Special Education


State Performance Plan (SPP) for 2005-2012 - Revised February 2011 - Indicator 13

Overview of the State Performance Plan Development

See Overview of the State Performance Plan (SPP) Development preceding Indicator 1.  In addition to the plan development activities described previously, the Department sought the input on data collection for this indicator with the transition subcommittee of the Commissioner's Advisory Panel for Special Education Services (CAP), representatives of the Transition Coordination Sites (TCS) and representatives of the Employment and Disability Institute of Cornell University working on TransQUAL Online, a tool to support school district teams to improve their practices in career development and transition.

New York State (NYS) consulted with CAP to establish the new baseline and improvement activities for Indicator 13 reported in February 2011.  The State’s technical assistance and support networks were also involved in these discussions.

Monitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionPart B/Child Find

Indicator 13:

Indicator definition used through school year 2008-09:
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.

Beginning with the 2009-10 school year, this Indicator is defined as follows:
Percent of youth with IEPs aged 15* and above with an IEP that includes appropriate measurable post-secondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age- appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those post-secondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs.  There also must be evidence that the student was invited to the IEP Team meeting where transition services are to be discussed and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency was invited to the IEP Team meeting with the prior consent of the parent or student who has reached the age of majority.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))

* Note: The federal indicator is age 16.  NYS has elected to measure this indicator beginning at age 15, since State regulations require that transition services be indicated in a student’s IEP beginning with the IEP in effect when the student turns age 15 and updated annually.  In NYS, the IEP Team is the Committee on Special Education (CSE).

Measurement used through school year 2008-09:

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.

Measurement used as of school year 2009-10:

Percent = [(# of youth with IEPs aged 15 and above with an IEP that includes appropriate measurable post-secondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age-appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those post-secondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs.  There also must be evidence that the student was invited to the CSE meeting where transition services are to be discussed and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency was invited to the CSE meeting with the prior consent of the parent or student who has reached the age of majority) divided by the (# of youth with an IEP age 15 and above)] times 100.

Data Source:

NYS will use data taken from State monitoring, as described below.

Overview of Issue/Description of System or Process

State law and regulations define transition services to mean a coordinated set of activities for a student with a disability, designed within a results-oriented process that is focused on improving the academic and functional achievement of the student with a disability to facilitate the student's movement from school to post-school activities, including, but not limited to, post-secondary education, vocational education, integrated competitive employment (including supported employment), continuing and adult education, adult services, independent living, or community participation. The coordinated set of activities must be based on the individual student's needs, taking into account the student's strengths, preferences and interests, and must include needed activities in 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.

When the purpose of an IEP meeting is to consider transition services, the meeting notice must indicate this purpose, indicate that the school district/agency will invite the student to participate in the meeting; and identify any other agency that will be invited to send a representative.

In NYS, transition services must be in a student's IEP beginning not later than the first IEP to be in effect when the student is age 15 (and at a younger age, if determined appropriate), and updated annually.  The IEP must, under the applicable components of the student’s IEP, include:

  • under the student’s present levels of performance, 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;
  • appropriate measurable post-secondary goals based upon age appropriate transition assessments relating to training, education, employment and, where appropriate, independent living skills;
  • annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs;
  • statement of the transition service needs of the student that focuses on the student's courses of study, such as participation in advanced placement courses or a vocational education program;
  • 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; and
  • 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, before the student leaves the school setting.

The Office of Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities’ (VESID) Strategic Plan Goals, Key Performance Indicators and Targets (June 2004, revised October 2004) included the Key Performance Indicator, “Individualized Education Program (IEP) with transition goals, objectives and services for students with disabilities.” 

Plan to collect baseline data

NYS will collect data from a statewide representative sample of school districts on this indicator and use a monitoring protocol to select and review the IEPs in the representative sample of school districts. Over a six-year period beginning with the 2005-06 school year, all school districts will provide data on this indicator.

Sampling Methodology

NYS has distributed all school districts among six statewide representative samples. These six groups of school districts were tested with Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and there was no statistical difference among the six groups of school districts on the population variables described in Attachment 2.  These population variables were from the 2000 decennial census.  New York City is the only school district in the State with a total enrollment of 50,000 or more students, so it will be represented in each of the six samples.

