2012 BIE Summer Learning Institute July 12 & 14, 2012 Denver, Colorado

1. BIE’s Special Education Integrated Monitoring Process (SEIMP) SY 2012-2013Building a Brighter Tomorrow through Positive and Progressive Leadership 2012 BIE Summer Learning Institute July 12 & 14, 2012 Denver, Colorado

2. General Supervision Responsibility—the BIE is required to . . . • Monitor the school’s implementation of Part B (20 U.S.C. 1400(c)(1)) • Enforce the requirements in accordance with the provisions of 34 CFR 300.604(a)(1) and (a) (3), (b)(i), and (b)(2)(v), and (c)(2) • Annually report on BIE’s progress on the State Performance Plan (SPP) Indicators

4. Monitoring Activities Focus on: • Improving educational results and functional outcomes for all children with disabilities • Ensuring compliance with Part B of IDEA, with a particular emphasis on those requirements that are most closely related to improving educational results for children with disabilities

5. SEIMP Monitoring Components • Focused Monitoring (on-site) • Desk Audit • SPP Indicator 11—timely initial evaluations • SPP Indicator 13—secondary transition • Other • Indian Student Equalization Program (ISEP) • Dispute Resolution (State Complaints & Due Process Hearings • Parent Concerns • Suspension/Expulsion (SPP 4a) • Fiscal Management

6. I. Focused Monitoring Focused Monitoring is a proactive approach, which includes a purposeful selection of priority areas to examine for compliance/results while not specifically examining other areas in order to maximize limited resources, emphasize important requirements, and increase the probability of results.

7. Focused Monitoring for SY 2012-2013 • Written Notificationsent to schools April 23, 2012 • Selection- 59 schools selected (2nd year of 3-year cycle) • On-Site Monitoring Dates-August 6 to November 30, 2012 • Purpose - to improve education results for students with disabilities • On-site Activities—entrance conference, special education student file reviews, classroom observations, interviews, technical assistance as needed, and exit conference • Preparation—monitor(s) contact schools to schedule dates and provide further information; and conduct pre-audit of IEP files prior to visit

8. How Were 59 Schools Selected? • Based on SY 2010-2011 data: • Top 10 reading/math proficiency scores • Low 48 reading/math proficiency scores • Not on current corrective action plan • Once every 3-years

9. Associate Deputy Director—East

10. Associate Deputy Director—Navajo

11. Associate Deputy Director—West

12. On-Site Activities • Entrance Conference • Special Education student file reviews • Classroom Observations • Interviews • Review of school special education documents • Technical Assistance as needed • Exit conference • Follow-up activities

13. II. Desk Audits • Desk Audit—Indicator 11 (timely initial evaluations) • Conducted annually (November 15) by DPA utilizing the NASIS special education module • Purpose—to determine compliance of the 60-day timeline to complete initial evaluations for the period July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012.

14. School’s Responsibility: • All schools submit Desk Audit School Performance (SPP Indicator 11) to compliance.monitoring@bie.edu by September 14, 2012 • If school has no initial evaluations for the year, submit the required form check box as indicated on the desk audit form • Scan and upload documents into NASIS: • Parent Consent to Evaluate with signature and date • Determination of Eligibility with signature and date • Electronic desk audit forms available at: http://www.bie.edu/ProgramsSpecialEd/SEIMP/index.htm

15. DPA Responsibility • Review the following documents utilizing the NASIS special education module: • Parent Consent to Evaluate with signature and date • Determination of Eligibilitywith signatures and date • If evaluation exceeds timeline, note # of days and review the reasons for delay

16. II. Desk Audits • Desk Audit—Indicator 13 (post-secondary transition) • Conducted annually (November 12) by DPA utilizing the NASIS special education module • Documents • Individualized Education Program with Transition • IEP Team Meeting Invitation • Consent to invite agencies to transition meeting

17. 8 Question Protocol 1. Post-Secondary Goals 2. Goals Update 3. Transition Assessment 4. Transition Services Needs 5. Annual Transition Services IEP Goals** 6. Course of Study 7. Student Invitation 8. Representation of Participating Agency

