Continuous Improvement Monitoring Process: Self … 07 CIMP.pdfContinuous Improvement Monitoring...

Updated 4/17/07

Continuous Improvement Monitoring Process: Self Review Report

Date of Report: June 30, 2007

District Name: Plainview-Elgin-Millville District Number: 2899

Cooperative/Education District Name: Hiawatha Valley Education District Director of Special Education: Amy Adams

Superintendent: Dr. Eric Bartleson Annual Due Date: June 30 Electronic Report Submission: [email protected] . Reports must be PC Microsoft Word© compatible or Send Report to: Bonnie Carlson, Compliance Supervisor Minnesota Department of Education Division of Compliance and Assistance 1500 Highway 36 West Roseville, MN 55113-4266 * For districts providing record review data: Submit individual student non-compliance information electronically or on a CD. Please do not send a hard copy.

MNCIMP:SR District Name: Plainview-Elgin-Millville Cooperative/Education District Name (if applicable): Hiawatha Valley Education District

1

REPORT INFORMATION

Directions/Questions: • The report includes brief directions for each reporting section. The MNCIMP:SR Guidelines and Resources Manual, which has more

detailed directions, resources, and samples for several report sections can be found on the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) web site: http://education.state.mn.us/mde/Accountability_Programs/Compliance_and_Assistance/Special_Education_Monitoring/MNCIMP__SR/index.html

• Questions pertaining to the due process/compliance components of the report may be directed to the district’s lead compliance monitor. • Most sections of the report require a district unit of analysis. Reporting directions for each section will indicate if a district within a

cooperative or education district can report on an area using a cooperative unit of analysis. • Caution is advised when attempting to analyze data based on small sample sizes, i.e. program evaluation, record review, and

stakeholder data.

Report Format: • It is not necessary to completely fill each space; and if more space is needed, the space provided will expand accordingly. • Do not edit or delete any part of the report format. If the district is not required to report information in a particular section, leave the

section blank. • Include the district name and number, and cooperative/education district name, if applicable on the cover page. Also include the

district name in the report footer, beginning on page three. To do this, go to the “View” button on the toolbar, click on “Header and Footer”, then scroll to the bottom of the page to enter the district name. Click anywhere outside the footer to close.

• If using an acronym within the report, spell out the words completely first, with the acronym proceeding it, e.g. Minnesota Department of Education (MDE).

• Do not include charts, appendices, or any attachments with this report. • If possible, submit the report electronically to the email address on the cover page of the report. If electronic submission is not

possible, mail two copies of the report to the address on the cover page of the report. • Email the report by June 30 each year to [email protected] . All reports must be PC Microsoft Word© compatible.


2

1. District Demographics Directions

• Update the district demographic charts annually. • Cooperatives: report each district’s demographics and general information/significant trends or changes individually. Indicate the district name for each profile reported.

SPP/APR Part B Indicators 9&10

Total Student

Enrollment (General Education

plus Special Education)

Percentage of Total

Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity (General Education plus Special

Education)

Total Part B Special Education Enrollment

(K-21)

Percentage of Part B (K-21)

Special Education Minority Enrollment

by Race/Ethnicity

Total Early Childhood Special Education Enrollment

(Part C and Pre-K)

1,612 White – 94% Black – 0% Asian – 0%

Am. Indian – 0% Hispanic – 6%

200 White – 91% Black – .5% Asian – .5%

Am. Indian – 1% Hispanic – 7%

24

2. District General Information and Significant Trends or Changes

On July 1, 2006 Plainview School District #810 and Elgin-Millville School District #806 consolidated to form Plainview-Elgin-Millville School District #2899. The December 1, 2005 Plainview Child Count total enrollment was 1,093 students. The December 1, 2005 Elgin-Millville Child Count total enrollment was 519. This brings the consolidation enrollment to 1,612 students. The Plainview special education population was 134 students and the Elgin-Millville special education population was 66 students, bringing a total special education population of 200 students for PEM. The Plainview Special Education Department consisted of a coordinator who was less than full time, 11 special education teachers, and a special education secretary. Elgin-Millville consisted of 3.5 special education teachers, with the elementary principal acting as special education coordinator. PEM currently has a full time special education coordinator, 15.5 special education teachers, and a full time special education secretary. Special education teachers and students are located in four buildings in two communities. PEM is part of the Hiawatha Valley Educational District. Minnesota Department of Education validation was in March of 2007. Twelve citations were issued for the Plainview School District and five citations were issued for the Elgin School District. Seventeen corrective action plans have been submitted to MDE for our combined special

MNCIMP:SR Profile • Starting with the first year of planning, indicate the number of years the district/cooperative has participated in Self-Review. • If assistance is needed, contact your district’s lead compliance specialist. • Update this section annually. • For cooperatives or education districts, report each member district’s information individually as appropriate. • Report any extenuating circumstances that impact the district demographics or disability demographics, i.e. open-enrolled student population, opening of a new group home

in the district, etc. Number of Years in Self-Review: Date of last MDE Validation: Date of next MDE Validation:

6 March 2007 2012


3

2. District General Information and Significant Trends or Changes education program. Educational trends for the newly consolidated PEM district will begin with the data collected during the 2006-2007 school year. A Response to Intervention Program existed in grades 1 and 2 during the 2006-2007 school year. The RTI program will expand to include kindergarten and third grade during 2007-2008. Data Sources for this report include: 1. 2005 Federal Child Count Reports 2. MDE Web Based Reports of District Information from 2005-2006 3. Department of Accountability and Compliance District Citation Report with students, March 2007.

3. MNCIMP:SR Membership Selection Process The Hiawatha Special Education District (HVED) selected at least one member from each of the 13 school districts to participate in the CIMP process. The original team was formed during the 1999-2000 school year. Plainview Community School was represented by the special education coordinator and a parent. The following year two additional special education teachers joined the Plainview leadership team. Plainview participated in the cluster level team consisting of diverse representatives from six neighboring school districts. The Elgin-Millville CIMP team has existed since 2000. The special education staff collaborated to write the CIMP Report based on evidence collected and analyzed from a variety of sources. The team included administration from the elementary and high school, as well as the HVED south cluster special education director. During the 2005-2006 school year, anticipating consolidation of the two districts, writers of the 2005 CIMP Report from both districts collaborated and shared information. The current PEM special education staff spent one afternoon in April reviewing CIMP goals and planning for future goals. CIMP team members attending training during 2006-2007 school year consists of the special education coordinator and the special education secretary. Diversified membership will be sought during the second year of PEM consolidation.

