U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA 20041...

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs

Building the Legacy: IDEA 2004 1

General Supervision



Concepts of General Supervision

Accountability for Implementation & Improved Results



The BIG 8 of General Supervision

(and Continuous Improvement)

1. What are the minimum components for General Supervision ?

2. How do the components form a state system ?

3. What are the annual processes operating within the system ?



Difference between

Concepts & a

Model

Each state develops

Its Own Model of General

Supervision based on what’s

required and desired



State Performance

Plan

Policies, Procedures, and Effective

Implementation

Data on Processes

and Results

Targeted Technical

Assistance & Professional Development

Effective Dispute

Resolution

Integrated Monitoring Activities

Improvement, Correction,

Incentives & Sanctions

Components of General

Supervision

Ask Yourself

How Each Piece

Operates and

Fits Into the

Whole

Fiscal Management



Requirements:State Performance Plan (SPP)

34 CFR §§76.720 and 80.40 Annual performance reports (APRs)

34 CFR §300.157 Performance goals and indicators

34 CFR §300.601 SPP

34 CFR §300.600 (c) and (d) Monitoring and enforcement

34 CFR §300.602 Targets and reporting

State Performance

Plan



State Performance Plan

Stakeholders should be actively involved in all aspects of the SPP.

The development and implementation of the SPP leads to improved results.

Reporting is critical to ensuring accountability to the public.

The SPP is the blueprint for systems change.

State Performance

Plan



Requirements:Policies, Procedures & Effective

Implementation 20 U.S.C. §1232d(b)(1) Program

administered in accordance with rules 20 U.S.C. §1232e(b)(1) local

educational agency (LEA) administers program in accordance with rules

34 CFR §76.700 Compliance with statutes

34 CFR §300.100 State policies and procedures (state plan)

34 CFR §300.154 Methods of ensuring services

34 CFR §§300.200-300.201 LEA policies and procedures

Policies, Procedures & Effective

Implementation



Policies, Procedures & Effective Implementation

Aligned with IDEA Implemented by local programs Methods to detect noncompliance and

ensure correction of noncompliance Program improvement through

improvement planning and incentives Current interagency agreements and

memoranda of understanding (MOU) when required to ensure IDEA implementation

Mechanisms to determine effectiveness of agreements and MOU

Policies, Procedures & Effective

Implementation



Requirements: Effective Dispute Resolution

34 CFR §300.150 Procedural safeguards

34 CFR §§300.151-300.153 Complaint procedures

34 CFR §300.500 Procedural safeguards

34 CFR §300.504 Procedural safeguards notice

Effective Dispute

Resolution



Effective Dispute Resolutions

Are timely Track issues Inform onsite and offsite

monitoring activities Periodically evaluate

effectiveness of resolutions Determine that parents and

families and students understand their rights, especially in cases where there are few or no complaints, hearings, or other resolutions

Effective Dispute

Resolution



Requirements:Data on Processes & Results

20 U.S.C. §1232d(b)(4) Evaluate effectiveness

20 U.S.C. §1232e(b) LEAs report to the state educational agency (SEA), board, Secretary

34 CFR §300.601(b) Data collection

34 CFR §300.602 Targets and reporting

34 CFR §300.640 Annual report of children served

Data on Processes & Results




Collection and verification• 618• Dispute resolution• Previous monitoring reports• other

Examination and analyses• Areas of state concern• Clusters of related indicators

Reporting• APR (state)• LEA Performance compare to state

targetsStatus determination Improvement

• Data are used to plan and revise activities




Requirements:Integrated Monitoring Activities

20 U.S.C. §1232d(b)(3)(A) Proper methods of monitoring

34 CFR §300.120 Monitoring least restrictive environment (LRE)

34 CFR §300.149 SEA responsibility for general supervision

34 CFR §300.600 State monitoring





Stakeholders involvedFocus on specific hypotheses for areaTeams include family members Investigation related to noncompliance

and program improvementMultiple methods and data sources to

monitor every program, every yearActivities include continuous examination

of performance for compliance and results

Written reports specify evidence of correction and of improvement

Internal and external technical assistance and professional development support improvement and correction




