Results-Driven Accountability (RDA) ESSU Data Management System

Results-Driven Accountability (RDA)
C o n t i n u o u s Imp r o v e me n t P r o c e s s : F r e q u e n t l y A s k e d Q u e s t i o n s
ESSU Data Management System
When will Enrich have the updated Colorado Academic Standards uploaded?
This response was provided by the CDE Standards Project Director when
provided with the question noted above:
Since the adoption of the Common Core in math and ELA (in 2010) there have
been no changes to the Colorado Academic Standards (CAS). Any proposed
changes to the Colorado Academic Standards would go through an extensive
and public process and would require State Board of Ed approval before
adoption. CAP4K does allow for the revision on or before 2018, but that
process would be public, involve multiple constituencies, and would require
Board approval.
The coding on the standards dates them as 2009 and 2010, because those are
the years they were written and adopted. Those dates may lead people to
believe we have new standards as implementation took place in 2013. Some
people may think the implementation date of 2013 means that there were new
standards, when in actuality the standards written and adopted in 2009/10
were the ones implemented in the 2013/14 school year.
Note from Cindy Millikin: Enrich is currently populated with the CAS as written.
In addition, the standards from the Colorado Early Learning Development
Guidelines have been added for preschool.
What support can CDE give to uploading IEPs into the Data Management
System?
Cindy Millikin will provide direct support to any AU that needs assistance in the
process for uploading IEPs into the Data Management System, whether the
upload will occur via Enrich or through uploading a zipped file of records from
other IEP systems. There is also a handout with step-by-step directions for the
upload process, including screen shots of the process. Please email Cindy if you
need assistance: [email protected]
Timelines
•
August 2014 – May 2015 –
Conduct record reviews based
on the student sample
•
January-February 2015:
Receive SASIDs of students
16+ years of age who exited
Post-School Outcomes
Interviews as per EOY 2014
submission
•
June 2015 - Submit the
signed verification of Indicator
7 data
•
September 15 2015 –
complete the submission of
data entered in the ESSU Data
Management System from
post-school interviews
(Indicator 14 data collection
on students who exited one
year prior and are 16+ years
of age)
Who has access to the Data Management System within an AU?
The AU Director makes any decisions regarding access to the ESSU Data
Management System. The following list provides descriptions of the current roles available at the AU level:
AU Monitoring Director: This role is intended for Directors. They have the ability to engage in all actions within
the ESSU Data Management System (DMS). They will set up any teams they may have within the areas of the
DMS. The Directors with this role as stated do NOT submit files within the IEP Interchange; if a Director also
submits data to the IEP Interchange, the role is a combined role, i.e., AU Monitoring Director and LEA User.
February 2015
Page 1
RESULTS DRIVEN ACCOUNTABILITY: CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
2
AU Monitoring Manager: This role is intended for people who serve as essential support to the Directors. These
might be mid-level management staff who will be able to do all actions across all areas of the ESSU Data
Management System EXCEPT designing/selecting teams. If the AU Monitoring Manager also submits data to the
IEP Interchange, the role would be combined with LEA User.
AU Monitoring Record Reviewer: This role is intended for staff that the Director assigns to help with the record
reviews, only. They will not be able to view other areas of the ESSU DMS.
AU Monitoring Post-School Interviewer: This role is intended for staff who are assigned by the Director to enter
data from the Post-School Outcome interviews, only. People with this role will not be able to enter other areas
in the ESSU DMS.
AU Monitoring Record Reviewer and Post-School Interviewer: This role is intended for staff who are assigned by
the Director to conduct record reviews AND complete post-school outcome interviews. They will be able to
conduct record reviews. They will be able to enter data from the post-school outcome interviews. However,
they would not be able to enter other areas in the ESSU DMS.
What is the function of the Profile tab in the data management system?
The profile tab will hold data that summarize the profile of the AU. This is where the AU Director will attach the
signed reports as verification of data for collections. This is also the location where the AU’s Comprehensive
Plan will be attached. The CDE ESSU will attach data charts and graphs that summarize the AU’s student profile.
Some of the questions on the paper checklist do not match the wording for questions in the data
management system. Have these items been revised to reflect the information requested?
• Local vs individual standards
• Re-evaluation in contradiction to IEP
With the delay in the initial development of the Compliance functionality in the ESSU DMS, the ESSU created a
paper version of the checklist so that AUs could begin conducting their record reviews on paper (i.e., to be
transferred into the DMS once “live”). When the DMS Compliance functionality went “live” and AUs were
entering their data into the system, it became apparent that there were a few questions that needed
adjustments or clarification (see the two bulleted items above).