Leadership Team Formation and Membership Team Member Name District Position Term Length Membership Responsibility

Amy Adams HVED Special Education Director – North Cluster

4 years Actively participates

William Ihrke PEM High School Principal 2 years Consultant

W. Lynn Bastian PEM Elementary Principal 7 years Consultant

Holly Reeve HVED Birth – 3 Teacher/Coordinator


Heather Chapman HVED Birth – 3 Teacher/Coordinator

1 year Actively participates

Lin Funk Plainview Special Education Teacher, PEM Coordinator


Clark Olstad P-E-M gr. 4-8 Principal 7 years Consultant

Eileen Byrne Special Education Teacher 7 years Actively participates

Jennifer Spencer Special Education Teacher 7 years Actively participates

Linda Zarling Special Education Teacher 7 years Actively participates

Dale Ely Special Education Teacher 1 year Actively participates

Karen Martin Special Education Teacher 1 year Actively participates

Julie Moechnig Special Education Teacher 1 year Actively participates

Joyce Christensen Special Education Teacher 1 year Actively participates


4

Leadership Team Formation and Membership Chelsea Mir Special Education Teacher 1 year Actively participates

Peggy Seifert Special Education Teacher 1 year Actively participates

Jessica Crusan Special Education Teacher 1 year Actively participates

4. MNCIMP:SR Parental & Community Involvement

How are parents and community involved in the MNCIMP:SR planning process, analysis of the data, and Action Planning process? The annual meeting of the Parent Advisory Committee (PAC) was held on November 20, 2006 during fall parent-teacher conferences. Parents heard oral reports from the special education teachers including updates on the Response to Intervention Program, data collection, as well as a speaker from the Friendship Center.

4. MNCIMP:SR Parental & Community Involvement How is your district’s MNCIMP:SR status and progress disseminated to parents, community, and other stakeholder groups? A copy of the CIMP Report is given to members of PAC, school administrators, and all special education teachers. The PEM district newspaper, the Paw Print, will be used as a vehicle to share information with every family in district 2899. On June 11, 2007 the special education coordinator will report on CIMP progress to the PEM school board. The minutes of this meeting will be posted on the district website. The special education department maintains a link on the school website.

5. Special Education Mission and Belief Statements Mission Statement: PEM will provide educational opportunities so that learners will reach their maximum potential as independent, successful, productive adults.

Belief Statements: PEM will provide quality programming using best practices to ensure students receiving special education services become independent learners and productive, responsible citizens.

Have you changed the mission and belief statements from your previous report? YES X NO If yes, provide rationale for the change. The Plainview mission and belief statements have been consolidated with the Elgin-Millville statements, and are now the PEM mission and belief statements.

Special Education Goal Statements Describe the process for development of the goal statements: The Plainview Community School leadership team and the Elgin-Millville leadership team developed goal statements during several planning meetings throughout the school year. The PEM leadership team adopted our new goal statement during an April 2007 special education staff meeting.

Goal Statements: 1. All school staff will provide or support appropriate services to special education students and programs. 2. Special education staff will promote and follow due process mandates. 3. Special education staff will promote parent/student involvement in planning, programming, and monitoring special

education student’s services. 4. Data collection will be utilized to develop, implement, and evaluate special education programs.

Have you changed the goal statements from your previous report? YES NO X If yes, provide rationale for the change.


5

6. Program Evaluation Directions: Student Achievement

• Report and provide an analysis for any grade and subject in which the district did not demonstrate adequate yearly progress (AYP) for the special education population. Small districts of similar size within a cooperative or education district may be grouped for reporting purposes.

• Select the degree of need (high, medium or low) based upon the urgency to implement change as determined by district criteria established by the leadership team. For each area designated as a high need, linkage with the District’s Improvement Plan under NCLB for the following school year must be provided (see Future Action Plan section of this report).

SPP/APR Part B Indicator 3

Did your district make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for the entire special education subgroup in 2005-2006? (See district report card.) (Check one)

Yes _____

No _____

NA (cell size too small to calculate AYP for Special Education) _____

The district report cards for ISD 810 and ISD 806 are no longer available on the MDE website, due to consolidation on July 1, 2006. As per John Comstock, of MDE, information was gathered from the PEM district office, with the following results for special education students: 3rd grade – 3 special education students were included in the 9% Elgin-Millville and 3% of Plainview of non proficient students in reading, and 0 in the 9% Elgin-Millville and 9% Plainview of non proficient in math. 4th grade – 10 special education students were included in the 24% Elgin-Millville and 22% Plainview of non proficient students in reading, and 6 in the 24%Elgin-Millville and 18% Plainview of non proficient in math. 5th grade – 6 special education students were included in the 12% Plainview of non proficient students in reading, and 6 in the 19%Elgin Millville and 33% Plainview of non proficient in math. 6th grade – 7 special education students were included in the 21% Elgin-Millville and 19% Plainview of non proficient students in reading, and 9 in the 15% Elgin-Millville and 32% Plainview of non proficient in math. 7th grade – 5 special education students were included in the 33% Elgin-Millville and 20% Plainview of non proficient students in reading, and 5 in the 31% Elgin-Millville and 29% Plainview of non proficient in math. 8th grade – 9 special education students were included in the 46 % of Elgin-Millville and 32% of Plainview non proficient students in math, and 9 in the 49% of Elgin-Millville and 22% of Plainview of non proficient in reading. 10th grade – 5 special education students were included in the 30% Elgin-Millville and 28% Plainview of non proficient students in reading. 11th grade – 7 special education students were included in the 76% Elgin-Millville and 71% Plainview of non proficient students in math. PEM is unable to determine AYP because the MCA I and MCA II do not have matching criteria. Also, the Elgin-Millville computer labs could not support systems for NWEA testing. With new labs, the NWEA will be a measure of growth twice during the 2007/2008 school year.

If your district missed AYP last year for the first time, it is possible that next year your district will officially be in “needs improvement” status. How do you plan to improve the proficiency levels of students with disabilities? Respond below.


6

(See “District Data Profile” online at http://education.state.mn.us/mde/ for information needed to complete this section)

Grade Level

(enter rate)

Skill Assessed (check)

Analysis Degree of Need

(check one) 3 ____ 4 ___ 5 ____ 6 ___ 7 ____ 8 ___

11 ____

Math ____

• Are there any extenuating circumstances? • How are you linking into your district’s Improvement Plan under NCLB? • Are there additional steps you plan to take? If yes, document details in the Future Action Plan in this

report.