18. 1—Post-Secondary Goals • For students 16 and older, or will turn 16 during the duration of the IEP year, there are appropriate measureable post-secondary goals that cover education, training, employment, and as needed, independent living skills • Each postsecondary goal is written for student’s wants and needs after high school graduation or when student ages out • Each postsecondary goal is measurable (e.g., can be counted)

19. Measureable Post-Secondary Goals Must be Written in Following Areas: • Education and/or training • Education—community college, university, technical/trade/vocational school • Training—vocational or career field, independent living skills, apprenticeship, on-the-job , job corps, etc. • Employment • Paid employment (competitive, supported, sheltered) • Non-paid (volunteer, training capacity) • Military • Adult Living (if needed) • Independent living skills, health/safety, financial income, transportation/mobility, social relationships, recreation/leisure, self advocacy/future planning

20. 2—Goals update • The post-secondary goals are updated annually • For each postsecondary goal, was the goal addressed and/or updated in conjunction with the development of the current IEP? • Education and/or Training • Employment • If appropriate, Independent Living

21. 3—Transition Assessment Requirement • There is evidence that the post-secondary goals were based on age appropriate transition assessments. • Did the transition assessments provide information on “the student’s needs, taking into account strengths, preferences, and interests” regarding postsecondary goals? Transition assessment “is the ongoing process of collecting data on the individual’s needs, preferences, and interests as they relate to the demands of current and future working, educational, living, and personal and social environments. Assessment data serve as the common thread in the transition process and form the basis for defining goals and services to be included in the Individualized Education Program.”

22. 4—Identify Transition Services Needs • There are transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet his/her post-secondary goals. Consider what services, supports or programs does this student… – currently need? – need in order to achieve his/her post-school goals? – need in order to ensure success as he/she enters the adult world? Is the student linked to the needed post-school services, supports or programs before he/she leaves the secondary school setting?

23. 5—Annual Transition Services IEP Goals • There are annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs. • For each postsecondary goal is there at least one annual goal and short-term objective included in the IEP related to the student’s transition services needs? • Education and/or training • Employment • If appropriate, independent living

24. 6—Identify Course of Study to Meet Post-secondary Goals • There is a course of study that will reasonably enable the student to meet his/her post-secondary goals. • Are the courses of study a multi-year description of coursework from the student’s current to anticipated exit year that is designed to help achieve the student’s post-school goals? • Do the courses of study align with the student’s identified post-secondary goals?

25. 7—Student Invitation to Transition Planning Meetings • There is evidence that the student was invited to the IEP Team meeting when transition services were discussed. • IEP Team Meeting Invitation

26. 8—Representation of Participating Agency • If appropriate, there is evidence that a representative of any participating agency was invited to the IEP Team meeting with prior consent of the parent(s) or student who has reached the age of majority. • IEP Team Meeting Invitation • Permission for Consent Prior to Inviting Agencies Related to Transition

27. Critical Interrelationships Quality IEP’s & Implementation Staying in School Positive Post-School Outcomes Graduating

28. III. Identifying Noncompliance through Other Activities • ISEP • Dispute Resolution (State Complaints and Due Process Hearings) • Parent Concerns • Suspension/Expulsion • Fiscal Management

29. A. ISEP (25 CFR Subpart D—Accountability) • Special Education • To ensure special education and related services are made available to the child in accordance with the child’s IEP (34 CFR §300.323(c)(2)), each school must maintain on each student with disabilities receiving special education a current IEP and documentation of services (attendance roster for academic services, service log for related services)

30. ISEP continued • Findings of Noncompliance • A finding may be identified when the Education Line Officer (ELO) conducts an ISEP (special education) audit • Correction of Noncompliance • The school is instructed by the ELO to correct any noncompliance that is identified within 30 calendar days of certification • If correction of noncompliance are not made, the ELO submits the Special Education Certification Roster form to compliance.monitoring@bie.edu by December 1, 2012

31. III. Other (con’t) • Dispute Resolution Findings of Noncompliance • State Complaints • Date of report is written notification to school • Due Process Hearings • Findings are identified from fully adjudicated hearing decision Correction of Noncompliance • Timelines stated in report • If not stated, one-year timeline is applied

32. III. Other (con’t) C. Parent Concerns • When parents report dissatisfaction with their child’s special education program, parents are requested to put their concerns in writing • A review of the concerns will be conducted; findings of noncompliance may be identified Correction of Noncompliance • Timeline stated in report • If not stated, one-year timeline is applied

