State Part B Administrator Survey

Appendix D

State Part B Administrator Survey

IDEA – NAIS

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This survey is part of the IDEA National Assessment Implementation Study (NAIS), a new study that is occurring as part of the congressionally mandated National Assessment of Progress under IDEA 2004. The NAIS is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education (ED), Institute of Education Sciences (IES). The purpose of the study is to develop an understanding of how state and local government agencies are implementing early intervention and special education programs supported under IDEA 2004. The NAIS has important implications for the education of children with disabilities as it will provide critical information to the Department of Education and Congress and inform the next reauthorization of IDEA.

The NAIS is not a compliance study, nor a study of the results of effectiveness of IDEA.

We are requesting you and other state special education directors complete this questionnaire because you and your staff have the most knowledge about special education policies and practices in your state. As grantees under IDEA, state education agencies are required to participate in this data collection (20 U.S.C. 1221e-3, 1226c, 1231a, 3474, and 6511(a)); it is not voluntary. With your contribution, ED and Congress will gain a more accurate and complete understanding of how IDEA is being implemented for students with disabilities at the state level.

Please note that data on state policies and resources/supports may be reported by state. Thus, while personally identifiable information about individual respondents will not be released, data displayed by state could be attributed to the state agency or possibly to an individual respondent.

Thank you for joining us in our effort to understand the implementation of IDEA 2004. We appreciate your time and cooperation.

Please see the next page for definitions for completing this survey.

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless such collection displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 1800-0011. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average one hour (or 60 minutes) per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collection. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. 20202-4537. If you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission of this form, write directly to: Lauren Angelo, U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, 555 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Suite 502H, Washington, D.C. 20208.

If you have any questions, contact:

Martha Wilaby, 1-888-463-1892e-mail: [email protected]

Definitions

Throughout this questionnaire “students with disabilities” means school aged-students having mental retardation; hearing impairment, including deafness; speech or language impairment; visual impairment, including blindness; serious emotional disturbance (hereafter referred to as emotional disturbance); orthopedic impairment; autism; traumatic brain injury developmental delay; other health impairment; specific learning disability; deaf-blindness; or multiple disabilities and who, by reason thereof, receive special education and related services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) according to an Individualized Education Program (IEP).

STATE EDUCATION AGENCY QUESTIONNAIRE

Identification

Significant Disproportionality and Early Intervening Services (EIS)

According to IDEA 2004 and the accompanying regulations, an LEA may choose to use up to 15% of its Part B funds for EIS. If an LEA is identified as having significant disproportionality in identification, placement, or discipline, it is required to reserve 15% of its Part B funds to provide EIS to students in the LEA. Each state develops a definition of significant disproportionality for making this determination.

1. What best describes the status of your state’s progress in defining significant disproportionality for 2008-09? Choose one.
   
   

Our state’s definition of significant disproportionality is finalized and no changes are anticipated in the coming year
Our state’s definition of significant disproportionality is finalized but we are planning modifications or revisions in the coming year
Our state’s definition of significant disproportionality is in the process of being developed

2. Please enter the web address of a location where we may view your current definition of significant disproportionality. If this information is not available on a website, please include a hard copy when you return your survey.

3. How many LEAs are required to use EIS during the current school year as a result of significant disproportionality?

Unduplicated count

 If zero, skip to Item 5

4. Specify the number of LEAs required to use EIS as a result of significant disproportionality during the current school year in each of the three areas: identification, placement, and discipline. If the LEA is required to use EIS because of disproportionality in multiple areas, count the LEA in each of those areas.

Area of significant disproportionality:		Number of LEAs required to use EIS
Identification
Placement
Discipline

5. When an LEA is required to use EIS as a result of significant disproportionality, which of the following actions does your state education agency (SEA) undertake? Check all that apply.
   
   

Provides or arranges technical assistance (specialized advice and customized support) for the LEA
Provides or arranges professional development for the LEA
Provides additional (beyond the 15% required from Part B) targeted monetary or staff resources
Develops a specific plan for the LEA to follow
Conducts a review of LEA policies and procedures
Conducts more frequent monitoring of the LEAs
Other
h. None of the above

If “other”, please describe below:

6. Please specify the number of LEAs that voluntarily are using any portion of their Part B funds to implement EIS during the 2008-09 school year. If you don’t know, enter ‘DK’ in the box.

