HPEC Evaluation and Eligibility Discussions

1. HPEC Evaluation and Eligibility Discussions High plains Education Cooperative August 7th, 2012

2. Agenda • Changes in evaluation • MTSS – school wide • Patterns of Strengths & Weaknesses – individual problem solving • Data • Eligibility • Prong 1 • Prong 2 • Exclusionary Factors

3. General Education Interventions = Child Find • Kansas describes two methods of GEI • 1. MTSS (protocol interventions + systemic problem-solving) • 2. Individual problem-solving (SIT, SAT, etc.) • Method of GEI determines which special education eligibility evaluation method will be used: • MTSS = Response to Intervention • Individual problem-solving = Patterns of Strengths & Weaknesses

4. MTSS 1. School-wide data collection system used for universal screening (DIBELS, MAPS, AIMSWEB). 2. Diagnostic assessments are completed with students flagged through screenings (QPS, PAST, PALS, etc). 3. Data is used to monitor progress and effectiveness of interventions. Interventions are modified; students move in and out of intervention groups based upon progress monitoring data. 4. Collaborative teams are effectively functioning to help determine appropriate intervention groups & instruction for specific students.

5. Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses • GEI is implemented using individual student problem-solving to develop intervention plans & collect data (SIT, SAT, CARE, ILPs). • EITHER: • No school-wide universal screening is being completed, OR • A universal screening is used, but no further diagnostic testing is performed. Students are grouped according to teacher determined criteria, rather than diagnostic test results.

6. Data Collection • Regardless of which model your school uses, intervention data is a must! • Include: • Documentation of interventions used • Progress monitoring data

7. Data Example • Documentation of Intervention: • Phonics instruction provided to address deficits flagged in QPS • Receives 30 minutes extra reading instruction daily • Sight word drill using incremental rehearsal • Documentation of Progress Monitoring:

8. MTSS and Individual Problem Solving Both require looking for a Dual Discrepancy (significantly lower achievement and low rate of growth) Both require looking at the 2 prongs of Eligibility Document (meet criteria and display a need) Both require looking at exclusionary criteria

9. Evaluation and Eligibility 1. After GEI intervention either MTSS or Individual Problem Solving, a referral is made to the School Psychologist. 2. The School Psychologist gains parent permission to evaluate student. 3. The Special Education Team considers necessary data to collect after reviewing intervention data. 4. Team collects additional assessment. 5. Team conduct two-prong test of eligibility using Eligibility Indicator Document. 6. Consider Prong 1, including exclusionary criteria and presence of dual discrepancy. 7. Consider Prong 2 looking at student need. 8. Determine eligibility.

10. Dual Discrepancy 1. Low level of performance (after appropriate interventions) when compared to peers, and 2. Low rate of growth (after appropriate interventions) when compared to peers, or The interventions needed to obtain adequate level of performance or adequate learning rate are too demanding to be implemented with integrity without special education and related services.

11. What is Prong 1? Prong 1 answers the question of: Does the child have an exceptionality? For meeting this prong of eligibility, the team must  consider information and have data to support at least 1 indicator  from each ofthe areas listed for that particular eligibility category. There are 13 different eligibility categories

12. Example Prong 1 (Emotional Disturbance) • Prong 1: Does the child exhibit an exceptionality? • For meeting this prong of eligibility the team must  consider information and have data to support at least 1  indicator  from each of the four following areas: • 1.  Characteristics of Emotional Disturbance.  • 2. Evidence that characteristics have been exhibited over a long  period of time. • 3. Evidence that characteristics are exhibited to a marked degree.  • 4. Evidence that behavior adversely affects educational performance.  Other Supporting Information: Medical information and records

13. Example Prong 1 (Learning Disability) • Prong 1: Does the student exhibit an exceptionality? • For meeting this prong of eligibility, the team must  consider information and have data to support at  least 1 indicatorfor each of the three following areas. • 1.  Observational Data  • 2. The child does not achieve adequately for the child's age or meet  state approvedgrade level standards. • 3. Evidence of provision of learning experiences and  instruction appropriate for the child's age and grade level. • Other Supporting Data: Medical records or other diagnosis of perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, or developmental  aphasia.  

14. What is Prong 2 • Prong two answers the question: Does the child need special education? • Data indicates need for sustained and/or prolonged services. • Data indicates that even with modifications the child is not making adequate progress to meetstate approvedgrade level standards in one or more areas. • Data indicates a need for specially designed instruction. • Data indicates rate of learning is significantly different from peers.

15. Exclusionary Factors A child must NOT be determined to be a child with aan exceptionality if the determinant factor is:  Lack of appropriate instruction in readingincluding the essential components of reading instruction  Lack of appropriate instruction in math; Limited English proficiency; 

16. Team Decision If the team concludes the student meet the criteria for prong 1, prong 2, and the exclusionary factors have been ruled out then the child is deemed eligible and an IEP is written.