High ____ Medium ____ Low ____

3 ____ 4 ___ 5 ____ 6 ___ 7 ____ 8 ___

10 ____

Reading ____

• Are there any extenuating circumstances? • How are you linking into your district’s Improvement Plan under NCLB? • Are there additional steps you plan to take? If yes, document details in the Future Action Plan in this

report.


Program Evaluation Directions: High School Graduation, Dropout & Suspensions/Expulsions

• Report and provide analysis for any performance areas where the district performance falls below the state and/or rates. Small districts of similar size within a cooperative or education district may be grouped for reporting purposes.

• Select the degree of need (high, medium or low) based upon the urgency to implement change as determined by district criteria established by the leadership team. Each area designated as a high need must have a corresponding Action Plan for the following school year (see Future Action Plan section of this report).

Reporting Categories

SPP/APR Indicator

2005-2006 State Data

Analysis

Degree of

Need (check one)

Graduation Rates

Part B 1

State Rate = 82.43%

State Target

= 81.95% (Special

Education Rate)

District Rate 90.0%Plainview and 83.3% Elgin At or above state rate? Yes _x___ No ___ At or above state target? Yes _x___ No ___ If below either state target or rate, provide an analysis.

High ____ Medium ____ Low __x__

Dropout Rates

Part B 2

State Rate = 4.89%

State Target

= 4.55% (Special

Education Rate)

District Rate 3.1% Plainview and 0% Elgin At or above state rate? Yes ____ No __X__ At or above state target? Yes____ No _X___ If above either state target or rate, provide an analysis.

High ____ Medium ____ Low __x__


7

Program Evaluation Directions: High School Graduation, Dropout & Suspensions/Expulsions Suspension and Expulsion Rates

>10 days

Part B 4

State Rate = 1.25%

State Target

= 1.8% (Special

Education Rate)

District Rate 0% Plainview and 0% Elgin At or above state rate? Yes ____ No __X__ At or above state target? Yes____ No __X__ If above either state target or rate, provide an analysis.

High ____ Medium ____ Low __X__

Program Evaluation Directions: Child Find & Least Restrictive Environment • Report and provide analysis for any performance areas where the district falls below the state target and/or state rate. Small districts of similar size within a

cooperative or education district may be grouped for reporting purposes. Please note that this data is provided at the administrative unit level in Part C sections. • Data can be found on the MDE website at

http://education.state.mn.us/mde/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Statewide_Performance/State_Local_Outcome_Data/index.html • Select the degree of need (high, medium or low) based upon the urgency to implement change as determined by district criteria established by the leadership team. Each area

designated as a high need must have a corresponding Action Plan for the following school year (see Future Action Plan section of this report).

Reporting Category

SPP/APR Indicator


Program Evaluation Analysis

Degree of Need

(check one) Part C:

Child Find Birth-1

Part C 5

State Rate = .46%

State Target

= .45%

Administrative Unit Rate Plainview 2.7%, Elgin 0.0% At or above state rate? Yes X Plainview No X Elgin At or above state target? Yes X Plainview No X Elgin If below either state target or rate, provide an analysis. Plainview and Elgin are now combined districts. Previously they were separate, but close geographically. The current levels reflected by Plainview are higher than the state rate and put the combined district well within the target levels. Wabasha County has a very active child find program, using Follow Along, and universal home visits within a month of a child’s birth.


Part C: Child Find

Birth-2

Part C 6

State Rate = 1.57%

State Target

= 1.56%

Administrative Unit Rate Plainview 1.8%, Elgin 1.6% At or above state rate? Yes __X__ No ___ At or above state target? Yes __X__ No ___ If below either state target or rate, provide an analysis.

High ____ Medium ____ Low _X___

Part C: Natural

Environment (ages 0-3)

Part C 2

State Rate = 90.3%

State Target

= 89.5%

Administrative Unit Rate Plainview 92.7%, Elgin 92.7% At or above state rate? Yes __X__ No ___ At or above state target? Yes __X__ No ___ If below either state target or rate, provide an analysis.



8

Reporting Category

SPP/APR Indicator



Degree of Need

(check one) Part B:

Pre-School Settings LRE (age 3-5)

environments with typically developing peers (including settings 1, 3, & 4)

Part B 6

State Rate = 50.5%

State Target

= 58%

Administrative Unit Rate 52.4% and 52.4% At or below state rate? Yes _X___ No ___ At or below state target? Yes ____ No __X_ If below either state target or rate, provide an analysis. Our district serves a smaller percentage of children in settings that include typically developing peers than other districts in our region by 1.1% (Region – 53.5%), and strata (63.9%). A goal will address this need.

High ____ Medium __X_ Low ____

Reporting Category

SPP/APR Indicator

#



Degree of Need

(check one) Part B:

Settings/LRE School Age (6-21)

Removed from class less than 21% of day

Part B 5A

State Rate= 60.40%

State Target Rate = 61%

District Rate 78.7%Plainview and 77.4% Elgin At or below state rate? Yes ____ No __X__ At or below state target? Ye s___ No ___X_ If below either state target or rate, provide an analysis.


Part B: Settings/LRE

School Age (6-21) Removed from class greater than 60% of

the day

Part B 5B

State Rate=9.94%

State Target

Rate = 9.55%

District Rate 2.8% Plainview and 4.8% Elgin At or above state rate? Yes ____ No __X_ At or above state target? Yes ____ No __X_ If above either state target or rate, provide an analysis.

High ____ Medium ____ Low ___X_

Part B: Settings/LRE

School Age (6-21)

Served in separate schools, residential

placements, or homebound or

hospital placements

Part B 5C

State Rate= 4.74%

State Target Rate = 5.4%

District Rate .9% Plainview and 0.0% Elgin At or above state rate? Yes ____ No __X_ At or above state target? Yes ____ No __X_ If above either state target or rate, provide an analysis.



