Continuous Improvement Plan - FY04 - Data Information
Introduction
Following the 1998-1999 school year, the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (ESE) developed its first Continuous Improvement Plan (CIP) for Special Education in cooperation with a Steering Committee composed of multiple stakeholders. That initial plan, completed in June 2001, formed the basis of a number of activities aimed at correcting areas identified as non-compliant and changing practice in areas identified as priority areas.
Since that first plan was completed, Massachusetts has begun to change its focus toward using data in a more effective manner to review and identify needed areas of focus. This FY04 plan is the next iteration of our continuous improvement process and includes three sections (Parent Involvement, FAPE, and Secondary Transition) and 6 focus areas within those three sections. Of the six focus areas, four priority areas have been identified by our state Steering Committee and are identified as such in this document.
Section 1. Parent Involvement
Parental involvement and input has been a major theme and thrust of activities in the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, aimed at systemically including parents in all aspects of the special education process, and has included the education of parents on special education topics. Our CIP focuses specifically on
Parent Participation in Meetings Regarding Educational Decisions for Their Child
Evaluation Indicators
Program Quality Assurance (PQA)/Coordinated Program Review (CPR) and Mid-Cycle Review (MCR): The monitoring cycle for special education ensures every district is visited every three years. CPRs and MCRs will be used to identify school district's compliance in this area, and to develop corrective action plans as necessary.
CPR indicators SE 26 (1-5) (Parent Participation In Meetings) (focus indicator) and SE 32 (Parent Advisory Council for Special Education) will be reviewed each year. Additional data will be collected related to the number of Team meetings taking place during a three month period and the parent participation at those meetings.
Data to date
SE 26 (our focus indicator) provided baseline data of 86% compliance in 2000-2001, with 87% compliance in 2001-2002. Other data elements we reviewed showed compliance ranging from 86% to 94%. This level of compliance is considered "substantially compliant." Massachusetts considers this a key area and it will remain as part of our CIP until our focus indicator reaches 93% compliance for two years in a row.
Section 2. Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)
Providing an appropriate public education is a key concept in special education and is pivotal to an effective and responsive system. Our CIP focuses in three areas related to providing a free and appropriate public education
2.1 Special Education and Related Services are Identified and Provided and IEPs are current PRIORITY AREA
The requirement in this area focuses on ensuring that school districts conduct IEP meetings at least annually. Massachusetts has included review of service provision and Team participation as part of its review of this focus area.
Evaluation Indicators
Program Quality Assurance (PQA)/Coordinated Program Review (CPR) and Mid-Cycle Review (MCR): The monitoring cycle for special education ensures every district is visited every three years. CPRs and MCRs will be used to identify school district's compliance in this area, and to develop corrective action plans as necessary.
CPR Indicator SE 22 (2) is our focus indicator and relates to the currency of every student's IEP at the beginning of the school year. Other indicators associated with this area will also be reviewed: SE 18 related to the development of the IEP and the Team participation and SE 22 (1 & 4) related to provision of services without delay.
Data to date
SE 22(2) (our focus indicator) provided baseline data of 93% compliance in 2000-2001, with 89% compliance in 2001-2002. Although this is high compliance in the focus indicator, associated areas compliance ranges as low as 63%. Massachusetts considers this a key area and it will remain as part of our CIP until our focus indicator reaches 93% compliance for two years in a row.
2.2 Least Restrictive Environment PRIORITY AREA
The requirement in this area focuses on ensuring that school districts are able to provide a full range of placement options depending on the individual needs of the student. Further, that removal occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in the general education environment with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. This requirement is generally referred to as the Least Restrictive Environment or LRE.
Evaluation Indicators
Program Quality Assurance (PQA)/Coordinated Program Review (CPR) and Mid-Cycle Review (MCR): The monitoring cycle for special education ensures every district is visited every three years. CPRs and MCRs will be used to identify school district's compliance in this area, and to develop corrective action plans as necessary.