Number of LEAs choosing to use EIS

7. If an LEA in your state does not have significant disproportionality and wishes to use Part B funds to provide EIS…

	Yes	No
Is SEA approval required to use any Part B funds for EIS?		…
Is SEA approval required on the amount of Part B funds that an LEA spends?		…
Is SEA approval required on the type of activity that an LEA spends funds on?		…

Response to Intervention

Response to Intervention (RtI) is a multi-step approach to providing early and progressively intensive intervention and monitoring within the general education setting. In principal, RtI begins with research-based instruction and behavioral support provided to students in the general education classroom, followed by screening of all students to identify those who may need systematic progress monitoring, intervention, or support. Students who are not responding to the general education curriculum and instruction are provided with increasingly intense interventions through a “tiered” system, and they are regularly monitored to assess their progress and inform the choice of future interventions, including possibly special education for students determined to have a disability.

8. Which of the following describe state-level activities related to RtI? Check all that apply.

The state has a state-level RtI task force, commission, or internal working group
The SEA has a dedicated full-time position related to RtI
The SEA has an outside advisory group related to RtI
The SEA has provided resources to school districts (e.g., issued grants or RFPs) to explore the use of RtI (e.g., to identify or try model RtI programs; to plan or begin implementation)
The SEA has issued guidelines on RtI
The SEA has organized trainings on RtI that were conducted by consultants or contractors
SEA staff conduct trainings on RtI
SEA staff provide technical assistance (specialized advice and customized support) to LEAs and schools that are investigating or implementing RtI
The SEA arranges technical assistance from consultants or contractors for LEAs and schools that are investigating or implementing RtI
RtI information is available on the SEA website
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

9. Please describe any current SEA initiatives related to RtI in each of the content areas below.

	Reading	Math	Behavior	Other
The SEA has no current initiatives related to implementation of RtI
The SEA has a pilot initiative to implement RtI only in a limited number of LEAs or schools
The SEA has an initiative to expand the use of RtI more broadly within the state
The SEA has an initiative to implement RtI statewide

10. If your state has either a pilot or statewide initiative that promotes RtI in elementary schools, at what level are decisions made about each of the aspects of RtI implementation described below? Check one or more box in each row.
    
    

 If your state has no current initiatives related to implementation of RtI in any area, skip to item 11.

	Level or levels where decision is made
	Staff at SEA decide	Staff at LEA decide	Staff at school decide	Not done	Don’t know
The research-based curricula to use in general education
The cut scores for determining risk status
The criteria for determining a student’s responsiveness to intervention
The frequency and duration of progress monitoring
The choice of the interventions to use for students determined to be at risk
The number of intervention sessions required prior to referral for special education
The decision rules for a referral for a special education evaluation
How to document intervention fidelity

11. In determination of eligibility for special education under Specific Learning Disability (SLD), which best describes your state’s policy with respect to RtI? Choose one.

The use of an IQ-achievement discrepancy model is prohibited, and RtI data are explicitly required in determining eligibility		 Skip to Item 14
The use of an IQ-achievement discrepancy model is prohibited, and an alternative method (not specifically RtI) is used to determine eligibility		 Skip to Item 14
The use of an IQ-achievement discrepancy model is permitted, and RtI data are explicitly required in determining eligibility
The use of an IQ-achievement discrepancy model is permitted, and RtI data may be used in determining eligibility
The use of an IQ-achievement discrepancy model is permitted, and an alternative method (not specifically RtI) may be used to determine eligibility
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

12. If your state permits the use of a discrepancy method in determining Specific Learning Disability, which best characterizes your state policy? Choose one.

The SEA has operationalized discrepancy criteria and any LEA using a discrepancy method must adhere to these criteria
LEAs have discretion to choose the specific discrepancy criteria used

13. Does your state have a plan to eliminate the use of an IQ-achievement discrepancy model as a determination of eligibility for special education under Specific Learning Disabilities by the 2010-2011 school year?

Yes
No

Personnel and Staffing

The following items ask about personnel and staffing issues for both general education and special education teachers. Some or all of the items may require data that is most easily accessible outside the special education office, such as from a certification or licensing bureau or from a human resources or personnel department. Please feel free to consult with others as necessary in order to provide the most accurate data possible for these items.

