Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

See Overview of the Development of the Annual Performance Report on page 1.

Indicator #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.

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

 
Actual Baseline Data for FFY 2005:

NYS’ baseline data for this indicator is that in the 2005-06 school year, 86.5 percent of children who were referred from Part C to Part B for eligibility determination and services had their eligibility determination made and IEP implemented by their third birthdays. This percentage includes children whose delays in eligibility determination or IEP implementation were for reasons that are in compliance with State requirements.

In the 2005-06 school year, 117 school districts that are representative of the State provided data to the State on the numbers of children who were receiving Early Intervention (EI) services for whom parents provided consent to evaluate for determination of eligibility for preschool special education programs or services under Part B of IDEA. Data were collected on the numbers of children found eligible and numbers of children found not eligible prior to their third birthday and on the numbers of IEPs developed and implemented prior to their third birthday.  Data were also collected on the number of days past the child’s third birthday when the IEP was implemented and the reasons for the delays. Of the 117 school districts reporting data for this indicator, 116 provided information on all eligible children and 1 provided information on a sample of students.

The table below provides NYS’ baseline data calculation for the 2005-06 school year. 

*The federal calculation described in the measurement section of this indicator for New York State is as follows:  [(C ) /(A-B-D)]*100 = 26.9%

Column D in the table above includes the following other reasons determined to be "in compliance” with State requirements for implementing the IEP past the child’s third birthday for children included in Column A above:

• Parents chose to continue their children in EI and transition to preschool after the child became three years of age. (1172 children)

• Parents chose not to enroll child in recommended program. (This is the same as parents did not provide consent for services.) (84 children)

• Child moved from district prior to determination of eligibility or prior to IEP implementation by age 3. (16 children)

• Parents refused or repeatedly did not make the child available for the evaluation. (158 children)

• Parents canceled the scheduled evaluation and/or selected another site or approved evaluator.(21 children)

• Children were referred to CPSE less than 30 days before their third birthday. (113 children).

• Child transferred to a new district after the evaluation period began and parents and new district agreed to an extended time period. (2 children)

• Eligibility determined within timelines but services to start opening of school which is past child’s third birthday. (4 children) 

Some of the reasons provided by school districts for implementing the child’s IEP past the third birthday determined to be "out of compliance" with State requirements were as follows:

• Evaluator was not available or evaluator caused delays

• CPSE did not meet to determine eligibility in a timely manner

• Additional evaluations were needed than originally scheduled

• Scheduling difficulties

• Recommended Part B programs and/or services were not available when the child turned three years of age.

• Still awaiting evaluations as of reporting date

Number of Days Past the Third Birthday When IEPs were Implemented - Some of these children had delays for reasons that are “in compliance” with State requirements and some are for reasons that are considered to be “out of compliance” with State requirements. Data were not collected in such a way as to be able to distinguish between the two types of delays:

Days of Delay in Implementing IEPs of Children Eligible for Preschool Special Education who are Transitioning from Part C to Part B by SEQA Region

Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2005-06:

• All school districts that reported having less than 100% of children whose eligibility was not determined or whose IEPs were not implemented by their third birthday according by NYS’ formula for baseline calculation for this indicator  will be required to take actions to improve their compliance rates and report improvement to the State.

• NYS will modify its data collection instrument for the 2006-07 school year such that we will be able to compute a compliance rate based on all students referred from EI to preschool more precisely. 

• NYS is working towards being able to collect these data at the student level in such a way as to determine the student specific reasons for delays in eligibility determinations and IEP implementation.

• School districts reported large numbers of children whose parents opted to continue receiving services in EI until after the child turned three years of age.

• Based on NYS’ baseline calculation, the Central SEQA region had the lowest percentage of children who had timely determinations of eligibility and IEPs implemented by children’s third birthdays (59.3%). The Eastern region had the largest such percentage (96.5%).

• NYC reported the greatest percentage of children who experienced the longest delays (more than 30 days) in receiving services (84.6%) compared to other regions.

• School districts reported that most of the delays in implementing IEPs were for reasons that are in compliance with State requirements.

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets/ Improvement Activities/ Timelines/ Resources for FFY

The proposed target was revised to clarify that 100 percent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3, who are found eligible for Part B, will have an IEP developed and implemented by their third birthday or in compliance with State requirements.  This is necessary to account for reasons why a child’s IEP is not implemented by their third birthday that are legitimate reasons in compliance with State and federal requirements.  In particular, NYS allows a parent to retain their child in EI for a limited time after the child’s third birthday, but requires that the child’s eligibility for Part B services be first established.

The following improvement activities were completed:

• A joint Department of Health and State Education Department guidance document: Transition of Children at Age Three from the New York State Department of Health Early Intervention Program to the State Education Department Preschool Special Education Program or Other Early Childhood Services was developed and is available at:
  https://www.p12.nysed.gov/specialed/publications/preschool/transitionguide/cover.html
   

• A video/training program on transition from EI to preschool special education was developed and disseminated to Early Childhood Direction Centers and EI and preschool providers.
   

• The procedures to allow a temporary increase in approved special class sizes in those extenuating circumstances when adding a student to a special class is necessary to ensure that the student receives a free appropriate public education were revised in December 2005 to streamline the process.  See Child-Specific Allowance to Temporarily Exceed an Approved Special Class Size for Preschool Students with Disabilities were revised in December 2005.
  https://www.p12.nysed.gov/specialed/publications/preschool/childspecific1205.htm

The following improvement activity was added:

• To address the timely provision of preschool services to children transitioning from EI to preschool services, NYS will propose a regulatory amendment to address the role of the school district in evaluating a preschool child with a disability and providing services in a timely manner.