1 / 44

Focus

Focus. Exceptional Student Education. Where’s the Money?. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). IDEA Recovery Funds for Services to Children and Youths with Disabilities. FEFP Funding History.

monita
Download Presentation

Focus

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. Focus Exceptional Student Education

  2. Where’s the Money?

  3. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) • IDEA Recovery Funds for Services to Children and Youths with Disabilities

  4. FEFP Funding History

  5. The Base Student Allocation (BSA) is determined annually by the Legislature in the General Appropriations Act The BSA for 2009-10 is $3,630.62 . Base Student Allocation (BSA) X Authority: s.1011.62(1)(b), F.S.

  6. Base Student Allocation • 2006-07 $ 3,981.61 • 2007-08 4,079.74 • 2008-09 3,886.14 • 2009-10 3,630.62

  7. Program weights are • used to recognize varying educational program costs • Group 1 Includes Three Programs • Basic Grades K-3 (1.074) • Basic Grades 4-8 (1.000) • Basic Grades 9-12 (1.033) • Group 2 Includes Four Programs • Exceptional Student Education • Level IV (3.520) • Level V (4.854) • English for Speakers of Other Languages • (1.124) • Career Education, Grades 9-12 (1.050) Program Weights X Appropriations Act

  8. IDEA Funds Gilchrist’sAward

  9. LEA Determinations based on State Performance Plan Indicators

  10. LEA Profile

  11. 2009 LEA Determinations One point is generated for meeting each of the criteria with determination categories defined as follows: Meets requirements: 7-9 points Needs assistance: 4-6 points Needs intervention: 1-3 points Needs substantial intervention: 0 points

  12. LEA Determinations – Status for 2009 Districts would have to have substantial compliance on at least 7 of the 9 factors in order to receive a determination of “meets requirements”

  13. Florida’s SEA Determination 2009 • “Needs Assistance” • third year • Factor that affected OSEP’s determination • 24% for compliance of Indicator 13 • 92 of the 389 records that were reviewed were found compliant (i.e., IEPs that included coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services)

  14. John M McKay Scholarship (District)

  15. 2009Changes

  16. SB 1540 – Zero Tolerance • Requires that a district school board having a policy authorizing corporal punishment as a form of discipline review its policy on corporal punishment at specified intervals • Revises the requirements for zero-tolerance policies by requiring definitions for criteria for reporting acts posing a serious threat to school safety, and petty acts of misconduct • Requires school districts to adopt a cooperative agreement with DJJ establishing guidelines for ensuring that any no contact order is reported and enforced • Encourages school districts to use alternatives to expulsion or referral to law enforcement agencies unless using such alternatives will pose a threat to school safety

  17. Differentiated Accountability: What’s New • Legislature recently approved HB 991 and SB 1682. DA will now be the State’s Official Accountability System. • Non-Title I A, B, and C schools not making AYP will be included in DA. • SINI status will not be used to determine placement of schools in the DA matrix. • Coaches only required for Intervene and Correct II D and F schools. • Performance and Differentiated Pay only required for Intervene and Correct II D and F schools. • Eliminated requirement for “outside expert” and extended learning day. • Community Assistance Team (CAT) is required for F and Intervene schools—only one team is required per district, not per school. • FAIR required for Correct II and Intervene schools and State’s SIP template required of all DA schools.

  18. Rule 6A-1.09981Implementation of Florida's System of School Improvement and Accountability

  19. Cell-size criteria for science and writing in School Grades Updated procedure for determining percentage of students proficient in writing (School Grades) Inclusion of Florida Alternate Assessment results for students with disabilities in calculating learning gains for reading and math Revising high school grading requirements

  20. Revising High School Grading Requirements Calculation Guide

  21. SB 1908 Beginning in the 2009-10 school year, 50% of the school’s grade will be based on the existing FCAT-related factors and the remaining 50% will be based on factors that include: A school’s graduation rate; As valid data become available, the performance and participation of students in AP, IB, Dual Enrollment, AICE, and industry certification; The postsecondary readiness of the students as measured by the SAT, ACT, or CPT; The high school graduation rate of at-risk students; The performance of a school’s students on statewide standardized end-of-course assessments, when available; and Growth or decline in the data components from year to year.

