Results-Driven Accountability

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS

1

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

Purposes•Ensure that infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families receive early intervention services and their rights are protected•Assist States and local programs•Ensure EIS providers and parents have the necessary tools•To assess and ensure effectiveness

2

Statutory Monitoring Focus• Primary Monitoring Focus

Improving early intervention results and functional outcomes for all children with disabilities

In the past, our focus was on ensuring that States meet IDEA program procedural requirements

3

What we focus on is what improves.

4

Over the course of the last nine years

OSEP has taken the steps necessary to prepare for a results focused accountability system

• Data timeliness and quality much improved• Compliance rates much improved

5

RDA OVERVIEW 6

Vision for RDA

All components of an accountability system will be aligned in a manner that best support States in improving results for infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities, and their families.

7

8

Core Principles

• Principle 1: Partnership with stakeholders.• Principle 2: Transparent and understandable to

educators and families. • Principle 3: Drives improved results• Principle 4: Protects children and families• Principle 5: Differentiated incentives and

supports to States• Principle 6: Encourages States to target

resources and reduces burden• Principle 7: Responsive to needs 9

OSEP Theory of Action

10

Vision: All infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities will achieve improved educational results and functional outcomes. : All infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities will receive individualized services in natural settings.

Strands of Action If OSEP Then Then Then

… provides guidance in a timely and responsive manner ..communicates its vision effectively

… States will have the information they need to align their activities to OSEP’s vision…States will promote higher expectations for CWD

…States, LEAs and EIS providers will have higher expectations for CWD, will access

resources to provide effective

interventions and services to

infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities

…All infants, toddlers,

children, and youth with

disabilities will receive

individualized services in

natural settings and demonstrate

improved educational results and functional outcomes

… engages strategically with other ED programs, Federal agencies, States, grantees and outside organizations

… OSEP will more effectively leverage resources to improve services for CWDOSEP will increase the reach and impact of its work

… provides differentiated resources and evidence-based information…supports the development of effective personnel that support CWD

… States have increased capacity to support LEAs and EIS providers to deliver effective interventions…the number of effective personnel will increase

… holds States and grantees accountable for clearly identified, measureable results…engages States in planning, assessment and evaluation

… States put systems in place that lead to improved results for CWD and protect the rights of children and families

Technical Assistance

Accountability

Leadership

Collaboration

Components of RDA

• State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR) measures results and compliance.

• Determinations reflect State performance on results, as well as compliance.

• Differentiated monitoring and technical assistance supports improvement in all States, but especially low performing States. 11

SPP/APRFocused on Systemic Improvement

• Reduce burdenReduce indicators (- B-15 and 20; C-9 and 14)Pare down reporting requirements to just

those specifically required• One comprehensive improvement plan

focused on analyzing current system and redesigning as necessary to improve results

12

State Systemic Improvement Plan

13

The SPP/APR includes a comprehensive, multi-year State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP), focused on improving results for student with disabilities, that includes the following components…

Year 1—FFY 2013Delivered by April 2015

Year 2—FFY 2014Delivered by Feb 2016

Years 3-6—FFY 2015-18Feb 2017- Feb 2020

Phase IAnalysis

Phase IIPlan

Phase IIIEvaluation

• Data Analysis;• Infrastructure Analysis;• State-identified

measureable result;• Coherent Improvement

Strategies;• Theory of Action.

• Multi-year plan addressing:• Infrastructure

Development; • Support EIS

Program/LEA in Implementing Evidence-Based Practices;

• Evaluation Plan.

• Reporting on Progress including:• Results of Ongoing

Evaluation;• Extent of Progress.

• Revisions to the SPP .