14. Which state agency is responsible for licensing and certification of special education teachers?

State education agency
State licensing and certification agency that is not part of the SEA
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

15. During the current (2008-2009) and prior (2007-2008) school years, what strategies has your state routinely used to increase the proportion of teachers who meet the Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) provisions of IDEA and NCLB? Check all that apply.

Collaborate with universities to create programs and curricula to ensure that graduates meet the HQT provisions (e.g., create a task force, fund grants to IHEs for restructuring)
Pay for tutoring to prepare teachers for certifications tests/licensure exams
Provide funding for teachers to participate in professional development opportunities (e.g., IHE tuition, workshop fees)
Pay fees for tests/licensure exams
Provide alternative routes to certification in special education for persons with content area certification
Provide alternative routes to certification in special education for any person with a bachelors degree
Provide free or subsidized training for highly qualified secondary school teachers to obtain special education credentials
Provide free or subsidized training for special education teachers to obtain content area credentials
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

In the questions below, HOUSSE refers to High, Objective, Uniform State Standard of Evaluation. Using HOUSSE, the No Child Left Behind law (NCLB) allows states to develop an alternate way for current teachers to demonstrate subject-matter competency and meet HQT requirements consisting of a combination of teaching experience, professional development, and knowledge in the subject garnered over time in the profession.

16. Under HOUSSE, in what ways does your state measure subject matter knowledge for special education teachers at the elementary school level? Elementary schools are schools for which the lowest grade is 3 or lower, and the highest grade is 8 or lower. Please indicate whether the alternate ways of demonstrating subject-matter competency are required or optional under HOUSSE. Check all that apply.

	Required	Optional
This state does not have HOUSSE for this type of teacher
Performance evaluation
Portfolio
Classroom experience
Student achievement data
Content area test scores (e.g., PRAXIS, state-developed tests)
National Board certification
Completion of professional development, including additional coursework
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

17. Under HOUSSE, how does your state measure subject matter knowledge for special education teachers at the middle school level? Middle schools are schools for which the lowest grade is between 4 and 7, and the highest grade is between 4 and 9. Please indicate whether the alternate ways of demonstrating subject-matter competency are required or optional under HOUSSE. Check all that apply.

	Required	Optional
This state does not have HOUSSE for this type of teacher
Point system or rubric
Performance evaluation
Portfolio
Classroom experience
Student achievement data
Content area test scores (e.g., PRAXIS, state-developed tests)
National Board certification
Completion of professional development, including additional coursework
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

18. Under HOUSSE, how does your state measure subject matter knowledge for special education high school teachers? High schools are schools for which the lowest grade is 7 or higher and the highest grade is 12. Please indicate whether the alternate ways of demonstrating subject-matter competency are required or optional under HOUSSE. Check all that apply.

	Required	Optional
This state does not have HOUSSE for this type of teacher
Point system or rubric
Performance evaluation
Portfolio
Classroom experience
Student achievement data
Content area test scores (e.g., PRAXIS, state-developed tests)
National Board certification
Completion of professional development, including additional coursework
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

Parent/Guardian Involvement

19. For the 2008-2009 school year, is your SEA offering any of the following to LEAs to promote the involvement of parent/guardians of students with IEPs? Check all that apply.

Funds to LEAs to help parents participate in IEP meetings (e.g., transportation, babysitting, translators)
Technical assistance related to promoting parent involvement
Written guidelines related to parent involvement
Workshops or professional development on increasing parent involvement
Other activity

If “other”, please describe below:

20. For the 2008-2009 school year, does your state have a federally funded Parent Training and Information Center (PTI)?

Yes
No	 Skip to Item 22

21. For the 2008-2009 school year, in what ways are SEA staff collaborating with the PTI? Check all that apply.

Development or delivery of professional development
Delivery of technical assistance
Dissemination of information regarding each other’s services
Development of training/guidance materials
Parent outreach efforts
Promotion of alternative dispute resolution models
Other activity

If “other”, please describe below:

Academic Standards

Alignment of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) with State Standards

Standards-based IEPs are those that align goals for students with disabilities with the content and academic achievement standards that form the basis of each state’s general education curriculum.

Content standards describe what students should know and be able to do in the core academic subjects.