Additionally, beginning in FY04 the Department will conduct a review of placement data by disability as well as using performance data to look at underlying beliefs and practices. A USDE ranking of states by placement types will also be used to assess Massachusetts' use of placements for special education in comparison to other states.
SE 20 (Least Restrictive Program Selected) has been identified as our focus indicator for the CPR data. We will additionally review results of placement data analysis and determine if such data analysis can be used as a focus indicator.
Data to date
SE 20 (our CPR focus indicator) provided baseline data of 80% compliance in 2000-2001, with 73% compliance in 2001-2002.
2.3 Opportunity for Children with Disabilities to be Involved and Progress in the General Curriculum
Massachusetts' focus in this area for this CIP has moved from a focus on procedural compliance (which appears to be at high levels) to a focus on outcomes so that we can examine if the compliance with requirements is providing us with the performance outcomes we hope for.
Evaluation Indicators
The Special Ed. Steering Committee determined that review of this area will focus on outcomes, specifically dropout data and MCAS performance data for students with disabilities disaggregated to consider disability specific information and placement information. In addition to the federally required placement types, Massachusetts will review outcome data in types of communities and schools, including, but not limited to vocational schools. In FY04, our review of data will be used to set performance goals and indicators.
Section 3. Secondary Transition
Massachusetts has engaged in considerable training and discussion on how to improve planning for transition for students with disabilities to post-school activities. Two key areas in this section remain as both a focus and a priority on our CIP.
3.1 Outcome Oriented Statements of Transition PRIORITY AREA
Massachusetts is seeking to ensure that, when planning for transition, the IEP Team considers multiple aspects including (a) the coursework the student is currently taking and how well it prepares him/her for the future; (b) the students preparation and interest in postsecondary education, vocational training, employment, adult services, independent living, and community participation.
Evaluation Indicators
Program Quality Assurance (PQA)/Coordinated Program Review (CPR) and Mid-Cycle Review (MCR): The monitoring cycle for special education ensures every district is visited every three years. CPRs and MCRs will be used to identify school district's compliance in this area, and to develop corrective action plans as necessary.
CPR Indicator SE 6#2 is our focus indicator and includes review of records to ensure that for a student who is 16 years of age, or younger if appropriate, the Team includes in the IEP services that promote movement of the student from school to post-school activities, including post-secondary education, vocational training, integrated employment (including supported employment), continuing and adult education, adult services, independent living, or community participation. SE 6 #3 - is an additional indicator we review in this area and looks at whether the transition services are based upon the student's needs, taking into account the student's preferences and interests.
The state Special Ed. Steering Committee will additionally focus on how to ensure that vocational options are available to all students who need them. The area of transition has been identified as a key focus area for our state improvement grant application called "Project Focus Academy."
Data to date
SE 6 #2 (our CPR focus indicator) provided baseline data of 84% compliance in 2000-2001, with 70% compliance in 2001-2002. SE 6 #3 provided baseline data of 86% compliance in 2000-2001 and 71% compliance in 2001-2002.
3.2 Statement of Transition Service Course of Study Beginning at Age 14 PRIORITY AREA
Requirement:
The IDEA 1997 Amendments require that the IEP of each student beginning at age 14, and updated annually, includes a statement of the transition service needs of the child under that applicable components of the IEP that focuses on the child's course of study. 20 U.S.C. 1414(d)(1)(A)(vii)(I).
Evaluation Indicators
Program Quality Assurance (PQA)/Coordinated Program Review (CPR) and Mid-Cycle Review (MCR): The monitoring cycle for special education ensures every district is visited every three years. CPRs and MCRs will be used to identify school district's compliance in this area, and to develop corrective action plans as necessary.
Data to date
For our baseline year of 2000-2001 CPR results show a compliance rate of 89% and for 2001-2 a compliance rate of 71%.
last updated: June 3, 2004
|
State Government · State Services 