Requirements:Targeted TA and Professional

Development

20 U.S.C. §1232d(b)(3)(B), (C), (D) Provide TA, promising practices and disseminate information

20 U.S.C. §1232e(b)(8) LEA has effective dissemination to teachers and administrators

34 CFR §300.119 TA on LRE

34 CFR §300.156 Personnel qualifications

Targeted T/A &

Prof Dev



Targeted Technical Assistance & Professional Development

Directly connected to the SPP and improvement activities

Provided to correct noncompliance and improve results

Principles of adult learningMeasure effectiveness of implementation Incorporate various agencies in

development and disseminationDistribute promising practices and

evidence based practices to local programs

Targeted T/A &

Prof Dev



Requirements:Improvement, Correction, Incentives, & Sanctions

20 U.S.C. §1232d(b)(3(A) and (E) Proper methods – correction and enforcement

34 CFR §80.12 Special conditions 34 CFR §80.43 Enforcement 34 CFR §300.222 LEA compliance 34 CFR §300.600 State monitoring

and enforcement 34 CFR §§300.603-300.604

Determinations and enforcement actions

34 CFR §300.608 Enforcement

Improvement & Correction,




Improvement, Correction, Incentives & Sanctions

Explicit state authority to enforce regulations, policies, and procedures

TA to ensure correction of noncompliance

Improvement planning to meet targets Corrective action planning and follow-up

tracking of correction and improvement Range of formalized strategies and/or

sanctions for enforcement with written timelines

Determines the status of local programs annually

Improvement & Correction,




Requirements:Fiscal Management

34 CFR §§300.704 and 300.705 Distribution of funds

34 CFR §300.209 Treatment of charter schools

34 CFR §300.133 Private schools proportionate share

34 CFR §§300.163 and 300.203-300.205 Maintenance of effort

34 CFR §§300.162 and 300.202 Excess cost/supplement not supplant

34 CFR §300.226 Early intervening services 15%

OMB Circular A-133 – Single Audits

Fiscal Management



Fiscal Management

States distribute funds in accordance with federal requirements.

Funds are used in accordance with federal and state requirements.

States provide oversight on the use of funds.

Funds are aligned to problem areas in the SPP/APR

Fiscal Management



Describing a ‘System’ of General Supervision

Problems in Description (beginning list) Equating general supervision as only

onsite monitoring Viewing administration as a

collection of separate and isolated functions

Defining accountability as an event rather than a ‘state’ and process

Others?



State Performance

Plan

Policies, Procedures, and

Effective Implementation

Data on Processes

and Results

Targeted T/A & Professional Development

Effective Dispute

Resolution




Fiscal Manage-

ment

What is‘System ?’



It’s about Better Results



State Performance

Plan

Policies, Procedures, and Effective

Implementation

Data on Processes

and Results

Targeted Technical

Assistance & Professional Development

Effective Dispute

Resolution




Fiscal Management

General Supervision

Big 8

Building the Legacy 2004 27 U.S. Department of Education

Office of Special Education Programs

Monitoring and Enforcement

Primary focus of federal and state monitoring activities must be on:

– Improving education results and functional outcomes

– Ensuring that public agencies meet program requirements, particularly those most closely related to improving educational results

28

State Monitoring and Enforcement (TB 1-1)

34 CFR 300.600(a) requires that a state:– Monitor the implementation of

Part B – Enforce, and

– Report annually on performance

30

State must Monitor LEAs

The state must monitor its LEAs, using quantifiable indicators in each of the following priority areas, and using such qualitative indicators as are needed to adequately measure performance in those areas:

31

Monitoring Priority Areas

Provision of FAPE in the LRE State exercise of general supervision,

including child find, effective monitoring, the use of resolution meetings, mediation, and a system of transition services as defined in 34 CFR 300.43 and in 20 U.S.C. 1437(a)(9) and

32

Monitoring Priority Areas

Disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services, to the extent the representation is the result of inappropriate identification



Analyzing LEA Performance

Each state must use the targets in its SPP to analyze the performance of each LEA



When must states begin reporting on LEA Performance?