By January 2006, the State Education Department (SED) will notify the selected sample districts that they must conduct a self-review of a randomly selected sample of IEPs of all students with disabilities ages 15-21. 

Federal Indicator Number Eligible Population of Students From Which A Random Sample Must be Selected Minimum Number of Students in the Sample Method for Selecting Students Required Documentation
13 All students with disabilities ages 15-21 who are provided special education services in district-operated programs or under contract with other service providers. All students up to 30 eligible students.
NYC samples 100 students.		 Random selection using a random number table Documentation period is seven years.
Maintain list of all eligible students, copy of Random Number Table used, beginning random number for selecting students and list of all students who were selected and their number

A school district may choose to review additional IEPs above the minimum number in order to improve the confidence with which results can be generalized to the entire population especially when there is wide variation in the results.  In some cases, the State may require the review of additional IEPs. 

SED will require that school districts maintain documentation as described above if they choose to report data on a sample of students. The totally random sampling methodology and required documentation should eliminate selection bias.  The State will attempt to prevent missing data by first describing precisely what SED needs to collect, providing technical assistance and then following up with school districts to request missing data. The completeness of data collection will improve after the first year and will continue to improve as long as requirements remain unchanged.  All issues of confidentiality will be handled in accordance with the rules and procedures in FERPA. SED will also guard against divulging personally identifiable information by not reporting results when there are less than five students for whom data are available or when those results can be easily calculated based on other data provided. 

IEP Review Process

By February 2006, SED will provide an “IEP/Transition Self-Review” monitoring protocol to all school districts.  The school districts selected for the representative sample will be directed to complete the “Transition IEP” self-review monitoring protocol on a representative sample of IEPs and document results on a form prescribed by SED.  The form will require documentation of the percent of students whose IEPs met each of the compliance requirements on the monitoring protocol.  The State is exploring the development of an on-line reporting system (e.g., an adaptation of the TransQUAL Online system) through which school districts would be required to submit the aggregate results of the self-review.   SED will arrange for professional development on the self-review protocol and TransQUAL Online system through TCS and SETRC.  Training will be ongoing in subsequent years, as needed.

Districts will be directed to complete and enter data on their IEP reviews by August 31.  SED will arrange for random verification reviews of reported data in school districts in each Special Education Quality Assurance (SEQA) region.  All school districts identified through the self-review or verification process as not having IEPs that include appropriate documentation of post-secondary goals and transition services on a student's IEP will be directed to correct the noncompliance as soon as possible, but no later than one year from the date of identification. 

The review of IEPs required a determination as to whether the IEPs in the sample selected included specific transition content information and whether the content of the IEP would reasonably enable the student to meet measurable post-secondary goals.  A qualitative review of the IEPs around the following eight components was conducted:

  • Students actively participate in planning their educational programs leading toward achievement of post-secondary goals.
  • IEPs are individualized and are based on the assessment information about the student's, including individual needs, preferences, interests and strengths of the students.
  • Transition needs identified in the students' assessment information are included in the students' present levels of performance.
  • Annual goals address students' transition needs identified in the present levels of performance and are calculated to help each student progress incrementally toward the attainment of the post-secondary goals.
  • The recommended special education programs and services will assist the students to meet their annual goals relating to transition.
  • The statements of needed transition services are developed in consideration of the students' needs, preferences and interests, are directly related to the students' goals beyond secondary education and will assist the students to reach their post-secondary goals.
  • Courses of student are linked to attainment of the students' post-secondary goals
  • The school district and appropriate participating agencies coordinate their activities in support of the students' attainment of post-secondary goals.

Baseline Data for FFY 2005 (2005-06)

During FFY 2005, 33.3 percent of youth, ages 15 and above, had IEPs that included coordinated, measurable annual IEP goals and transition services to reasonably enable them to meet their post-secondary goals.

