CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONTom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction

Compliance DataISES Small Group Sesson

December 2011

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

2

Purpose

• To review multi-year compliance data from SESR and VR monitoring in order to:– Identify additional data questions– Discuss preliminary priorities– Start thinking about possible

improvement activities

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

3

All of 1,059 California School Districts Participate Annually

Data Review

Selection CriteriaEvery school districtparticipates everyyear

Activities Local Plan Timeline Compliance CASEMIS Key Performance Indicators (KPI) Compliance and Due Process

Histories

Annual Collection and Analysis of District Information

Activities

Local Plans – Annual Budget and Service Plans (SELPA)

Student Level Data - Compliance testing

Ongoing Compliance History – Triage process

State Performance Plan Indicators – Calculation and review of district data

Compliance Determinations

Disproportionality

Scope

Every school district is reviewed every year.

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

4

Approximately 250 California School Districts

Self-Reviews

Selection CriteriaEvery school districtparticipatesonce everyfour years

Activities Monitoring Plan Record Review Educational Benefit IEP Implementation

Special Education Self Reviews

Scope

Every school district participates every four years

Activities

SELPA/District conducted

Monitoring Plan

Parent Input

SPP Indicators

Compliance History

Record Review

Ed. Benefit

IEP Implementation

Policy and Procedure Review

SELPA Governance

Findings and Corrective Action Plans

CDE Follow up Visits

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

5

20 California School Districts

Verification Reviews

Selection CriteriaSchool districtswith low KeyPerformanceIndicators (KPI)

Activities Monitoring Plan Record Review Educational Benefit IEP Implementation

Verification ReviewsScope

Juvenile Court Schools and other districts per Triage Process

Activities

CDE conducted

Monitoring Plan

Parent Input

SPP Indicators & other Data

Compliance History

Record Review

Ed. Benefit

IEP Implementation

Staff and Parent Interviews

Policy and Procedure Review

SELPA Governance

Findings and Corrective Action Plans

Follow up Visits

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

6

8 California School Districts

Facilitated Districts

Selection CriteriaSchool districtswith the lowest 15% ofKey PerformanceIndicators (KPI)

Activities Three Year Support Grant Process RCAT+ Program Improvement

Facilitated District Reviews

Scope

Districts who have Significant Disproportionality or Disproportionate Representation

Activities

Begins with Review of Policies, Procedures and Practices

2 year support

In depth programmatic and data review

CEIS Plan

Speciality Expert Support

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

7

Training•Statewide SELPA Level Training•Local Training Modules

•Overview•Software Installation•Monitoring Plan Development•Student Record Reviews•Policy and Procedure Reviews•Entering Findings•Systemic Findings, CAs and Reporting•Follow-up and Correction

Monitoring Plan Development

Monitoring Plan Approved

Record Review Activities

IEP Implementation

Monitoring Implementation of Local Plan

Other monitoring activities identified in the Monitoring Plan

Enter and Evaluate Findings

Preparation and Planning

Develop Corrective Actions

Policy and Procedure Review ActivitiesSubmit Findings and Corrective

Actions for Review• Electronic data through secure portal• CDE review files for completeness, accuracy, and coherency

Document/Track Corrections • Submit through secure portal

Prepare Monitoring Plan

Conduct Monitoring Activities

Analyze Results, Submit CAPs, Track

Correction

Parent Input Meeting/Survey

Review District Data

Monitoring Plan Written and Submitted for Approval

Special Education Self Review Process

Educational Benefit Review Activities

Conduct Follow up Reviews• Initiate other enforcement activities, as needed

Close Based on Evidence of Correction

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

8

Total Students and Districts Reviewed through VR and SESR

2006-07 through 2009-10

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

9

Most Frequent Findings from VR and

SESR 2006-07 through 2010-11

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

10

Noncompliance Items by SPP Indicator 2006-07 through 2009-10

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

11

Number of Districts having one or more NC findings by SPP/APR Indicator

2006-07 through 2009-10

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

12

Items Associated with SPP/APR Indicator 5 – Least Restrictive Environment (including total findings by item and total of districts found noncompliant 2006-07 through 2009-10)

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

13

Finding Statements related to Item 3-4-1.2 – General Education Teacher in the IEP meeting.

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

14

Finding statements related to Item 3-4-1.2 – Explanation of the extent to which the student will not participate with general education students in the general education classroom and in extracurricular and nonacademic activities

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

15

National Comparison

Least Restrictive Environment

Tom TorlaksonState Superintendent of Public Instruction

16

National Comparisons – Graduation Rate and

Drop Out Rate