9

Program Evaluation Directions: Early Childhood Outcome Data • Report and provide analysis for any performance areas where the district falls below the state target. Small districts of similar size within a cooperative or education

district may be grouped for reporting purposes. • Data can be found on the MDE website at

http://education.state.mn.us/mde/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Statewide_Performance/State_Local_Outcome_Data/index.html • Select the degree of need (high, medium or low) based upon the urgency to implement change as determined by district criteria established by the leadership team. Each area

designated as a high need must have a corresponding Action Plan for the following school year (see Future Action Plan section of this report). Reporting Category

SPP/APR Indicator



Degree of Need

(check one) Parts B and C:

Transition

A. Documentation of transition planning

on IFSP B. Transition

conferences occurred during regulatory

timeframe

Part B #

Part C 8

State Targets = A. 100%

compliance B. 100%

compliance

A. IFSP documentation of transition planning – Administrative Unit Rate NO DATA AVAILABLE At state target of 100%? Yes ____ No _____ If not at the state target, provide an analysis. This indicator relies on accurate feedback via the state ECSE data collection system. Because the data is reported as an “administrative unit” for P-E-M (which includes all of Hiawatha Valley Education District data), it is felt there were some systemic breakdowns in data reporting for this year. There is evidence that reports were submitted to MDE on time, but those reports have not been tracked and included in the data. Extensive training has been done for all ECSE teachers and their directors this year, and Hiawatha Valley Education District is confident that future data will reflect compliance in this area. B. Transition conferences occurred – Administrative Unit Rate NO DATA AVAILABLE At state target of 100%? Yes ____ No _____ If not at the state target, provide an analysis. As reported above, there is a belief that the data is simply missing, but the service is being provided as required. With the training interventions implemented this year, the district is confident they will see numbers reflecting compliance in the future.

High ____ Medium: X Low ____

Part C: Timely Evaluations

45-day timeline

Part C 7

State Target = 100%

compliance

Administrative Unit Rate Plainview 100%, Elgin 100% At state target of 100%? Yes __X__ No ______ If not at the state target, provide an analysis.

High ____ Medium_____ Low X


10

Stakeholders

Stakeholder Data Findings

School Year(s) Data

Collected

Degree of Need

(check one) Family Part C

Information was collected through □ MDE Survey □ District Survey □ Focus Group(s) Sampling method: Part C: Survey or Focus Group # surveys distributed = ___________ # of families contacted ________ # surveys returned = _____________ # of families participated ______ # for valid sample = _____________


Family Part C

Findings: Findings reported for 2005/2006. As per directions, information does not need to be recorded this year.

7. Stakeholder Information Directions • Data collection efforts must either include all members of a stakeholder group or a representative sample of the group. • The representative sample must provide a valid sample size to be able to generalize the data. • A tool to use to determine an appropriate sample size can be found at: http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm. • Indicate the format used to collect stakeholder data. • Report the sampling method(s) used, as part of the analysis. • Disaggregate all Part B and Part C responses and report separately. • Include the number of stakeholders identified for the initial contact. • Include the number of stakeholders that participated. • Include the number of participants necessary for a valid sample. • Summarize findings for each stakeholder group. FAMILY SURVEY: QUESTION 8 Include the following data specific to question 8 on the MDE survey: • Report Part B data only. • Record the number of families that responded to question 8. • Provide the number of families that responded for each rating 1 through 5, e.g. 2 marked 1; 0 marked 2; 7 marked 3; 75 marked 4; 250 marked 5. • Select the degree of need (high, medium or low) to implement change as determined by district criteria established by the leadership team. • Each area designated as a high need must include a corresponding Action Plan for the following school year. (See Future Action Plan.)


11

Stakeholders Stakeholder Data Findings

School Year(s) Data

Collected

Degree of Need

(check one) Family Part B

Information was collected through □ MDE Survey □X District Survey □ Focus Group(s) Sampling method: Part B Survey or Focus Group # surveys distributed = 140 and 64 # of families contacted _______ # surveys returned = 38 and 14 # of families participated ______ # for valid sample = _____ _______ SPP/APR Indicator #3 MDE Survey Question 8: # surveys returned with a response to question 8 = _______ Number of responses for score _________ 1 _________ 2 _________ 3 _________ 4 _________ 5

2004-2005 High ____ Medium ____ Low __X__

Family Part B

Findings: Plainview: A score of 3.61 on a 4.0 rating scale was achieved in overall satisfaction. The most positive areas reported were: parents believe they are a part of the planning team when their child moves from one classroom to another (3.84), transition from program or classroom has gone smoothly (3.71), communication between staff and parent has been positive and effective (3.61). Areas of weakness: receiving training regarding the secondary transition planning process (2.80), staff keeps me informed about parent advisory groups, support groups, and parent training (3.11). Elgin-Millville: Overall satisfaction of families was 3.51. Strengths for the district: my child received a secondary transition by age 14, the building(s) where my child received services is physically accessible to him/her, I am satisfied with the amount of time my child spends in activities with children who do not have disabilities. Areas of weakness: transition planning at the secondary level.

2004-2005

General Educator Staff Information was collected through □ MDE Survey □X District Survey □ Focus Group(s) Sampling method: Survey or Focus Group # surveys distributed = 60 Plainview and 32 Elgin # of general education teachers contacted _______ # surveys returned 36 Plainview and 22 Elgin # of general education teachers participated ______ # for valid sample = _____________

2004-2005 High ____ Medium ____ Low __X__


12

General Educator Staff Findings: Plainview: Areas of strength: Special Education staff provides me with the needed support and services to help my students in special education (3.50), communication between the special education staff and myself has been effective in helping the students I serve (3.50), special education students in my building have equal access to extra curricular and nonacademic activities compared to general education students (3.58). Weaknesses: the special education students in my class are appropriately placed to meet their individual needs (3.15), and the special education staff have been helpful to me in finding alternate strategies for working with students with possible disabilities (3.11). Elgin-Millville: overall satisfaction was 3.43. Strengths: very pleased with teacher involvement in the IEP process. Weaknesses: concern about the placement of special education students in their class, if the placement reflected the correct placement according to the student needs.

2004-2005

Stakeholders

Stakeholder Data Findings

School Year(s) Data

Collected

Degree of Need

(check one) Paraprofessional Information was collected through □ MDE Survey □ District Survey □ Focus Group(s)

Sampling method: Survey or Focus Group # surveys distributed = 13 Plainview and 5 Elgin # of paraprofessionals contacted _______ # surveys returned = 13 Plainview and 4 Elgin # of paraprofessionals participated ______ # for valid sample = _____________

2004-2005 High ____ Medium ____ Low __X__

Paraprofessional Findings: Plainview: Strengths: encouraging their students to function as independently as possible given the nature of their disabilities (3.77). Concerns: the results of special education evaluations have been shared with me in ways that are meaningful and provide me with insight into student needs (2.85), information from the IEP is shared with me in a way that is useful (2.85). Elgin-Millville: overall satisfaction was 3.66. Strengths: received the necessary training, in-service, or other information needed for working with students in special education. Weaknesses: special education evaluations shared in ways that are meaningful and provide them with insight into student needs.

