1 / 88

If we can dream it, We can achieve it.

If we can dream it, We can achieve it. Modified Consent Decree Presentation. Schools for All Children. Donnalyn Jaque-Antón, Associate Superintendent, Division of Special Education Los Angeles Unified School District. What we want for our children…. SCHOOLS FOR ALL CHILDREN.

adler
Download Presentation

If we can dream it, We can achieve it.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. If we can dream it, We can achieve it.

  2. Modified Consent Decree Presentation Schools for All Children Donnalyn Jaque-Antón, Associate Superintendent, Division of Special Education Los Angeles Unified School District

  3. What we want for our children…

  4. SCHOOLS FOR ALL CHILDREN

  5. “If you don’t know where you’re going any road will take you there.”

  6. BELIEVE . . . . In our children . . . In ourselves . . . Our beliefs are the core that keeps our children at the center of the work we do.

  7. BELIEVE . . . . In our children . . . In ourselves . . . Our beliefs are the bases for developing student-centered outcomes.

  8. Beliefs • High standards for all students • Equitable access to the core curriculum • Integration of students with disabilities • Academic results/achievement • Shared responsibility for all students • Collaborative environments • Monitoring and accountability must be part of the improvement process.

  9. MCD Progress Report – Year 1 (2003/2004) Positives: • CRU/PRN timely responses • Increased Individualized Transition Plans (ITPs) • Systemic behavioral support system • Increased participation in Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) • Establishment of Informal Dispute Resolution (IDR) • Development of data and report systems -Welligent, Enhanced SIS, DSS

  10. Needs: • Emphasis on MCD as a District Priority, from the top down • Accurate data across all systems • Accountability for benchmarks/outcomes by all • Timely IEP translations • Increased Graduation/Completion rates • Qualified staff • Timely initial assessments, 80 days MCD Progress Report – Year 1 (2003/2004)

  11. Accountability for Results MCD Review Teams • Central • Local District • School Review of Data • Reports • Monthly • Bi-monthly • Quarterly • Evidence of Completion of Action Steps

  12. Accountability for Results Actions • Targeted intervention • Targeted assistance • Corrective actions • Maintenance monitoring • On-going assistance

  13. Strategic Priorities • Accurate identification and appropriate assignment of services • Integration of students with disabilities • Access to the general curriculum and standards for academic achievement • Knowledgeable and qualified staff • Monitoring of performance indicators and accountability for results

  14. Accurate Identification and Appropriate Assignment of Services STRATEGIC PRIORITY I

  15. Accurate Identification and Appropriate Assignment of Services • Timely completion of evaluations and IEPs • Reduced overrepresentation • IEP services provided

  16. Accurate Identification and Appropriate Assignment of Services Outcome No. 10: Timely Completion By the end of the 2005-2006 school year: 90% of all initial evaluations shall be completed within 50 days 95% of all initial evaluations shall be completed within 65 days 98% of all initial evaluations shall be completed within 80 days Completion means that the evaluation has been completed and an IEP meeting convened. If the evaluation or IEP is delayed because of parent request or the child is unavailable for testing, the completion period shall be extended by the period of such parent request availability.

  17. Outcome #10 Results 2003/2004 2003-2004 Benchmark: 65% of all initial evaluations shall be completed and IEPs convened within 50 days; 75% of all initial evaluations shall be completed within 65 days; 98% of all initial evaluations shall be completed within 80 days.

  18. Detail: Outcome #10(Source: R. Gonzalez, 7/2004)

  19. Outcome #10 2004-2005 Benchmark: 75% of all initial evaluations shall be completed and IEPs held within 50 days; 90% of all initial evaluations and IEPs within 65 days; 98% of all initial evaluations and IEPs within 80 days.

  20. Accurate Identification and Appropriate Assignment of Services Outcome No. 18: African American students identified as emotionally disturbed By June 2006, 90% of African American students identified as emotionally disturbed during initial or triennial evaluation, will demonstrate evidence of a comprehensive evaluation as defined by the Independent Monitor and consideration for placement in the least restrictive environment as determined by the Independent Monitor. New Outcome

  21. Outcome #18 Status 2003/2004 African American Students New Outcome 2004-2005 Benchmark: No benchmark set. Source: CASEMIS and CBEDS 12/03

  22. Accurate Identification and Appropriate Assignment of Services Outcome No. 13: Delivery of Services By June 30, 2006, 93% of the services identified on the IEPs of students with disabilities in all disability categories except specific learning disability will show evidence of service provision. In addition, by June 30, 2006, 93% of the services identified on the IEPs of students with specific learning disability will show evidence of service provision. New Outcome

  23. Outcome #13 Status 2003/2004 New Outcome Delivery of Services 2004-2005 Benchmark: No benchmark set.

  24. Accurate Identification and Appropriate Assignment of Services Outcome No. 13: Delivery of Services New Outcome By June 30, 2006, the District will provide evidence that at least 85% of the services identified on the IEPs of students with disabilities have a frequency and duration that meets IEP compliance.

  25. Outcome #13 Status 2003/2004 New Outcome Frequency and Duration of Services 2004-2005 Benchmark: No benchmark set.

  26. Integration of Students with Disabilities STRATEGIC PRIORITY II

  27. Integration of Students with Disabilities • Increased participation in the general education classroom through collaborative services and supports • Home school placement • Behavioral supports and interventions

  28. Integration of Students with Disabilities Outcome No. 6: Placement of Students with Disabilities (6-22) with Eligibilities of SLD and SLI By the end of the 2005-2006, the District will demonstrate a ratio of not less than 73% of students placed in the combined categories of 0-20% and 21-60% and not more than 27% students placed in the 61-100% category according to Federal placement reporting requirements.