Discussion of FFY 2005 Baseline Data

The 2005 baseline data is based on the monitoring review of IEPs from a representative sample of 108 school districts, including New York City (NYC).  The total number of students with IEPs, ages 15-21 in NYS during the 2005-06 school year was 54,780.  The total number of IEPs reviewed from these representative school districts was 3,541.  Of the 3,541 IEPs, 1,176 were found to have been in compliance with all IEP transition requirements.

Of the 108 school districts:

  • 43 school districts reported that 0 percent of their student's IEPs that were reviewed met compliance with the IEP transition requirements.
  • 34 school districts reported between 1 and 49 percent of their students' IEPs that were reviewed met the transition requirements.
  • 12 school districts reported between 50 and 79 percent of their IEPs that were reviewed met the transition requirements.
  • 19 percent reported between 80 and 100 percent of IEPs that were reviewed met the transition requirements.

Regional variations are noted in the following chart.  NYC, from which nearly one third of the students with disabilities are educated, reported that none of their IEPs met all of the compliance indicators.    

2005-06 Indicator 13 - Transition IEP FFY 2005 Baseline Data
Transition Coordination Site (TCS) Region Total # of School Districts Reviewed Number of Reviewed School Districts with IEPs found in Compliance
0% of IEPs in compliance 1-49% of IEPs in compliance 50-79% of IEPs in compliance 80-100% of IEPs in compliance
Eastern 18 6 3 3 6
Hudson Valley 22 16 4 2 0
Long Island 23 2 6 4 11
Mid-State 14 5 7 1 1
Mid-West 17 8 8 0 1
NYC 1 1 0 0 0
Western 13 5 6 2 0
Totals 108 43 34 12 19

Technical assistance personnel from SED’s funded TCSs and/or SETRC facilitated the reviews of most of the school districts compliance with this indicator.  This served as part of the verification process and afforded districts technical assistance during the compliance review.  In most cases it was indicated that districts are often providing appropriate transition programs and services but not accurately documenting this information on the students' IEPs.

Data for each of the eight compliance indicators is reported in the chart below.  Major findings include:

  • 23 percent of districts reported compliance with the requirement for measurable post-secondary goals.  This is a new requirement for school districts (IDEA 2004).
  • 24 percent reported compliance with documenting a student's transition needs under the IEP section "present levels of performance."  However, TCS and SETRC staff participating in these reviews reported that district staff were generally able to orally describe the student's needs, but often failed to accurately capture those needs in writing in the IEPs.
  • More than 70 percent of school districts were in compliance with the requirement to document recommended special education programs and services.
  • More than 57 percent of the school districts invited and/or otherwise provided for the student's participation in the transition planning process. 
FFY 2005 Baseline
Compliance Rate for Individual Regulatory Citations - Transition IEPs
Requirement Number of Districts in Compliance Percent of Districts in Compliance
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%
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%
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%
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%
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%
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%
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%
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%

New Baseline Data for FFY 2009 (2009-10)

Federal changes in the definition of the indicator in March 2009 necessitated resetting a new baseline.  Data reported for the 2009-10 school year below are the State’s new baseline data; they cannot be compared to prior years’ data.

During FFY 2009, 67.2 percent of youth, ages 15 and above, had IEPs that included appropriate measurable post-secondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age-appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those post-secondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs.

Discussion of FFY 2009 Baseline Data

The FFY 2009 baseline data is based on the monitoring review of IEPs from a representative sample of 107 school districts, including NYC.  Districts used a State-developed self-review monitoring protocol to review a sample of IEPs of students with disabilities aged 15 and above to determine if each IEP is in compliance with all transition planning requirements.  The self-review monitoring protocol is posted at https://www.p12.nysed.gov/specialed/spp/13selfreview-410.pdf.  The total number of students with IEPs, ages 15-21, in NYS during 2009-10 was 58,055.  The total number of IEPs reviewed from these representative school districts was 3,321.  Of the IEPs reviewed, 2,232 were found to have been in compliance with all IEP transition requirements.