2004-2005

Special Education Staff Part C

Information was collected through □ MDE Survey □X District Survey □ Focus Group(s) Sampling method: Part C: Survey or Focus Group # surveys distributed = 2 # of special education staff contacted _______ # surveys returned =1 # of special education staff participated ______ # for valid sample = _____________

2004-2005 High ____ Medium ____ Low __X__

Special Education Staff Part C

Findings: Plainview: Weakness: due to amount of paperwork, meetings, and regulations asked of special education and the number of students on her speech/language caseload, diminishes her ability to provide a quality program.

2004-2005


13

Special Education Staff Part B

Information was collected through □ MDE Survey □ District Survey □ Focus Group(s) Sampling method: Part B: Survey or Focus Group # surveys distributed = 11 Plainview and 4 Elgin # of special education staff contacted _______ # surveys returned = 11Plainview and 4 Elgin # of special education staff participated ______ # for valid sample = _____________

2004-2005 High ____ Medium ____ Low __X__

Special Education Staff Part B

Findings: Plainview: Strengths: including families in the decision making process during their child’s evaluation and IEP development (4.0), providing regular updates to families on their child’s progress toward meeting goals and objectives (4.0). Concerns: community placement options, not ECSE classrooms, are the first choice settings for preschool children with disabilities (2.75), there are an adequate number of quality community placement options for prescreen aged children with disability in my district ( 2.75), and a post-school follow up process in place so that information is available regarding the outcomes of students who have received services in transition (2.43). Elgin-Millville: Strengths: overall satisfaction was 2.0. Staff strongly agrees that efforts are made to include families of special education students in the decision making process. Weaknesses: a need for community placements and options in employment and training opportunities.

2005-2006

Stakeholders

Stakeholder Data

Findings School

Year(s) Data Collected

Degree of Need

(check one) Administrator

(Optional) Information was collected through □ MDE Survey □ District Survey □ Focus Group(s) Sampling method: Survey or Focus Group # surveys distributed = ___________ # of administrators contacted _______ # surveys returned = _____________ # of administrators participated ______ # for valid sample = _____________


Other: ___________________

Information was collected through □ MDE Survey □ District Survey □ Focus Group(s) Sampling method: Survey or Focus Group # surveys distributed = ___________ # of ______________ contacted _______ # surveys returned = _____________ # of _______________ participated _____ # for valid sample = _____________


Other: ___________________

Findings:


14

Part B and Part C SPP/APR (all) 8. Record Review Directions

• Records selected for review must be a demographically representative sampling of a district‘s students in special education. • The representative areas include but are not limited to disability, race/ethnicity, age and gender. • The Part B record sample and the Part C record sample must be determined separately. • A tool to use to determine an appropriate sample size can be found at: http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm.

• Report a summary of findings for each TSES area that has non-compliance identified in one or more student files. • Include the total number of records identified with non-compliance and the total number of records reviewed, e.g. “5 of 10 secondary

transition records lacked a secondary transition evaluation by age 14 or grade nine.” • Indicate if the records reviewed were Part C or Part B. The record review data must be reported separately. • Under the “Compliance Status” column, check “individual student non-compliance” if one or more student records were identified. • Check “MDE systemic non-compliance”, if non-compliance is identified based on compliance findings from a variety of sources including

but not limited to compliance review of individual student records, stakeholder survey responses and complaints identified within the monitoring cycle.

• Each TSES area listed as “MDE non-compliance” must be included in the Action Plan. • For each student file identified with non-compliance, submit the individual student information electronically using an Access

Monitoring Database report by student and citation. If the report is not available, the information can be burned on a CD which can be sent to MDE.

• Do not send paper copies of the individual student data. Record Review Process and Sampling Procedures

Describe the district’s sampling procedures and record review process: Validation was completed at the Hiawatha Valley Education District during March, 2007. The corrective action reports have been submitted to our Director of Special Education, Amy Adams.


15

TSES Reference Number

TSES Compliance Area

PartB

PartC

Record Review Data Compliance Status

Individual Student Non-compliance MDE Systemic Non-compliance



9. Longitudinal Review Directions (optional) • Include the number of longitudinal records reviewed. • Internal consistency reporting pertains to each indicator used to determine the consistency of documentation from initial or prior evaluation to

the most current evaluation. Secondly, internal consistency addresses whether or not the three consecutive IEP were consistent with the IEP process. Address the quality indicators as strengths or weaknesses found in the review.

• Conferred benefit pertains to the data used to determine whether the student benefits from his/her special education program and service over time. Determine if growth was evident from evaluation to evaluation and across three consecutive IEP.

• Determine the degree of need (high, medium or low) based upon the urgency to implement change as determined by district criteria established by the leadership team. Each area designated as a high need must have a corresponding Action Plan for the following school year (See Future Action Plan section of this report).

• Refer to the 2004 MNCIMP:SR Guidelines and Resources Manual for additional directions, sampling procedures, and resources.

Reporting Categories

Longitudinal Review (optional) Analysis

Degree of Need (check one)

Internal Consistency


Conferred Benefit



16

10. Current Year Action Planning Directions

*Use the information reported in the district’s prior year Action Plan(s), reported as high need and/or non-compliant, to complete the following components, identified by an asterisk (*) in the left side of the chart below:

• *Goal Statement: Identify goal as stated in prior year’s MNCIMP:SR Report. • *Desired Outcome: Provide a measurable statement of the expected outcome. “What will change as a result of strategies and activities implemented?” • *Strategy(s): Describe strategies employed to achieve the desired outcome, e.g. training, staff development, policies, task force committees, etc. • *What collected data will give evidence of progress? Describe what data will be collected to determine if the outcome has been met or if progress is being made.

For the current year’s report, complete the “Progress/Results Analysis” and “Status” sections of the chart below based on the prior year’s Action Plan(s) to determine if progress has been made in meeting the desired outcome.

• Progress/Results Analysis: Report data that was collected to determine whether the outcome was met. • Status: Analyze results and determine progress from the prior year’s Action Plan(s) in meeting the desired outcome. Indicate whether the outcome was met, will

need to be continued, or other. If the outcome was not met and will be continued, address the outcome in the next year’s Action Plan (see next page) and note any changes in strategies. If “Other” is checked, provide an explanation in the “Progress/Results Analysis” section.

Note: To insert additional lines to an Action Plan, tab after the last column and a new row will automatically be inserted. To insert additional Action Plan charts, insert a page break after the chart, then copy and paste the blank Action Plan chart into the new page.