  29. Outcome #6 Results 2002/2003 2003-2004 Benchmark: 63% of students with disabilities of SLD and SLI will not exceed 60% of their instructional day outside the general education classroom.

  30. Detail: Outcome #6, 2002/2003Source: Welligent (batch filtered, 7/04)

  31. Outcome #6 2004-2005 Benchmark: 68% of students with disabilities of specific learning disability (SLD) and speech and language impairment (SLI) will not exceed 60% of their instructional day outside the general education classroom.

  32. Integration of Students with Disabilities Outcome No. 7: Placement of Students with Disabilities (6-22) with All Other EligibilitiesBy the end of the 2005-2006, the District will demonstrate a ratio of not less than 52% of students placed in the combined categories of 0-20% and 21-60% and not more than 48% students placed in the 61-100% category according to Federal placement reporting requirements.

  33. Outcome #7 Results 2003/2004 2003-2004 Benchmark: 20.8% of students with all other disabilities will not exceed 60% of their instructional day outside of the general education classroom.

  34. Detail: Outcome #7, 2003/2004Source: Welligent (batch filtered, 7/04)

  35. Outcome #7 2004-2005 Benchmark: 40% of students with all other disabilities other than specific learning disability (SLD) and speech and language impairment (SLI) will not exceed 60% of their day outside the general education classroom.

  36. Integration of Students with Disabilities Outcome No. 8A: Home School PlacementThe district will ensure that the percentage of students with disabilities of specific learning disabilities (SLD) and speech and language impaired (SLI) who are in their home school does not fall below 92.9% by June 30, 2006. New Outcome

  37. Outcome #8 Status 2003/2004 Specific Learning Disabilities and Speech and Language Impairment New Outcome Ratio of .617 used to determine NPS students Source: Welligent 6/1/04, SESAC 3/12/04 (NPS) Current IEPs Only – April 2003-April 2004 2004-2005 Benchmark: No benchmark set.

  38. Outcome No. 8B: Home School PlacementBy June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of students with disabilities with all other eligibilities in kindergarten and sixth grade to 65% and the percentage of students with disabilities with all other eligibilities in ninth grade to 60%. Integration of Students with Disabilities New Outcome

  39. Outcome #8 Status 2003/2004 New Outcome Disabilities Other than SLD/SLI Source: Welligent 6/1/04, SESAC 3/12/04 (NPS) Ratio of .617 used to determine NPS students Current IEPs Only – April 2003-April 2004 2004-2005 Benchmark: No benchmark set.

  40. Outcome No. 8C: Home School PlacementBy June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of students with disabilities with all other eligibilities in elementary grades one through five in their home school to 62.0%.By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of students with disabilities in middle school grades seven and eight in their home school to 55.2%.By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of students with disabilities in high school grades ten and above in their home school to 36.4%. Integration of Students with Disabilities New Outcome

  41. Outcome #8 Status 2003/2004 New Outcome Source: Welligent 6/1/04, SESAC 3/12/04 (NPS) Ratio of .617 used to determine NPS students Current IEPs Only – April 2003-April 2004 2004-2005 Benchmark: No benchmark set.

  42. Outcome No. 5A: Reduction of Long-term SuspensionsBy June 30, 2006 the District will reduce the percent of students with disabilities suspended 6 or more days from 9.14% of the total suspensions of students with disabilities occurring during the 2001-2002 school year to 2% of the total suspension of students with disabilities. Integration of Students with Disabilities

  43. Outcome #5A Results 2003/2004 2003-2004 Benchmark: Establish a Districtwide system for delivery and accountability of behavior services for schools to compliantly address the behavioral needs of students with disabilities, including discipline procedures.

  44. Detail: Outcome 5A, 2003/2004(Source: SIS, 6/2004)

  45. Outcome #5A 2004-2005 Benchmark: Reduce the percent of students suspended 6 or more cumulative days occurring during the 2004-2005 school year to 5.14%.

  46. Integration of Students with Disabilities Outcome No. 5B: Other suspensionsBy June 30, 2006 the District will reduce the risk of suspension for the population of students with disabilities by 30% from the rate of 14.7 in the 2002-03 school year to a rate lower than 10.3%. New Outcome Outcome No. 5C: Other suspensionsBy June 30, 2006 the District will reduce disproportionality in the districtwide rate of suspension of students with disabilities in comparison to their non-disabled peers to a relative risk ratio of no more than 1.75X discrepant, such that the population of students with disabilities is no more than 1.75 times more likely to be suspended than the population of their non-disabled peers.

  47. Outcome 5B/C Status2003/2004 New Outcome • Source: • California Department of Education, Educational Demographics Unit • CASMIS December (ages 5-22 excluding NPS Students • Student Information Systems • July 1, 2003 – June 15, 2004 2004-2005 Benchmark: No benchmark set.

  48. Integration of Students with Disabilities Outcome No. 17: IEP Team Consideration of Special Factors – Behavioral Interventions, Strategies, and Supports New Outcome By June 2006, the percentage of students with autism with a behavior support plan will increase to 40% and the percentage of students with emotional disturbance with a behavior support plan will increase to 72%. 2004-2005 Benchmark: No benchmark set.

  49. Access to the General Curriculum and Standards for Academic Achievement STRATEGIC PRIORITY III

  50. Access to the General Curriculum and Standards for Academic Achievement • Participation in Statewide assessments • Progress in the general curriculum • Increased graduation and completion rates • Reduced drop out rate • Transition planning for adult living

More Related