Of the 107 school districts:

  • 16 school districts (15 percent of the 107 school districts) reported that 0 percent of their student's IEPs that were reviewed met compliance with the IEP transition requirements.
  • 15 school districts (14 percent of the 107 school districts) reported between one (1) and 49 percent of the students' IEPs that were reviewed met the transition requirements.
  • 15 school districts (14 percent of the 107 school districts) reported between 50 and 79 percent of their IEPs that were reviewed met the transition requirements.
  • 22 school districts (20.6 percent of the 107 school districts) reported between 80 and 99 percent of IEPs that were reviewed met the transition requirements.
  • 39 school districts (36.4 percent of the 107 school districts) reported 100 percent of IEPs that were reviewed were in compliance with all transition planning requirements.

Regional variations are noted in the following chart.  While the majority of school districts in each region of the State reported a compliance rate of between 80 to 100 percent, two regions of the State were an exception: In the Western region only one school district had a compliance rate in this range and in NYC the compliance rate was 25 percent.

Indicator 13 - Transition IEP FFY 2009 Baseline Data
RSE-TASC* Region Total # of School Districts Reviewed in FFY 2009 Number of Reviewed School Districts with IEPs found in Compliance
0% of
IEPs in compliance		 1-49% of IEPs in compliance 50-79% of IEPs in compliance 80-99% of IEPs in compliance 100% of IEPs in compliance
Capital District/ North Country 24 3 3 5 6 7
Central 9 2 2 0 2 3
Long Island 12 2 1 2 4 3
Lower Hudson 15 1 3 3 1 7
Mid-Hudson 7 0 1 2 2 2
Mid-South 11 3 1 0 0 7
Mid-State 11 2 0 1 4 4
Mid-West 8 0 0 0 2 6
New York City 1 0 1 0 0 0
West 9 3 3 2 1 0
Totals 107 16 15 15 22 39

*Regional Special Education Technical Assistance Support Centers

School districts that reported any IEP not in full compliance with all requirements were required to immediately correct those IEPs and provide an assurance of correction of noncompliance to SED, which was verified by the State’s monitoring staff. 

Also, school districts that reported less than 100 percent of IEPs in full compliance with all requirements were issued findings in 2010. School districts are required to correct these findings as soon as possible but no later than within 12 months from notification and report an assurance of correction of noncompliance to SED. These corrections are also verified by the State’s monitoring staff. NYS will report on the correction of noncompliance identified during FFY 2009 in the February 2012 APR.

Measurable and Rigorous targets

FFY Measurable and Rigorous Target
2005
(2005-06)		 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.
2006
(2006-07)		 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.
2007
(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.
2008
(2008-09)**		 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.

Note: No reporting is required in the February 2010 APR submission, although data continued to be collected from individual school districts using the prior definition. (rev. 1/10)
2009
(2009-10)**		 100 percent of youth* aged 15 and above will have IEPs that include appropriate measurable post-secondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age-appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those post-secondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs. (rev. 1/10**)
2010
(2010-11)**		 100 percent of youth* aged 15 and above will have IEPs that include appropriate measurable post-secondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age-appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those post-secondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs. (rev. 1/10**)
2011
(2011-12)***		 100 percent of youth* aged 15 and above will have IEPs that include appropriate measurable post-secondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age-appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those post-secondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs, with evidence that the student was invited to the CSE meeting where transition services are to be discussed and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency was invited to the CSE meeting with the prior consent of the parent or student who has reached the age of majority.
2012
(2012-13)***		 100 percent of youth* aged 15 and above will have IEPs that include appropriate measurable post-secondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age-appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those post-secondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs, with evidence that the student was invited to the CSE meeting where transition services are to be discussed and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency was invited to the CSE meeting with the prior consent of the parent or student who has reached the age of majority.
*  Note: “percent of youth” means percent of youth with IEPs reviewed
** Note: Revisions to targets and reporting schedule made in 1/10 per federal guidance.
*** In FFY 2009, the United States Education Department (USED) requested states to add two additional years to the SPP, including adding two additional years of targets.