17

Existing Action Plan(s) * *Goal Statement: All school staff will provide appropriate services to special education students and programs. (Plainview Community Schools will show an increase in

the number of special education students reaching the proficiency level on the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments and Basic Skills Tests.) Complete this section using the Action Plans from the district’s existing MNCIMP:SR report from the prior year.

Complete this section for next year’s report.

*Desired Outcome *Strategies *What collected data will give evidence of progress?

Progress/Results Analysis Status X

Outcome Met X Outcome Continue

Plainview Community School special education students will increase the number of students scoring at the proficient level or above on the MCA’s and BST’s as reported by the state.

1. Seventh – tenth grade special education students who are lacking the skills necessary to be proficient in any one of the MCA’s or BST’s due to their disability, will be enrolled in a resource study skills class in which strategies will be taught to increase their ability to score at a Level 3 or above. 2. Eighth grade students who have a disability in the areas of reading and/or math, will have the opportunity to be enrolled in a Basic Skills Strategy class which will cover the reading and math strategies necessary to increase their skills such as those taught in the Kansas Strategies.

Results from the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments and the Basic Skills Tests.

The report sent out by Minnesota Department of Education states that Plainview Community Schools Special Education students met Adequate Yearly Progress.

Other: explain


18

Existing Action Plan(s) *

*Goal Statement: All Plainview School staff will provide or support appropriate services to special education students and programs. Complete this section using the Action Plans from the district’s existing MNCIMP:SR report from the prior year.





First grade special education students will increase their reading fluency .

Response to Intervention Tier 1

90 minutes of direct reading instruction daily, with interventions, provided by regular education teachers and Title I teachers.

Tier 2 30 minutes of direct skill remediation by a team of general education, special education, and Title I staff providing specialized instruction – 5 times a week.

Fluency rates, decoding and phonemic awareness as recorded by AimsWeb benchmarks and probes.

Benchmarks for total Grade 1: Fall: Established: 12% Emerging: 49% Deficient: 39% Winter: Established: 61% Emerging: 35% Deficient: 4% Spring: Established: 75% Emerging: 24% Deficient: 1%

Other: explain


Special education students will demonstrate equal or greater rate of growth in reading fluency than non-disabled peers.

Tier 3 Special Education referral for the students who do not respond to Tier 1 and Tier 2 interventions.

Reading probes administered 3 times per school year to all kindergarten through Grade 6 students as recorded on the benchmarks of the AimsWeb program.

Monthly probes given to all first grade students measured the following growth: Average increase of Words Per Minute (WPM ) between probes for special education students equaled 9 WPM. All other first grade students increased 9.5 WPM.

Other: explain


19

Existing Action Plan(s) * *Goal Statement: Plainview special education staff will promote parent/student involvement in planning, programming, and monitoring special education student

services. (At least 50% of students on transition IEP’s will demonstrate knowledge of strengths and needs by identifying IEP goals through development of a power point presentation to be shown at IEP meetings.)

Complete this section using the Action Plans from the district’s existing MNCIMP:SR report from the prior year.




Outcome Met Outcome Continue

Students will be prepared to participate in the IEP meetings and will develop skills necessary for success in high school as well as in life after graduation from high school.

Students will use technology and components of the Self-Advocacy Strategy to develop a Power Point presentation. This strategy and skill will be taught in Stress Management and/or Resource Study Skills.

Data on the number of students who developed and/or presented Power Point at the IEP meeting.

Eight special education students developed an agenda and ran their IEP meetings. Three of those students included a Power Point presentation. The students were of the following disabilities: 2 DCD, 1 Speech/Language, 4 EBD (3 EBD students developed the Power Point)

Other: explain X


Explanation: During the 2006-2007 school year, the PEM special education staff decided this goal was not realistic due to lack of appropriate technological equipment. Therefore a greater emphasis will be placed on having students participate in their IEP meetings.

Other: explain X


20

Existing Action Plan(s) * *Goal Statement: Plainview Community Schools will improve services to special education students and special education programming in the areas of due process

compliance. Complete this section using the Action Plans from the district’s existing MNCIMP:SR report from the prior year.




Outcome Met Outcome Continue X

Peer record review and/or MDE validation scheduled for January 2006 of special education files will indicate an 80% or higher compliance level on all areas of the Evaluation Process, IEP, and Progress Reporting.

Peer review of student files and/or validation by MDE scheduled during ’05-’06 school year (Part B and Part C files to be included).

Completed record review forms evaluated by Special Education Coordinator.

Though Plainview Community Schools special education department continues to conduct a peer review of files on a yearly basis, we do not consider that data as valid. We will wait for the MDE validation in 2007 to respond to this item.

Other: explain


Report to case managers on results of peer review and/or validation by MDE and follow-up training on any areas found to be below the 80% level.

Special education meetings: *review outcome of the review *in-service on any areas to be found below the 80% level

*Result indicated on the record review sheets *Attendance log on staff present at the in-service

Same as above

Other: explain


MDE validation during March 2007: 80% or higher compliance level on all areas of the Evaluation Process, IEP, and Progress Reporting.


*District citation report with students

PEM: - contents of evaluation plan 94% - evaluation materials/procedures 88% - eval report/educational needs 94% - SLD report 88% - PLEP 76% - goals and objectives 88% - LRE 76% - SE and related services 88% - progress reporting 88%

Other: explain


21


*Goal Statement: Elgin-Millville: to use CBM reading fluency data to identify reading difficulties earlier, and to be able to provide appropriate pre-referral interventions. To monitor student progress in the area of reading in both general reading programs and potential special education referral.






A baseline will be determined for the reading program in the elementary school. This will be assessed to identify students at risk for reading difficulties.

Further training will be completed by staff to those newly hired in the district. Data will be collected and compiled in grades K-6.

Reading Fluency data collected in grades K-6 and entered on the AimsWeb Program to establish grade level reading fluency norms.

Other: explain


PEM 2006-2007 AimsWeb benchmarks were completed in grades K-6 three times during the school year.

AimsWeb student, class, and grade level charts and graphs

Kindergarten – Letter Sound Fluency: Fall- 48% deficient, Spring – 19% 1st grade – nonsense words: Fall-26% deficient, Spring-11% 2nd grade – Curriculum Based Measure fall-37% deficient, Spring-20% 3rd grade – Curriculum Based Measure fall-30% deficient, Spring-19% 4th grade-Curriculum Based Measure fall-14% deficient, Spring 10% 5th grade-Curriculum Based Measure fall-22% deficient, Spring 13% 6th grade-Curriculum Based Measure fall-18%deficient, Spring 18%

Other: explain


22


*Goal Statement: Elgin-Millville: will increase parent and community participation in the CIMP process. Complete this section using the Action Plans from the district’s existing MNCIMP:SR report from the prior year.