With regard to the local vs individual standards item, it became apparent that the language was too vague;
therefore, two more explicit items were posted to replace that original item.
With regard to the item that referenced whether the data found in a reevaluation was in contradiction to the
information in the Evaluation report or IEP, it became apparent that the question’s polarity was reversed, i.e., if
the AU answered with the appropriate “no” response, the “lifesaver” for that item was red, indicating a negative
value. Therefore, this question was re-worded in the DMS so that it reads in the reverse, i.e., the data found in
the reevaluation was consistent with the information in the Evaluation report and the IEP.
As of this publication, the ESSU DMS is “live,” so record reviews should be entered directly into the DMS to avoid
duplicative work. Access is available at all times from any browser, iPad, etc..
February 2015
Page 2
RESULTS DRIVEN ACCOUNTABILITY: CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
3
If new reports are added to the data management system, how long does it take for a new report to be
completed?
Currently, the only reports that have been written for the DMS are the fiscal reports ordered by Barb Goldsby
and Vicki Graham. However, the ESSU will be building reports for Compliance, parent surveys, and post-school
outcome interviews. Some of these reports will be in the aggregate for the ESSU. Other reports will be created
and posted at the AU level to support the AU Directors in their administrative decision making and evaluation
activities.
IEP Process Questions
If there are no special evaluations, why is this choice on the paperwork?
Under the IDEA, there are two types of evaluations: an initial evaluation and a reevaluation. The regulations
require reevaluations to be conducted at least every three years. Some AUs have implemented a process for
reevaluations that they term "special evaluations" and that have specific requirements regarding process and
documentation for reevaluations for which the AUs do not want to reset the three-year reevaluation timelines.
Other AUs do not make any distinctions for these reevaluations. To accommodate the procedures of all AUs in
the state, a Colorado State Advisory Group that was formed to develop a document for IEP guidance in 2008
included the use of this procedure. This was also reflected on the model IEP forms developed by this Advisory
Group that are posted on the CDE website.
Will a clear definition of a transfer student be provided in writing?
The IEP Guidance document is currently under revision. The revised edition will provide guidance regarding
transfer processes. The revision is expected to be posted to the CDE website by the end of February 2015.
Would CDE provide a written explanation of why out of state IEPs should not be accepted?
Every AU has the responsibility to provide a free appropriate public education to all eligible students with
disabilities. If a student with a disability moves into an AU from another state, the AU will have to provide
appropriate special education and related services to that student, consistent with both federal law and
Colorado’s Rules for the Administration of the Exceptional Children's Educational Act (ECEA), including
determining whether the student is eligible under Colorado’s eligibility criteria, and whether the student’s outof-state IEP provides the appropriate special education and related services to provide that student with FAPE.
As with every eligible student with a disability, this will always be an individualized determination based upon
the specific circumstances of each child.
If the student’s out of state information, including evaluative information and the IEP itself, satisfy the Colorado
IEP team and meet the requirements of Colorado’s rules, then the IEP team would be free to accept or adopt
that IEP as its own. If the Colorado IEP team is not satisfied that the sending state’s eligibility criteria are
consistent with Colorado’s, or that the out of state IEP offers FAPE, then the IEP team is free to conduct its own
evaluations to determine eligibility and then develop its own IEP, as appropriate.
February 2015
Page 3
RESULTS DRIVEN ACCOUNTABILITY: CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
4
Will CDE provide model IEPs?
CDE will not be creating model IEPs. However, the ESSU is recruiting redacted exemplars of IEPs from the AUs as
they conduct their local record reviews. These redacted exemplars (whether considered positive or negative
examples) will be entered into the CDE Enrich Sandbox so they are connected to fictional students and will have
no connection to their original student data or their AU. These exemplars will be available to the AUs so they
may use these IEPs for training purposes.
What does a good PLAAFP look like?
The ESSU has collaboratively produced a guidance document titled, “Writing Standards-aligned ALPs and IEPs: A
Supplemental Guidance Document for Designing Effective Formal Educational Plans” Dec. 2014
The IEP section of the document is now located on the CDE IEP Forms page:
http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/iep_forms
The guidance document presents a Seven Step Process for practitioners as they consider the student’s present
level of academic achievement and functional performance as it relates to the requirements of the Colorado
Academic Standards. Due to the fact that each child’s individualized education program is unique to the
strengths and needs of that particular student, there can be no “model” IEP. However, there are examples
provided within the narrative of Step 2, Gather Data, and Step 3, PLAAFP. In addition, a variety of constructed
examples are included in the Through the Lens… section. These scenarios offer various ways an IEP team may
draft a student’s PLAAFP in order to provide a clear picture of the student’s abilities as they relate to the
academic standards and the impact of the disability. While there is no formally prescribed format, and local
policies and procedures of an Administrative Unit may further define the structure for a PLAAFP statement, IDEA
requires the following elements:
• the most recent evaluation data CRF §300.324(a)(iii)
• statement of the child’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance
§300.320(a)(i)
• academic and developmental, and functional needs of the child §300.324(a)(1)(iv)
• strengths, preferences and interests CRF §300.324(a)(1)(i)
• impact of disability statement §300.320(a)(1)(i) and (ii)
• concerns of the parent CRF §300.324(a)(1)(ii)
Communication
Why is different information given from different groups out of CDE?