33. D. Suspension/Expulsion • Notification to schools with suspension/expulsion rates two times the BIE average (ELO and ADD copied) and require the school to sent the following to DPA: • BIE Student File Review for Students with Disabilities Having Suspension and/or Expulsions Greater than 10 days in a School Year • Policies/procedures/practices to development and implementation of IEPs • Use of positive behavioral interventions and supports • Procedural safeguards to ensure compliance with the IDEA • Review of documents to determine compliance/noncompliance

34. Fiscal Management • On-site fiscal reviews are conducted • Findings of Noncompliance • On-site review report is written notification • Correction of Noncompliance • Timeline stated in report • If not stated, one-year timeline is applied

35. SEIMP Written Notification of Finding(s) • Written notification of finding(s) issued to school by December 1, 2012 • Focused Monitoring • Indicator 11 desk audit • Indicator 13 desk audit • Other—ISEP and Suspension/Expulsion • Written Notification is the date of the report for State Complaint, Due Process Hearing, Parent Concern, Fiscal Management (On-Site Review) • One-year timeline starts for school to correct noncompliance from date of written notification issued to school.

36. Correction of Noncompliance • Correct student-specific finding(s) of noncompliance for the applicable monitoring activity as soon as possible—within 30-days • Not required for students that have exited, transferred, or graduated • Notify DPA when noncompliance corrected • Conduct root cause analysis to determine actions to meet specific regulatory requirements • Develop action plan with tasks/deadlines • Implement action plan • Notify DPA and request verification of correction

37. How will DPA Verify Correction of Noncompliance? • Ensure school has corrected each individual case of noncompliance (student-specific) • Ensure school is correctly implementing the specific regulatory requirements of IDEA (at 100%) based on the DPA’s review of updated data and other documentation Note--both steps apply to verify correction of all findings of noncompliance

38. What is Updated Data? • The DPA utilizes NASIS to review updated data to verify the school has corrected noncompliance and are correctly implementing the specific regulatory requirements • Examples of updated data: • Student’s current IEP • Signature/date documents • Consent forms • IEP amendments • Enrollment status

39. If a school does not correct findings of noncompliance within the required one-year timeline, enforcement actions are implemented.

40. Enforcement Actions • Intensive Targeted Technical Assistance via 3 webinars on the following topics: • enforcement actions, • root cause analysis, • correction of specific areas of noncompliance identified during: focused monitoring, desk audits, ISEP, dispute resolution, parent concerns, suspension/expulsion, fiscal management (on-site reviews) • Special Conditions—required action with timelines to correct noncompliance

41. No correction—any or all of the following may apply: • Written Notification to School, ELO, ADD, Grantee • Incremental distribution of Part B funds • Fiscal Accountability On-Site Review • DPA staff assigned to school to provide TA and monitor progress Note—School status reported in Annual Performance Report (APR) and quarterly Program Improvement Accountability Plan (PIAP) impacts BIE’s level of determination and special conditions on Grant (funds) made by Office of Special Education Program (OSEP)

42. Timelines for SY 2012-2013 • April 2012—written notice sent to schools for SY 2012-2013 monitoring activities • August-October 2012—DPA conducts 59 on-site focused monitoring visits • November 12-15, 2012—DPA conducts Desk Audit for Indicator 11 (all schools) and Indicator 13 (HSs only) • December 1, 2012—DPA provides written notification to school • January 2013—school implements corrective action plan provided by the DPA • November 31, 2013—1-year timeline ends for school to correct noncompliance including DPA’s verification of correction

43. Roles and Responsibilities for Correction of Noncompliance • Schools—correct noncompliance & correctly implement specific regulatory requirements within required timeline • Education Line Officer—ensure correction of noncompliance within required timeline; knowledge of enforcement action; provide guidance to schools • Grantee/School Board—ensure correction of noncompliance within required timeline; knowledge of enforcement action; provide support and direction to school • DPA—verify correction of noncompliance based on review of updated data; implement enforcement actions

44. Summary Have a system in place to sustain compliance with all special education laws and regulations • School shall correct finding(s) of noncompliance as soon as possible and no later than one-year of identification • School shall correctly implement the specific regulatory requirements

45. Further Information