What is Indicator 14 and why is it important? Dawn A. Rowe, NPSO Coordinator Rhode Island Advanced Transition Training Providence, RI January 26, 2011 National Post-School Outcomes Center
Session Objectives • To learn what I-14 is and it’s utility • To learn about federal data collection and reporting efforts for post-school outcomes • To learn about Rhode Island’s data collection and reporting efforts for post-school outcomes • To introduce strategies that have evidence to support positive outcomes for youth with disabilities
The National Post-school Outcomes Center [NPSO] A national technical assistance & dissemination center funded by the U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs. We help State Education Agencies develop practical, yet rigorous data collection systems to describe the further educationandcompetitive employmentexperiences of youth with disabilities as they transition from high school to adult life.
Purpose of IDEA To ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free and appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living. IDEA Regulations §300.1(a)
Federal Reporting Requirements Under IDEA, States are required to submit: • State Performance Plan (SPP) • Annual Performance Report (APR) http://www.ride.ri.gov/OSCAS/SPPAPR/sppapr.aspx
Federal Requirements State’s performance plan and annual report are based on 20 Part B indicators 4 specific to secondary transition:
Critical Interrelationships for Achieving PSO Staying in school (Indicator 2) Quality IEPs (Indicator 13) Positive post-school outcomes (Indicator 14) Graduating (Indicator 1) Kohler (NSTTAC), 2007
Part B SPP/APR Requirements for Indicator 14 Percent of youth who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they left school, and were: • Enrolled in “higher education” • In “competitive employment” • Enrolled in “some other postsecondary education or training” • In “some other employment”
Indicator 14 for Federal Reporting Click to edit Master text styles
Findings from state data collection efforts are used to: Nationally Rhode Island • Report at the national, state, and local levels • Guide and improve transition programs for transition age youth with disabilities • Continue improvement in data collection focusing on improving representativeness • Develop capacity to improve outcomes for specific populations of youth who are not engaged at the same rate as others after high school (e.g., youth with ED, AA, Hispanic) . (FFY 2010 SPP)
Collecting Post-school Outcomes Data • Who are the data collected on? • What data are collected? • How are the data collected? • When are the data collected? • Who collects the data?
Who are data collected on? Nationally Rhode Island • Those with IEPs who leave high school: • With a diploma – regular or modified • With a certificate • By aging out • By leaving early /dropping out Youth with IEPs who leave high school by: • Graduating with a regular diploma • Age out • Left school early (i.e., dropped out) Challenge: Finding leavers one year out of school
What data are collected? Nationally Rhode Island • In school: • Demographic data • Disability • Gender • Race/ethnicity • Age • Method of exit • One year out: • Higher education • Competitive employment • Other postsecondary education or training • Other employment • In school: • Demographic data • Disability • Gender • Race/ethnicity • Age • Method of exit • Student Contacts • One year out: • Higher education • Competitive employment • Other postsecondary education or training • Other employment
How are data collected nationally? Census v. Sample Method of Collecting Every district over the life of the SPP ADM > 50K • Representative sample Disability • Gender • Race/ethnicity • Age Survey • Phone • Mailed • Face-to-face Web- or Internet-based Extant database Challenge: Finding leavers one year out of school
How are data collected in Rhode Island? Census Method of Collecting • Attempt to contact every leaver in every district over the life of the SPP • Use unique identifiers Survey • Combination of Phone and • Online survey (district personnel complete) Challenge: Finding leavers one year out of school
When are data collected? Nationally Rhode Island • April through September • When youth have been out of school for at least one year • Same Challenge: Finding leavers one year out of school
Who collects these data? Nationally Rhode Island • SEA or LEA staff • Teachers and support staff • Administrators • Outside contractor • University • Survey Center • Student’s last known case manager (certified special education teacher) • LEA Census Clerks • Special Education Administrators • (Regional training provided via WebEx) Challenge: Finding leavers one year out of school
Results of State’s Efforts: Outcomes for Students with Disabilities as measured by Indicator 14 United States Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (2011). Part B State Performance Plan/ Annual Performance Report 2011 Indicator Analyses.
Rhode Island’s PSO DataThese data represent youth who left school during the 2009-2010 school year. • Of the 1579 leavers 1101 (70%) responded to the PSO survey. • The responders were found to represent youth across the state based on disability category, gender, and minority status. • Dropouts were slightly underrepresented. • Of those who responded, 62% reported being enrolled in higher education, competitively employed, enrolled in some other postsecondary education or training program, or other employment since leaving high school.
