General Supervision Training Document Unit 4 Reporting to OSEP on Correction of Identified Noncompliance

1. General SupervisionTraining DocumentUnit 4Reporting to OSEP on Correction of Identified Noncompliance

2. Purpose To increase the capacity of participants to conduct general supervision activities around the reporting of correction of identified noncompliance

3. Intended Audience • New RRCP (Regional Resource Center Program) Staff • New TA&D (Technical Assistance and Dissemination) Staff • New SEA (State Education Agency) Staff • New LA (Lead Agency) Staff • New LEA (Local Education Agency) Staff • New EIP (Early Intervention Program) Staff

4. Objectives • Participants will gain a working understanding and increased capacity for accountability mechanisms and reporting on the correction of identified noncompliance • Participants will gain a working understanding and increased capacity for substantial compliance and the reporting requirements for the correction of identified noncompliance for compliance Indicators • Participants will understand the reporting requirements for correction of identified noncompliance for Indicators B15 and C9 in the Annual Performance Report (APR)

5. Outcome The consumers of the information will be able to demonstrate an understanding and increased capacity around the reporting of correction of identified noncompliance

6. Standard Disclaimer The content of this training document was developed by a Subgroup of the Regional Resource Center Program’s (RRCP) General Supervision Priority Team. The information provided on this site has not been vetted by the U.S. Department of Education and may not necessarily represent the views of the US Department of Education or the Office of Special Education Programs. Any information provided on the State Performance Plan University (SPPU) website is the intellectual property of the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), U.S. Department of Education.

7. Objective 1 Participants will gain a working understanding and increased capacity for accountability mechanisms and reporting on the correction of identified noncompliance

8. Objective 1 (cont’d) I. Accountability for Correcting Identified Noncompliance • APR Reporting 1) Compliance Indicators • Indicators C9/B15 • Overview/Descriptions • Other Accountability Mechanisms • Audits • Special Conditions

9. Timelines for Correction and Reporting

10. Objective 2 Participants will gain a working understanding and increased capacity for substantial compliance and the reporting requirements for the correction of identified noncompliance for compliance Indicators

11. Objective 2 (cont’d) • Reporting on Correction of Identified Noncompliance in Compliance Indicators • Describe the verification of correction of identified noncompliance in accordance with OSEP Memo 09-02 (2-Prong Review Process) • Numbers do not have to align with Indicators B15 and C9 but explain if they do not • Include subsequent correction up to the date of APR submission • Include program-specific follow-up activities (including enforcement/sanctions) for uncorrected findings • Report what has been done, not what is planned to be done

12. Objective 2 (cont’d) • If an LEA or EIP did not correct identified noncompliance in a timely manner (within one year of identification), the State must report in the APR whether the identified noncompliance was subsequently corrected by the time the States submits the APR. • Further, if an LEA or EIP is not yet correctly implementing the statutory/regulatory requirement(s), the State must explain in the APR what they have done to identify the cause(s) of continuing noncompliance, and what is being done about the continued lack of compliance, including, as appropriate, enforcement actions taken against the LEA or EIP.

13. Objective 2 (cont’d) • Substantial Compliance • For purposes of OSEP determinations • 95% + • 75% + with correction of all previously identified noncompliance • < 75% cannot be substantial compliance • OSEP considers subsequent correction when issuing determinations • Except for Indicators C9 and B15

14. Objective 2 (cont’d) Part B Examples

15. Optional APR Template – Indicators B11, B12, B13

16. Indicators B11, B12, B13Correction Over Multiple Years

17. Objective 2 (cont’d) Part C Examples

18. Optional APR Template – Indicators C1, C7, C8

19. Indicator C1Correction over Multiple Years

20. Objective 3 Participants will understand the reporting requirements for the correction of identified noncompliance for Indicators B15 and C9 in the Annual Performance Report (APR)

21. Objective 3 (cont’d) • Reporting on the correction of identified noncompliance in Indicators B15 and C9 • Describe Findings • States may choose to group individual instances of noncompliance in an LEA or EIS program if they involve the same legal requirement or standard • If instances of noncompliance are grouped, States must ensure correction of individual instances when possible • Findings identified through a State complaint process or due process hearing must be counted as an individual finding

22. Objective 3 (cont’d) • States may choose to report each individual instance of noncompliance as a separate finding • Subsequent correction must be reported • Correction that was not made within the one-year timeline • Report instances of subsequent correction separately from the instances of timely correction of identified noncompliance

23. Objective 3 (cont’d) • Report follow-up activities (including sanctions and enforcements) for program-specific noncompliance for each program with uncorrected noncompliance • Report what has been done, not what is planned or could be done

24. Objective 3 (cont’d) • Definition of Finding • A written notification from the State to an LEA or EIS program that includes a conclusion that the LEA or EIS program is in noncompliance • Must include • the citation of the statute or regulation • a description of the quantitative and/or qualitative data supporting the conclusion that there is noncompliance

25. Objective 3 (cont’d) • For SPP and APR indicators, monitoring inquiries, and dispute resolution findings for which correction can be completed for individual instances, State reports each instance of noncompliance as a finding. • For SPP and APR indicators, monitoring inquiries, and dispute resolution findings for which correction cannot be completed for individual instances (i.e., timelines), State groups individual instances of noncompliance into one finding for which the district must demonstrate compliance.

26. Objective 3 (cont’d) • OSEP Memo 09-02 Language Regarding Verification of Correction • In order to demonstrate that previously identified noncompliance has been corrected, an SEA/LA must: • Account for the correction of all child-specific instances of noncompliance; and • Determine whether each of the Schools or Programs with the identified noncompliance are correctly implementing the specific regulatory requirements

27. Objective 3 (cont’d) • Reporting on Correction in Indicators B15 and C9 • Include Subsequent Correction • Report subsequent correction separately from timely correction • Report program-specific (for each program with uncorrected noncompliance) follow-up activities including sanctions and enforcements • Report what has been done, not what is planned or could be done (past tense)

28. Indicator C9 Worksheet

29. Indicator B15 Worksheet

30. Indicators B15/C9 Correction over Multiple Years

31. Discussion Questions • What does your OSEP Response Table say about correction of noncompliance? • Has OSEP identified any other issues with correction of noncompliance? • Is there any language in your SPP/APR that could be revised to be clearer for next year’s submission?

32. Resources The Right Idea http://therightidea.tadnet.org/articles • Current Measurement Table • Current APR Templates

33. Resources OSEP Memo 09-02, October 17, 2008 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS REGARDING IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCOMPLIANCE AND REPORTING ON CORRECTION IN THE STATE PERFORMANCE PLAN (SPP)/ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT (APR)SEPTEMBER 3, 2008 www.rrfcnetwork.org