To increase parent participation in the parent advisory committee. Parent will provide feedback to improve special education programming.

Offer two parent advisory meetings with personal recruitment.

The district continued to make efforts to inform and involve parents in the program and make team based decisions for students. Parent surveys were collected and feedback was evaluated from the stakeholder.

Progress continues to be made in the efforts to share with parents their vital role in the CIMP process. After analyzing the percentage of surveys that were returned, the team felt that this continues to be an area to work to improve as we look to improve the overall program.

Other: explain


PEM 2006-2007: sent a mass mailing of 200 invitations to special education parents to the fall PAC meeting.

Only 2 parents came to the meeting.

Parent participation is an area of high need. Mailing is apparently not the best advertising for parent meetings. Other: explain


23


*Goal Statement: Elgin-Millville Community Schools will improve services to special education students and special education programming in the areas of due process compliance.






Peer record review and/or MDE validation scheduled for January 2006 of special education files will indicate an 80% or higher compliance level on all areas of the Evaluation Process, IEP, and Progress Reporting.

Peer review of student files and/or validation by MDE scheduled during ’05-’06 school year (Part B and Part C files to be included).

Completed record review forms evaluated by Special Education Coordinator.

Though Plainview Community Schools special education department continues to conduct a peer review of files on a yearly basis, we do not consider that data as valid. We will wait for the MDE validation in 2007 to respond to this item.

Other: explain Informal peer review will continue, but not as a data collection system.

X


Report to case managers on results of peer review and/or validation by MDE and follow-up training on any areas found to be below the 80% level.


*Result indicated on the record review sheets *Attendance log on staff present at the in-service

Same as above

Other: explain


MDE validation during March 2007: 80% or higher compliance level on all areas of the Evaluation Process, IEP, and Progress Reporting.


*District citation report with individual students

PEM: - contents of evaluation plan 94% - evaluation materials/procedures 88% - eval report/educational needs 94% - SLD report 88% - PLEP 76% - goals and objectives 88% - LRE 76% - SE and related services 88% - progress reporting 88%

Other: explain (Still waiting for final district validation report from MDE.)

X


24


*Goal Statement: PEM Schools will increase the number of pre-school children who receive special education and related services in settings with typically developing peers.






Special Education children ages 3-5 will be placed in Early Childhood Settings of 31, 32, 45 at a level that matches the state target rate for Part B.

Greater use of home, regular education preschool and daycare as programming alternatives for the ages 3-5 special education students, using new staff member in a creative/consultative way.

MARSS report and Child Count Plainview: 52.4% Elgin-Millville: 52.4% When compared to the state at 50.1%, Plainview and Elgin-Millville exceeded the state profile, but fell below the state target of 58.0%.

Other: explain


*Goal Statement: Plainview-Elgin-Millville staff will collect data to support the use of Response to Intervention Programs. Complete this section using the Action Plans from the district’s existing MNCIMP:SR report from the prior year.





Special Education students in grades 4-6, with a disability in reading, will increase their reading fluency skills by 1 word per week, and comprehension skills to the 50th percentile.

A minimum of 25 minutes of direct skill remediation 5 times a week by special education staff.

Fluency rates and comprehension, using AimsWeb benchmarks, will be administered 3 times per year, plus progress monitoring on at least a monthly basis.

Reading fluency and comprehension goal was set too high. Students did not achieve at this rate. Goal will be revised for the next school year.

Other: explain


25


*Goal Statement: Students will be prepared for a successful transition into post high school life. Complete this section using the Action Plans from the district’s existing MNCIMP:SR report from the prior year.





Developmental Cognitive Delayed students will be self-motivated to grow and improve their skills, increase their independence and responsibility, by successfully self-monitoring the use of percents and graphs and remember the process from day to day. Students will increase their work quality and quantity in the vocational area in comparison to the norm.

Students will record daily progress toward objectives in the vocational area on the computer, without being prompted, and discuss their progress with the staff and parents. Given work jobs with norms, the student will record and compare progress with normed scores.

The students’ graphs and percentages on a variety of normed jobs will show if they are progressing towards quality and quantity of normed scores

3 students record their daily quantity and quality of work on a graph. Each student is working to increase both areas by 25%. A weekly report is sent home to parents regarding the student’s daily vocational percentage.

Other: explain


26

11. Future Year Action Plan Directions (New Action Pan)

Complete the following components to address new areas identified in the current report as high need and /or as non-compliant: • Goal Statement: Identify goal as stated on MNCIMP:SR Report. • Desired Outcome: Provide a measurable statement of the expected outcome. “What will change as a result of strategies and activities implemented?” • Strategy(s): Describe strategies employed to achieve the desired outcome. (E.g. training, staff development, policies, task force committees, etc.) • What collected data will give evidence of progress? Describe what data will be collected to determine if the outcome has been met or if progress is being made.

The following sections should be left blank for the current report, and completed when submitting the MNCIMP:SR Report next year. • Progress/Results Analysis: Report data that was collected to determine whether the outcome was met. • Status: Analyze results and determine progress from the prior year’s Action Plan(s) in meeting the desired outcome. Indicate with an “X” whether the outcome was met, will need to

be continued, or other. If the outcome was not met and will be continued, address the outcome in the next year’s Action Plan and note any changes in strategies. If “Other” is checked, provide an explanation in the “Progress/Results Analysis” section.

Note: To insert additional lines to an Action Plan, tab after the last column and a new row will automatically be inserted. To insert additional Action Plan charts, insert a page break after the chart, then copy and paste the blank Action Plan chart into the new page.

Future Year Action Plan(s) Goal Statement: PEM special education staff will promote parent/student involvement in planning, programming, and monitoring special education student services.

2007-2008: 100% of 9-12 students will actively participate in their IEP meetings. Complete this section using the Action Plans from the current report. Complete this section prior to submitting next year’s report.

Desired Outcome Strategies What collected data will give evidence of progress?



2007-2008 Based on each student’s skill level, students will present at least one area of information on their IEP.

Case managers and students will discuss and plan for each IEP meeting, with students developing a presentation for the team.

Format of IEP meetings: each IEP meeting will have a written agenda indicating which portion of the meeting will be presented by the student.

