student Information Repository System (SIRS) and verified in the VR5 report, Section C, Report 14.
Criteria for notification:
- Minimum of 10 students with disabilities of a specific race were suspended out of school for more than 10 days;
- Minimum of 30 students with disabilities were enrolled on October 2, 2019; and
- The district’s 4B suspension rate is two or more standard deviations above the 2019-20 statewide average suspension rate of 0.76. The 2019-20 standard deviation was .985.
- Districts with any group with a 4B suspension rate of 1.97 or higher are notified they have a significant discrepancy.
Criteria for being “At Risk”:
- Minimum of 10 students with disabilities of a specific race were suspended out of school for more than 10 days;
- Minimum of 30 students with disabilities were enrolled on October 2, 2019; and
- The district’s 4B suspension rate is above the statewide average in the 2019-20 school year but lower than two standard deviations above the statewide average in the 2019-20 school year.
Criteria for Notification and Explanation of Data Used for Indicator 9
Disproportionality in the Identification of Students for Special Education
Notification Year: 2020-21 School Year
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.
Measurement:
Relative risk ratios are computed for each race/ethnicity. The ratios are a comparison of the risk of each race/ethnicity category to be identified for special education services compared to the risk of all other race/ethnicity categories combined to be identified for special education services. The ratios indicate how much more or less likely each race/ethnicity is to be identified for special education services compared to all other race/ethnicities combined.
The following calculations and methodologies are used:
For the focus group¹, the count of students with disabilities of a specific race/ethnicity are divided by the total count of students of the specific race/ethnicity. Example: a count of 20 Hispanic students identified as students with disabilities is divided by a count of 75 Hispanic students with and without disabilities enrolled in the district = 0.2666.
For the comparison group², the count of students with disabilities of all other race/ethnicities are divided by the total count of students of all other race/ethnicities. Example: a count of 59 non-Hispanic students identified as students with disabilities is divided by a count of 400 non-Hispanic students with and without disabilities enrolled in the district = 0.1475.
The focus group risk ratio is divided by the comparison group risk ratio to get the relative risk ratio. Example: 0.2666 is divided by 0.1475 = 1.807
Criteria for Notification:
- At least 10 students with disabilities of particular race/ethnicity were enrolled in district; and
- At least 30 students of particular race/ethnicity were enrolled in the district; and
- The relative risk ratio for any race/ethnicity is 2.5 or higher.
Source of data:
- The number of students with disabilities receiving special education by race/ethnicity as of October 7, 2020 were reported through the Student Information Repository System (SIRS) and verified in the VR5, Section C, Reports 15A + 15B.
- The total enrollment of all students (with and without disabilities) in the school district’s jurisdiction by race/ethnicity is the sum of the enrollment by race/ethnicity reported by each school building located in the district on October 7, 2020 through the Student Information Repository System (SIRS), including out-of-district placements.
¹ The focus group is the race/ethnicity or race/ethnicity/disability combination being evaluated.
² The comparison group is all other race/ethnicities or all other race/ethnicity/disability combinations than the focus group.
Criteria for Notification and Explanation of Data Used for Indicator 10
Disproportionality by Race/Ethnicity in the Identification of Students by Specific Disabilities
Notification Year: 2020-21 School Year
Indicator 10 Measurement:
Six relative risk ratios are computed for each race/ethnicity. The relative risk ratios are a comparison of the risk of each race to be identified by specific disabilities compared to the risk of all other races combined to be identified by specific disabilities. The specific disabilities evaluated are: Autism, Emotional Disturbance, Intellectual Disability, Learning Disability, Other Health Impairment, and Speech or Language Impairment. The ratios indicate how much more or less likely each race/ethnicity is to be identified by specific disabilities compared to all other race/ethnicities combined.
The following calculations and methodologies are used:
For the focus group¹, the count of students with disabilities of a specific race/ethnicity in a specific disability category are divided by the total count of the specific race/ethnicity. Example: a count of 13 black students classified with Autism is divided by a count of 59 black students with and without disabilities enrolled in the district = 0.2203.
For the comparison group², the count of students with disabilities of all other race/ethnicities in a specific disability category are divided by the total count of students of all other race/ethnicities. Example: a count of 25 non-black students classified with Autism is divided by a count of 217 non-black students with and without disabilities enrolled in the district = 0.1152. The focus group risk ratio is divided by the comparison group risk ratio to get the relative risk ratio. Example: 0.2203 is divided by 0.1152 = 1.9123
Criteria for Notification:
- At least 10 students with the specific disability of the race/ethnicity were enrolled in the district; and
- At least 30 students of the race/ethnicity were enrolled in district; and
- The relative risk ratio for any race/ethnicity is 4.0 or higher.
Source of Data:
- The number of students with disabilities receiving special education on October 7, 2020 by race/ethnicity and specific disability was reported through the Student Information Repository System (SIRS) and verified in the VR3 report (ages 4-5 plus ages 6-21).
- The total enrollment of all students (with and without disabilities) in the school district’s jurisdiction by race/ethnicity is the sum of the enrollment by race/ethnicity reported by each school building located in the district on October 7, 2020 through the Student Information Repository System (SIRS), including out-of-district placements.
For additional information on relative risk ratios see: https://ideadata.org/resource-library/54480c2b140ba0665d8b4569/.
¹ The focus group is the race/ethnicity or race/ethnicity/disability combination being evaluated.
² The comparison group is all other race/ethnicities or all other race/ethnicity/disability combinations than the focus group.