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: Effective General Supervision Part B / General Supervision |
Indicator 20: State reported data (618 and State Performance Plan (SPP) and APR) are timely and accurate.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))
Measurement:
State reported data, including 618 data and APRs, are:
-
Submitted on or before due dates (February 1 for child count, including race and ethnicity; placement; November 1 for exiting, discipline, personnel; and February 1 for APRs); and
-
Accurate (describe mechanisms for ensuring error free, consistent, valid and reliable data and evidence that these standards are met).
|
FFY |
Measurable and Rigorous Target |
FFY 2007 |
100 percent of State reported data, including 618 data and annual performance reports, are submitted on or before due dates and are accurate. |
Actual Target Data for FFY 2007:
93 percent of State-reported data, including 618 data and annual performance reports, were submitted on or before due dates and were accurate.
The following is a rubric developed by the United States Education Department (USED) to evaluate a state's performance on this indicator. The scores below represent New York State’s (NYS) self evaluation on each SPP/APR indicator and in the 618 data submission requirements. A score of 1 indicates a positive score in the cell and a 0 indicates the State was not able to provide all of the required information by the federal due date. NYS’ score on this rubric is 93 out of a possible 100 points.
Part B Indicator 20 - SPP/APR Data |
APR Indicator |
Valid and Reliable |
Correct Calculation |
Total |
1 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
1 |
3A |
1 |
1 |
2 |
3B |
1 |
1 |
2 |
3C |
1 |
1 |
2 |
4A |
1 |
1 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
7 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
8 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
9 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
10 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
11 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
12 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
13 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
14 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
15 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
16 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
17 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
18 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
19 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
Subtotal |
36 |
APR Score Calculation |
Timely Submission Points (5 pts for submission of APR/SPP by February 2, 2009) |
5 |
Grand Total |
41 |
Part B Indicator 20 - 618 Data |
Table |
Timely |
Complete Data |
Passed Edit Check |
Responded to Date Note Requests |
Total |
Table 1 – Child Count
Due Date: 2/1/08 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
Table 2 – Personnel
Due Date: 11/1/08 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
N/A |
3 |
Table 3 – Ed. Environments
Due Date: 2/1/08 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
Table 4 – Exiting
Due Date: 11/1/08 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
N/A |
3 |
Table 5 – Discipline
Due Date: 11/1/08 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
N/A |
3 |
Table 6 – State Assessment
Due Date: 2/1/09 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
N/A |
3 |
Table 7 – Dispute Resolution
Due Date: 11/1/08 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
N/A |
3 |
|
Subtotal |
21 |
|
Weighted Total (subtotal X 1.87; round ≤.49 down and ≥ .50 up to whole number) |
39 |
Indicator #20 Calculation |
|
A. APR Total |
41 |
|
|
B. 618 Total |
39 |
|
|
C. Grand Total |
80 |
|
Percent of timely and accurate data =
(C divided by 86 times 100) |
(C) / (86) X 100 = |
93 |
Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY 2007:
Explanation of Progress or Slippage
-
NYS did not achieve its target of 100 percent complete and accurate data submission to USED for the 2007-08 school year. The State’s score based on the USED self review rubric is 93.
-
All the deductions in points on the self-review rubric were caused by the same issue. For the 2007-08 school year, NYS began collecting most of the special education data required for the APR and by Section 618 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) at the individual student level, using the State’s individual student information repository system (SIRS). The State experienced significant delays in completing all reasonability checks, other edit checks, verification and certification processes and could not submit the December 3, 2007 child count and educational environments data (Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) Tables 1 and 3) by February 1, 2008. Instead Tables 1 and 3 were submitted to the Data Accountability Center (DAC) on July 2, 2008. Since these data were late being finalized, the State could not complete the required data analysis related to disproportionality and complete the review of each school district's policies, practices and procedures in time for reporting results in this APR for Indicators 9 and 10. As a result, two points were deducted for not providing valid and reliable data for Indicators 9 and 10 and two points for not providing timely data for OSEP Tables 1 and 3.