How well do those who responded represent all leavers in 2009-2010? Overall Response Rate: 70% Differences greater than ± 3% are important
Challenges • Finding leavers 1-year out of school • Contacting leavers 1-year out of school
Rhode Island’s Method of ExitOf the 1100 youth who responded across the state… Data Source: RI PSO SY 2009-10
Rhode Island’s Engagement Rate: Of the 1100 respondents Convert percents to numbers RI PSO SY 2009-10
So What?? • You are probably asking: • What do these data tell me? • What use are these data? • How can these data be used to improve programs for youth with disabilities? • Engagement rate alone is insufficient to inform program decisions. • The engagement rate should be disaggregated by subgroups of students based on key characteristics, such as demographic data, geographic location, or other relevant information. • Let’s look at examples of how data can be disaggregated.
Brainstorm questions to answer about the engagement rates of males and females. Do we do better with certain disability groups or genders? Are Males & Females engaged at the same or similar rate?
Percent of Males & Females Engaged Engagement Rate 28 Data Source: RI PSO SY 2009-10
Brainstorm questions to answer about the engagement rates of youth with different disabilities. Do we do better with certain disability groups or genders? Are youth with various disabilities engaged at the same or similar rate?
Engagement Rate by Disability Categories AO = All Other Disabilities Engagement Rate 30 Data Source: RI PSO SY 2009-10
Brainstorm questions to answer about the engagement rates of youth from different backgrounds. Do we do better with certain groups of youth? Are youth from various race or ethnic groups engaged at the same or similar rate?
Engagement Rate by Ethnicity Categories AO = All Other Disabilities Engagement Rate 32 Data Source: RI PSO SY 2009-10
How can disaggregated PSO data be used? • What are other states doing?
How other states are using PSO data to inform transition programs • NC revised their PSO survey to collect more programmatic data to examine whether in-school programs and services correlate with better post-school outcomes. • MD is sharing PSO data with the state Interagency Council to inform and improve the cross-agency collaborative services provided while youth are in-school.
How other states are using PSO data to inform transition programs • SD compared outcomes of students who participated in certain transition programs to those who did not to determine program effectiveness.
Let’s Look Closer: South Dakota • Question: Are youth who participate in 4 state specific in-school programs more likely to be engaged one-year out of school than youth who do not participate in these programs? • Programs: Catch The Wave, Youth Leadership Forum, Self-Advocacy, & Project Skills • Used an odds ratio to measure effect size, describing the strength of association between two dichotomous values: youth engaged (i.e., working or enrolled) versus youth not engaged (i.e. not working or enrolled).
OVERALL for 08-09: Odds Ratio of engagement for students who participated in Catch The Wave, Youth Leadership Forum, Self-Advocacy, or Project Skills Those who participated in these programs were 2.03 times more likely to be engaged in work or school than those who did not participate in these programs. 177/19 120/26 = 9.316/4.615 OR of 2.03
Empirical Evidence • South Dakota has empirical evidence that youth who participated in Catch The Wave, Youth Leadership Forum, Self-Advocacy, or Project Skills were consistently more likely to be positively engaged 1-year out of high school than youth who did not participate in these programs. • With sufficient data, you could do something similar to examine whether the programs offered in RI or your district contribute to positive post-school outcomes.
Thinking about Transition Related Program Improvement • In what areas are youth with disabilities doing well? • What areas need improvement? • What is the state/district doing well? • What does the state/district need to improve?
How do you make the connection between post-school outcomes of youth with disabilities and practices implemented in the district, school, or classroom?
…is a decision-making process for deciding what to teach based on: • frameworks or principles • best available research evidence • professional judgment • student needs and values Evidence-Based (Special)Education… (Buysse, Wesley, Snyder, & Winton, 2006; Cook, 2010 Detrich, Spencer, & Slocum, 2009;Turnbull et al., 2010; Cook, 2010)
Select Interventions • Create Individualized Interventions • Adapt Interventions Frameworks Provide a Systematic Basis for using Professional Judgment to: (Spencer, 2009)
Student-Focused Planning • Student Development • Family Involvement • Interagency Collaboration • Program Structure A Framework for Secondary Transition:The Taxonomy for Transition Programming (Kohler, 1996)
Focus on What you Can Control Post-School Outcomes Predictors Practices Lesson Plans