The ESSU is implementing a variety of routines in an effort to unify any messages that are given to the field from
ESSU staff. If an AU Director feels that s/he has been provided with conflicting information from members of
the ESSU, please report these inconsistencies to the AU Partner so the ESSU may clarify and establish a unified
message for all AU Partners and staff regarding the appropriate response.
February 2015
Page 4
RESULTS DRIVEN ACCOUNTABILITY: CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
5
No Directors’ Meeting Spring 2015
Why isn’t there a director’s meeting in the spring?
Due to the LRP Conference being held in Denver this spring and the potential conflicts for Directors with
attempting to attend two conferences/meetings, the ESSU worked with the SDLT in making the decision to
eliminate the Directors’ meeting this spring so that funds may be redirected to assist AUs in attending the LRP
conference.
Data
What support can CDE give to AUs, specifically BOCES, for data?
CDE provides data to the public via various outlets. Enrollment and demographic reports specific to students
with IEPs are available at http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/sped_datareports. Achievement data are
available at Data Center and Data Lab at School View (http://www.cde.state.co.us/schoolview). If you need data
unavailable at these publicly facing tools, please feel free to contact the data team directly through the
supervisor of the data team, Miki Imura; [email protected] .
Once the Data Management System’s performance tab is available, the data team will post PowerPoint slides
that summarize each AU’s performance on the state assessments. If you need further assistance in
understanding the data or would like more detailed data, please do not hesitate to contact Miki. Some BOCES
have data sharing agreements between the BOCES and their member districts. In such cases, the data team will
provide data that contain n < 16. If the BOCES does not have the signed data sharing agreement, CDE ESSU
regretfully cannot provide deeper level data to the BOCES (i.e., no district, school, or student level data).
How do we deal with the fact that the ‘n’ size really impacts data outcomes?
When a group contains a small number of students, it can be more easily influenced by outliers (e.g., one
student scoring with an extremely high or low score). Attempts to make generalizations from the data when the
sample size is so small are typically prone to error. In an attempt to avoid this problem and also to protect
students’ privacy, CDE has the n<16 rule – i.e., CDE does not provide data to the public that contains less than 16
students. The ESSU will be able to provide data to the AU Director when the sample sizes are less than 16;
however, these data may not be shared in any publicly facing way. If the AU is a BOCES, a data sharing
agreement must be in place. If the AU is a district or school with a small number of students, it is recommend
that student data be examined individually rather than as in the aggregate, as such examination should be more
meaningful and free of error.
Transition Services – A Continuum
Is there a decision tree to assist in designing programming for 18-21 year olds?
There is no specific decision tree to assist in designing services for students 18-21 years of age. School districts
in Colorado have developed creative ways of providing transition services to students with disabilities, ages 1821, who require services beyond the typical senior year of high school. Frequently, these services are delivered
February 2015
Page 5
RESULTS DRIVEN ACCOUNTABILITY: CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
6
through community-based or school-based programs that do not fit the mold of a typical classroom or centerbased program. These services are part of the continuum of transition services (15-21) that must be
individualized and linked to the students’ identified postsecondary goals. The decision to have a student
continue beyond the traditional senior year is determined by the IEP team and should be based on continued
academic and/or functional needs documented in the IEP. Annual goals linked to the postsecondary goals should
drive the services, and progress/mastery of the annual goals as well as linkages determine the time of
graduation/exit from K-12 Services. It is important to have clearly defined processes for determining schedules,
credits, attendance, and designating responsibilities for service delivery.
Where can I learn more?
Resource information
•
OSERS OSEP RDA Core Principles:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/rda/core-principles.html
•
OSEP Results Driven Accountability:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/rda-summary.doc
•
The National Post School Outcomes Center: http://psocenter.org/
The Colorado Department of Education
Exceptional Student Services Unit
Cindy Millikin, Director of RDA
1560 Broadway, Suite 1175, Denver, CO 80203
303-866-6619  [email protected]
February 2015
Page 6