-
To address this issue, the State issued a notification to all school districts that the State’s child count date has been changed from December 1 to the first Wednesday in October, beginning in 2008-09 school year. This improvement activity, as well as others described below will result in the State's ability to obtain the data early enough in the school year so that the State has sufficient time to complete its review of school district policies, procedures and practices to determine if the data is the result of inappropriate policies, procedures and practices.
Improvement Activities Completed in 2007-08
- NYS accessed technical assistance related to timely and accurate data. Three representatives from NYS attended the last annual meeting of Part B data managers hosted by DAC. This meeting was useful to the data managers of the various special education data systems and ensures everyone is knowledgeable about IDEA requirements related to each indicator. These three individuals regularly peruse the various federally sponsored websites for new information and ideas. They also regularly participate in most technical assistance phone calls and webinars hosted by OSEP as well as by the Northeast Regional Resource Center (NERRC) and sometimes also by other resource centers. This ensures they remain current in their knowledge.
- In 2007-08, the Office of Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities (VESID) conducted a lengthy analysis of its 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 data and developed its criteria to determine a valid and reliable process to determine under-representation. VESID considered the resources of National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems (NCCRESt) in our determination of a methodology for determining under-representation, but selected criteria that would factor in NYS statistics related to identification of students for special education.
- Criteria for under-representation were applied to three years of data and criteria for over-representation were applied to 2007-08 school year data and school districts were identified if they met the criteria for significant disproportionality (Indicators 9 and 10). Identified school districts were notified and required to use the State-developed self-review monitoring protocol to review their policies, practices and procedures related to identification of students for special education or identification of students by specific disabilities and placement in particular least restrictive environment (LRE) settings.
- In order to be able to implement the requirements of Indicators 9 and 10, NYS changed the State’s child count date from December 1 to the first Wednesday in October, beginning in 2008-09 school year. As a result of this change, we anticipate submitting the October 1, 2008 child count and educational environments data to the USED by February 1, 2009. As a result of finalizing these data earlier, we should be able to do the required data analysis and notifications for Indicators 9 and 10 earlier and conduct the review of policies, practices and procedures in sufficient time for reporting in the next APR, on February 1, 2010.
- NYS provided explanatory comments (data notes) in the appropriate sections of each IDEA, Section 618 Table. We also provided data notes to DAC on all significant year-to-year changes that are flagged by DAC, however, there were no specific data notes that were requested by DAC for the 2007-08 school year.
- VESID staff conducted numerous training sessions on submitting special education data through SIRS during the 2007-08 school year and enhanced the SIRS 2008-09 documentation with special education information to facilitate accurate data reporting.
- VESID staff provided ongoing technical assistance through various means to all stakeholders involved in the data collection processes for special education and are routinely engaged in meetings with our colleagues in general education data collection offices to facilitate the timely and accurate collection of special education data through SIRS.
- The Comprehensive Special Education Information System (CSEIS) reports for State complaint timeliness and 12-month compliance have been revised to reflect data identified by the Special Education Quality Assurance (SEQA) office as useful for tracking of both issues.
- CSEIS users and managers received ongoing training in the system revisions and use of reports to monitor data.
- The Impartial Hearing Reporting System (IHRS) has been revised to incorporate an Impartial Hearing Officer (IHO) Toolbox. The Tool Box includes an extension calculator to assist IHO with timeliness of extensions and a performance report that allows them to see those cases where the decision is late.
- IHRS users have received technical assistance memorandum regarding system changes and have access to technical assistance via phone and e-mail on a daily basis.
Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets/ Improvement Activities / Timelines / Resources for FFY 2007 [If applicable]
The State’s child count date has been changed from December 1 to the first Wednesday in October, beginning in 2008-09 school year.