Other: explain

Goal Statement: PEM Schools will improve services to special education students and special education programming in the areas of due process compliance. (Though

individual files have been corrected, the district has not yet received the district validation summary. Continue goal until then.) Complete this section using the Action Plans from the current report. Complete this section prior to submitting next year’s report.




100% of individual student files citations will be corrected by February 2008. Any district issues identified in the validation summary will be addressed within 40 days of receipt.

*Continuation of informal annual peer review. *Trainings scheduled after need areas identified. *Annual SpEd Forms/Due Process updates for all SE staff by HVED.

Approval of corrected files by MDE. Acceptance by MDE of any required corrective actions by PEM.

Other: explain


27

Future Year Action Plan(s)

Goal Statement: To use CBM reading fluency data to identify reading difficulties earlier, and to be able to provide appropriate pre-referral interventions. To monitor student progress in the area of reading in both general reading programs and potential special education referral.

Complete this section using the Action Plans from the current report. Complete this section prior to submitting next year’s report. Desired Outcome Strategies What collected data will give

evidence of progress? Progress/Results Analysis Status X


2007/2008 Decrease the number of deficient readers to no more than 10% at grades K-3.

RTI programs will be in place for grades K-3 during the 2007/2008 school year.

Spring benchmark from the Aimsweb probes.

Other: explain

Future Year Action Plan(s) Goal Statement: P-E-M will increase parent and community participation in the CIMP process.




To increase parent participation in the parent advisory committee. At least one parent will assist with analysis of CIMP data and provide feedback to improve special education programming.

2007 -2008: PAC meetings will be advertised in the district newspaper sent to every family. PAC meetings will also be listed on the school website. At least one parent will be recruited to be a direct participant in the CIMP process.

Attendance at meetings. During report writing time, at least one parent-generated idea will be included in the CIMP goal writing.

Other: explain


28


Goal Statement: PEM Schools will increase the number of pre-school children who receive special education and related services in settings with typically developing peers.




Special Education children ages 3-5 will be placed in Early Childhood Settings of 31, 32, 45 at a level that matches the state target rate for Part B.

Greater use of home, regular education preschool and daycare as programming alternatives for the ages 3-5 special education students, using new staff member in a creative/consultative way.

MARSS report and Child Count

Other: explain

Future Year Action Plan(s) Goal Statement: Plainview-Elgin-Millville staff will collect data to support the use of Response to Intervention Programs.




2007-2008 Reading fluency: increase of 15 words per minute from 1st to 3rd benchmark. Reading comprehension: students will score within 3 points of the 25 percentile at their grade level. Written expression: 10th percentile of correct writing sequence at grade level.

4 or more times per week with a minimum of 25 minutes of additional direct skill instruction.

Special education teachers will monitor bi-monthly using AIMSweb and other curriculum measurements.

Other: explain


29


Goal Statement: Students will be prepared for a successful transition into post high school life. Complete this section using the Action Plans from the current report. Complete this section prior to submitting next year’s report.




Developmental Cognitive Delayed students will be self-motivated to grow and improve their skills, increase their independence and responsibility, by successfully self-monitoring the use of percents and graphs and remember the process from day to day. Students will increase their work quality and quantity in the vocational area in comparison to the norm.

Students will record daily progress toward objectives in the vocational area on the computer, without being prompted, and discuss their progress with the staff and parents. Given work jobs with norms, the student will record and compare progress with normed scores.

The students’ graphs and percentages on a variety of normed jobs will show if they are progressing towards quality and quantity of normed scores

Other: explain


30

12. Data Management Plan Directions

• District Data Profiles for Early Childhood and K-21 special education programs are published annually and can be found on the MDE website at http://education.state.mn.us/mde/Learning_Support/Special_Education/Statewide_Performance/State_Local_Outcome_Data/index.html

• The year prior to the district’s scheduled MDE Validation Review, Part B and Part C record review findings should be included in the annual report. • Prior to the district’s scheduled MDE Validation Review, data must be gathered from all required stakeholder groups listed in the chart below. Districts may choose to

collect data from one or more groups during each year of the MNCIMP:SR cycle, or collect data from all groups in one year. • Complete the “Year Collected” column after the data has been collected for all categories except those already listed as “Annually”. • See the MNCIMP:SR Guidelines and Resources Manual for detailed sampling procedures and additional directions.

Data Sources and Targeted Population Timing of Measurements Year Collected

Part C: Child Find and Natural Environments

Annually Annually – District results can be found in the Early Childhood District Data Profiles

Part C and Part B Early Childhood Outcome Data

Ongoing as children enter or exit Part C or Section 619

Annually – District results can be found in the Early Childhood District Data Profiles

Part C Family Outcomes Survey

Ongoing as children exit Part C Annually—District results will be included in the Early Childhood District Data Profile

Part B (age 3-5): Settings/LRE

Annually Annually – District results can be found in the Early Childhood District Data Profiles

Part B (age 6-21): Settings/LRE

Annually Annually – District results can be found in the K-21 District Data Profiles

Part C: Timely Evaluations

Annually Annually—District results can be found in the Early Childhood District Data Profile

MCA-2 Results (Grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10 & 11) AYP Status for Special Education Subgroup


Graduation Rates


Dropout Rates


Suspension and Expulsion Rates


Family Stakeholder Information Part C

Maybe collected anytime in the cycle. Reported on the year prior to MDE Validation

2004/2005

Family Stakeholder Information Part B

Maybe collected anytime in the cycle. Reported on the year prior to MDE Validation

2004/2005


31

Data Sources and Targeted Population Timing of Measurements Year Collected General Education Staff Stakeholder Information May be collected any time in the cycle.

Reported on the year prior to MDE Validation. 2004/2005

Special Education Staff Stakeholder Information (Part C)

May be collected any time in the cycle. Reported on the year prior to MDE Validation.

2004/2005

Special Education Staff Stakeholder Information (Part B)


2004/2005

Paraprofessional Stakeholder Information May be collected any time in the cycle. Reported on the year prior to MDE Validation.

2004/2005

Administrator Stakeholder Information (Optional)


Other: _____________________________________


Other: _______________________________________


Part B: Record Reviews Ages 3 to 21 Special Education Student

Conducted and reported on the year prior to MDE Validation

2004/2005

Part C: Record Reviews Birth to age 3 Early Childhood Infants and Toddlers


2004/2005

Longitudinal Record Reviews (Optional)


Continuous Improvement Monitoring Process: Self … 07 CIMP.pdfContinuous Improvement Monitoring...

Documents

Transcript of Continuous Improvement Monitoring Process: Self … 07 CIMP.pdfContinuous Improvement Monitoring...