  22. Additional Requirement Law stipulates that in order for a high school to be designated as having a grade of “A”, the school must demonstrate that at-risk students are making adequate progress. In order for a school that earns enough points for an “A” to be awarded an “A”, the school’s at-risk graduation rate must meet a certain threshold to ensure “adequate progress.” This requirement is akin to the current learning gains requirement for the Low 25%.

  23. Inclusion of Florida Alternate Assessment Results in Calculating Learning Gains Section 1008.34(3)(b)(1)b, Florida Statutes, requires that learning gains for students seeking a special diploma, as measured by an alternate assessment tool, shall be included in School Grades no later than the 2009-10 school year. The Florida Alternate Assessment has nine separate performance levels, ranging from 1 to 9, with 4 or higher equaling proficient. Propose defining a learning gain as an improvement in performance levels or the maintenance of a proficient level.

  24. Graduation Rate • Calculation changing to ESEA (NCLB) four-year cohort model • Data will lag one year • New baseline and targets to be established

  25. Program Changes

  26. Rule 6A-6.03011 – ESE Eligibility for Students with Intellectual Disabilities InD

  27. Secondary Transition

  28. New Hot Area of Litigation joins Autism

  29. Reconvene If a participating agency responsible for transition services, other than the school district, fails to provide the transition services described in the IEP, the school district shall reconvene the IEP Team to identify alternative strategies to meet the transition objectives for the student set out in the IEP. (Rule 6A-6.03028(3)(h)9.a.b.c.)

  30. Alternate Assessment1% Rule

  31. Rule 6A-6.03018 –ESE Eligibility for Students with Specific Learning DisabilitiesEffective July 1, 2009 SLD

  32. Since December 2008, Florida’s general education intervention requirements in accordance with Rule 6A-6.0331, F.A.C., make a problem-solving/RtI process mandatory prior to considering ESE eligibility. • TAP 2009 SLD

  33. Parent Involvement in General Education Intervention Procedures The school district provides opportunities for parents to be involved in the process to address the student’s academic or behavioral areas of concern. Discussions are held with the parent regarding the student’s responses to interventions, supporting data and potential adjustments to the interventions, and anticipated future action to address the student’s learning and/or behavioral area of concern. Maintain documentation of parental involvement and communication.

  34. Whether the student has a specific learning disability as evidence by response to intervention data confirming each of the following: • Performance discrepancy • The student’s academic performance is significantly discrepant for the chronological age or grade level in which the student is enrolled, based on multiple sources of data when compared to multiple groups, which include the peer subgroup, classroom, school, district, and state level comparison groups • Rate of Progress • When provided with well-delivered scientific, research-based general education instruction and interventions of reasonable intensity and duration with evidence of implementation fidelity, the student’s rate of progress is insufficient or requires sustained and substantial effort to close the achievement gap with typical peers or academic expectations for the chronological age or grade level in which the student is currently enrolled; • and • Educational need • The student continues to need interventions that significantly differ in intensity and duration from what can be provided solely through general education resources to make or maintain sufficient progress

  35. Did Someone Say.. • “We can evaluate your child for ESE because we haven’t done RtI.”

  36. 2010 Proposed Rules

  37. HB 0081 Seclusion and Restraint on SWD • SB 2616 (Compare) • SB 2118 (Similar)

  38. Compliance How to stay out of the spotlight.

  39. You Might Need PD if… • “It’s not fair to my other students.” • “I don’t have time.” • “He doesn’t want my help anyway.” • “I didn’t sign on for this!” • “The parents are the REAL problem.” • “He’s just lazy.” • “No one told me I was supposed to do anything.” • “I’m ready to retire anyway.” • “I think this law is STUPID!”

  40. Common IEP Errors • “Drive-by” IEPs. • Forgetting to bring needed records to the IEP meeting. • Individuals vs. the IEP Team (not getting your story straight). • Discouraging the parent from being an active participant. • Side-bar conversations. • Selective amnesia in the IEP meeting (to get your desired result). • Losing your cool in the IEP meeting. • Failing to have current data on student progress. • Decisions based on teacher/admin. frustration

  41. Avoiding Legal Disputes In Special Education:21 Training Points for Administrators Lucky 21

  42. Role of LEA in IEP Meetings Commit Resources

  43. Procedural Safeguards

  44. Change Happens! How will you deal with it?

More Related