14

SSIP Activities by Phase

• Conduct root Conduct root cause analysis cause analysis (including (including infrastructure) to infrastructure) to identify identify contributing contributing factorsfactors

• For each For each contributing contributing factor, identify factor, identify both barriers and both barriers and leverage points leverage points for improvementfor improvement

• Search/evaluate Search/evaluate evidence-evidence-based solutions based solutions (Exploration Phase)(Exploration Phase)

• Develop action steps Develop action steps (address barriers/use (address barriers/use leverage points)leverage points)

• Develop Develop Theory of ActionTheory of Action• Develop Develop Plan for Improvement Plan for Improvement

(Implementation Framework)(Implementation Framework)

• Initiate Initiate Data AnalysisData Analysis• Conduct broad Conduct broad

Infrastructure AnalysisInfrastructure Analysis• Identify problem areaIdentify problem area

• Evaluation Evaluation of progress annuallyof progress annually• Adjust plan as neededAdjust plan as needed

How well is How well is the solution the solution

working?working?What is the What is the problemproblem??

Why is it Why is it happening?happening?

What shall What shall we do we do

about it?about it?

15

SSIP Phase I

SSIP Phase I and II

SSIP Phase III

SSIP Phase I

Differentiated Monitoring and Support

• SSIP Implementation Support activities, including on site visits and desk support

• All States will get TA on SSIP development and general TA from Regional Resource Centers and other OSEP-funded TA Centers

• Targeted TA based on determinations and SSIP• Low performing States will get more intensive

support• Connecting our work with Early Learning, SIG

and ESEA Flex 16

OSEP Results-Driven AccountabilityConceptual Framework for OSEP Differentiated Monitoring and Support to State Education Agencies and Lead Agencies Based on Their Levels of IDEA Implementation and Capacity to Support Improved Results

17

High Implementation X High Capacity = Improved Results for Children with Disabilities

18

OSEP State Systemic Improvement Plan: A Conceptual Framework

for Improving Results for Children with Disabilities

RDA Incentive Grant

• Proposed in the 2015 budget• $100 million from IDEA Part B section 611• 4 year competitive grants to States for Part

B and Part C• To support States in implementing their

SSIPs• States must agree to use results data in

their LEA determinations 19

SSIP IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT ACTIVITIES

20

What are SSIP Implementation Support Activities?

SSIP Implementation Support Activities are an opportunity for:

•The State, State partners (including OSEP funded TA centers),and OSEP to engage in conversation focused on the SEA’s and LA’s work on completing the SSIP

•OSEP and State partners to support the SEA/LA efforts to complete Phase I of the SSIP

•OSEP and State partners to analyze the States’ capacity to support LEA/EIS programs in implementing IDEA and improving outcomes

•OSEP and State partners to collaborate with the State to identify technical assistance and resources that the SEA/LA will need to increase their capacity to develop and implement the SSIP

21

SSIP Implementation Support Activities

SSIP Implementation Support On-Site/Desk Support Activities are not IDEA compliance monitoring activities. OSEP will not be making findings based on conversations that occur during the SSIP Implementation Support

on-site /desk support activities

22

Outcomes of SSIP ImplementationSupport Activities

OSEP•Increase understanding of the State’s capacity to support LEAs/EIS programs in implementing IDEA and improving outcomes for children with disabilities

•Inform the development of OSEP’s accountability system, including what TA and guidance OSEP will need to provide States

States•Identify resources that would be useful to States as they continue to work toward improved outcomes for all children•Explore ways to leverage resources and affect change at the local level•Increase understanding of the State’s capacity to complete the SSIP•Increase awareness and begin to identify the TA and support that the State will need to develop and implement the SSIP

23

What should States expect during the SSIP Implementation Activities?

• The Implementation guide and agenda are tools to provide a framework for the discussion. The structure and focus of the on site or desk support activity should be determined based on the needs of the State

• State staff will initiate the discussion on specific components of the SSIP as outlined in the agenda template

• Stakeholders will engage in the discussion to support the State in the SSIP development

• OSEP staff will engage in the discussion with the State and State partners on the SSIP development

• There is no expectation that any forms be completed or minutes be taken during the meeting

24

What happens after the SSIP Implementation Activities?

• This is the first in a series of conversations that OSEP will have with States to complete the SSIP. Following the SSIP Implementation Activities, OSEP staff will continue to work with States to provide ongoing support and TA

• OSEP will not be issuing a formal report following the SSIP Implementation On-Site/Desk Support

• The State will receive a letter summarizing the big ideas discussed at the meeting and providing resources, as appropriate

• OSEP will send the State a survey about the initial conversation in order to inform OSEP’s future work with States 25