Improvement Activities/Timelines/Resources

Activity Timeline Resources
Provide targeted training and technical assistance to school districts to improve transition planning process; assist districts and adult service agencies to develop and strengthen transition programs and services. 2005-12* 14 RSE-TASC Transition Specialists funded through IDEA Part B discretionary funds (rev. 1/10)
Develop a self-review monitoring protocol for IEP transition planning requirements.  2006
Completed
See SPP 6/07		 SED staff
Develop and disseminate statewide a transition planning policy guidance document 2007-12* SED Policy Staff
Require one-sixth of NYS school districts and NYC to annually conduct a review of their policies, procedures and practices for transition planning.  Encourage RSE-TASC personnel to facilitate the transition self-reviews, providing on-site improvement strategies during the review process. (rev. 1/10) 2006-12* SED staff; RSE-TASC, and RSE-TASC Transition Specialists (rev. 1/10)
Require school districts with poor results in the transition planning to work with RSE-TASC Transition Specialists to improve their transition planning process. 2007-12* RSE-TASC Transition Specialists (rev. 1/10)
Develop a statewide training program on IEP transition planning development. 2007 RSE-TASC Transition Specialists (rev. 1/10)
Develop and require by regulation the use of a State-mandated IEP form. 
Provide statewide training on the use of the form.		 2008-11

2010-12		 SED staff

RSE-TASC Regional Trainers and Transition Specialists
Assist school districts to assess school improvement transition planning needs, prioritize desirable changes, develop strategic plans to implement those changes and record their results.  School improvement through TRANSQUAL ONLINE focuses on:
  • district program structure
  • interagency and interdisciplinary collaboration
  • family involvement
  • student involvement
  • student development

TransQUAL Online provides a standardized set of quality indicators for transition procedures based on Dr. Paula Kohler’s Taxonomy of Transition Programming, which allows a school to self-identify its needs for improvement and to use a strategic plan template to make improvements.  Hyperlinks are made to on-line technical assistance information and effective practices.  School data is password and username protected and history files are created from year to year so a school can revisit and revise its plans and self-assessments.  Approximately half the school districts in the State have used the on-line tool.  Aggregated data from the tool is available to the RSE-TASC Transition Specialists to identify common needs and guide local training and development activities. (rev. 1/10)		 2006-12* TRANSQAUAL ONLINE - funded by SED through Cornell University using IDEA Part B discretionary funds
Provide training on the development of the IEP to NYC school based transition coordinators.
Cornell University's Employment and Disability Institute will work with NYC to advance the use of the TRANSQUAL Online toolkit with secondary programs.  		2007-12* RSE-TASC Transition Specialists (rev.1/10)
Cornell University
Implement Model Transition Programs in 60 school districts throughout the State 2007-09
Completed See APR 2/10		 Competitive contracts with 60 school districts in collaboration with VESID Vocational Rehabilitation District Offices
Analyze and disseminate the results of NYS' Longitudinal Post School Indicators Study of outcomes for former special and general education students who left school in 2000 and 2001 with a Regents, Local or IEP diploma.  Comparative analysis of high school experiences of the class of 2001 in relation to their post-school outcomes indicate that the combined presence during the student’s K-12 educational program of helpful transition planning, early planning, provision of career and postsecondary information, participation by students and families, integration, academic achievement and a safe educational environment are significantly related to positive post school transitions.  2005-07
Study Completed
(See Board of Regents Report, 11/08)		 Post School Indicator Study - SUNY Potsdam contract with IDEA Part B funds.
Establish a State Transition Technical Assistance Center to provide professional development to the State’s transition specialists in the RSE-TASC and technical assistance resources to all school districts in the State. 2010-12 IDEA discretionary funds supports TAC through Cornell University
Update and streamline TransQUAL Online and develop a website devoted to transition resources and planning for students, families and district staff.  http://www.transitionsource.org/external link 2010-11 Contract with Cornell University – Transition Services Professional Development Support Center
Develop and deliver training on the following topics to school districts statewide:
  • Transition in the IEP
  • Student Exit Summary
  • Transition Assessments
  • State and Community Agencies
  • Self-advocacy/self-determination
  • Assistive Technology and Accessible Instructional Materials for Post-School Success
 2011-12 State Transition TAC

Transition Specialists in the RSE-TASC
*Note: Extended the end dates to 2012 coinciding with extended dates of the SPP (rev. 2/11).
Last Updated:

February 28, 2011ate --> ate -->