Spring 2007 – State must report to public on status of LEAs against 2005-06 SPP targets



Secretary’s Determinations

Secretary annually reviews the APR and, based on the information provided in the report, information obtained through monitoring visits, and any other public information available, the Secretary determines if the state:



Secretary’s Determinations

• Meets requirements• Needs assistance• Needs intervention• Needs substantial intervention

39

Additional Requirements (TB 5/6-7)

– That the SEA must not make further payments under Part B of the act to specified state agencies or LEAs that caused or were involved in the Secretary’s determination

40

When LEA has Not Met Requirements

If an SEA determines that an LEA is not meeting the requirements of Part B of the act, including the targets in the state's performance plan, the SEA must prohibit the LEA from reducing the LEA’s maintenance of effort under 34 CFR 300.203 for any fiscal year



State Enforcement

Needs assistance Advises LEA of available sources of TA,

includingProvision of advice by expertsProfessional development,

instructional strategies and methodsDesignating distinguished educatorsCollaboration with Institutions of

Higher Education (IHEs), national technical assistance (TA) centers, and private TA providers



State Enforcement

Needs intervention Corrective action or improvement plan Withholds any further payments under

Part B



Compliance Agreements?

• Does the SEA have option to use a compliance agreement for an LEA which cannot correct in one year?– No. Compliance agreements apply only to

states– If LEA cannot timely correct, state is out

of compliance with it general supervisory responsibility

– SEA can request to enter in compliance agreement with Secretary



State Enforcement

Needs substantial intervention Withholds any further payments under

Part B



Other Enforcement Mechanisms

A state is not restricted from utilizing any other authority available to it to monitor and enforce the requirements of Part B



OSEP On-going Oversight

• Will focus on performance and compliance• Will primarily identify states for focused

monitoring by looking at their performance against the targets

• Other data sources such as rank orders and audits will also be used



Is CIFMS going away?

Verification-General supervision-Data-Financial systems

Focused MonitoringRelated to Specific Indicators

SPP/APR

Nope!

IV. State Monitoring and Enforcement (§300.600)

Section 300.600(a) has been amended to require States to: (1) monitor implementation of Part B of the Act; (2) make determinations annually about the performance of each LEA using categories in Section 300.603(b)(1); (3) enforce Part B of the Act in accordance with the statutory enforcement mechanisms that are appropriate for States to apply to LEAs; and (4) annually report on the performance of the State and of each LEA under Part B of the Act.

These amendments also clarify, in §300.600(e), that a State, in exercising its monitoring responsibilities under §300.600(d), must ensure that when it identifies noncompliance with the requirements of Part B of the Act by its LEAs, the noncompliance will be corrected as soon as possible, and in no case, later than one year after the State’s identification of the noncompliance. (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1416(a))

Implementation considerations: • States have some discretion in developing a process for making annual determinations on the performance of LEAs. • However, States’ annual determination processes must include consideration of: o an LEA’s performance on all State Performance Plan (SPP) compliance indicators; o whether an LEA submitted valid and reliable data for each indicator; o LEA-specific audit findings; and o any uncorrected noncompliance from any source.

• States are also advised to consider performance on results indicators, such as an LEA’s graduation and dropout rates, or the participation rate of students with disabilities in State assessments when making annual determinations. • States must use enforcement mechanisms to enforce this part consistent with §300.604. • If States are unable to correct noncompliance within one year of identification, States may enter into a compliance agreement with the Department under section 457 of GEPA, if the Department deems a Compliance Agreement is appropriate.

For More Information

• http://idea.ed.gov

• http://www.ed.gov

• http://www.monitoringcenter.lsuhsc.edu

• http://www.rrfcnetwork.org

U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA 20041...

Documents

Transcript of U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs Building the Legacy: IDEA 20041...