Academic achievement standards gauge the proficiency with which content standards have been attained by individuals or groups of students.

22. For the 2008-2009 school year, does your SEA provide a mandated standards-based IEP for LEAs?

Yes
No

23. For the 2008-2009 school year, does your SEA provide a suggested standards-based IEP for LEAs?

Yes
No

24. For the 2008-2009 school year, does your SEA have formal written policies in place regarding development and use of standards-based IEPs?

Yes
No

25. For the 2008-2009 school year, does your SEA have written guidelines in place regarding the development and use of standards-based IEPs?

Yes
No

26. During the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 school years, has your SEA provided any training or professional development on the development of standards-based IEPs?

Yes
No		 Skip to Item 29

27. Who was the target audience for the training or professional development on the development of standards-based IEPs? Check all that apply.

Principals
School administrative officials
Special education staff
General education staff
Reading specialists
Math specialists
Paraprofessional or instructional learning assistants
School counselors
School psychologists
School or district nurse
Speech and language therapists
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

28. What topics were covered by the professional development on standards-based IEPs? Check all that apply.

Assessment of students’ current performance
Developing standards-based goals for academic content areas (e.g., what a student is expected to know and be able to do in a specific content area, such as math or science; student can identify U.S. coins by name)
Developing standards-based goals for academic achievement (e.g., how well a student has mastered what is expected by reaching a proficiency level; standard score on a math assessment is above a specified cut-off).
Use of instructional strategies, supports and accommodations necessary for students with disabilities to achieve standards-based goals
Use of testing accommodations
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

Use of Testing Accommodations

29. For the 2008-2009 school year, does your SEA have formal written policies that specify a list of allowable/permissible testing accommodations?

Yes
No

30. Please indicate when the testing policies being used for the 2008-2009 school year first became effective.

2008-2009
2007-2008
2006-2007
2005-2006
Other

If “other” please note school year below:

Dispute Resolution

31. During the last school year (2007–2008), how many formal mediations did your state complete?

 If none, enter 0, then skip to Item 35

32. How many of these formal mediations resulted from the following:
    
    

LEA requests for impartial due process
Parent/guardian requests for impartial due process

33. Of the mediations reported in Item 31, how many concerned the following issues?
    Count mediations more than once if they involved more than one issue.

Evaluation of students for special education services
Eligibility of students for special education services
Student’s educational program (e.g., academic, functional, and life skills) as set forth in the IEP
Educational placement
Discipline (including suspension or expulsion)
Procedural safeguards (e.g., prior written notice, confidentiality)
Related services (e.g., transportation, speech therapy, counseling)
Tuition reimbursement (e.g., private school placement)
Other

If “other”, please specify below:

34. Of the mediations reported in Item 31, how many resulted in a mediation agreement?

35. During the last school year (2007–2008), how many resolution meetings were requested?

36. During the last school year (2007–2008), how many impartial due process hearings were requested?

 If none, enter 0, then skip to Item 39

37. Of the number of impartial due process hearings reported in Item 36, how many were completed after unsuccessful mediation?

38. Of the number of impartial due process hearings reported in Item 36, how many concerned the following issues? Count hearings more than once if they involved more than one issue.

Evaluation of students for special education services
Eligibility of students for special education services
Student’s educational program (e.g., academic, functional, and life skills ) as set forth in the IEP
Educational placement
Discipline (including suspension or expulsion)
Procedural safeguards (e.g., prior written notice, confidentiality)
Related services (e.g., transportation, speech therapy, counseling
Tuition reimbursement (e.g., private school placement)
Other

If “other”, please specify below:

39. Does your state education agency conduct administrative reviews?

Yes
No		 Skip to Item 42

40. During the last school year (2007–2008), how many state administrative review hearings did your state agency complete?

 If none, enter 0, then skip to Item 42

41. Of the number of state administrative reviews reported in Item 40, how many concerned each of the following issues? Count reviews more than once if they involved more than one issue.

Evaluation of students for special education services
Eligibility of students for special education services
Student’s educational program (e.g., academic, functional, and life skills ) as set forth in the IEP
Educational placement
Discipline (including suspension or expulsion)
Procedural safeguards (e.g., prior written notice, confidentiality)
Related services (e.g., transportation, speech therapy, counseling
Tuition reimbursement (e.g., private school placement)
Other

If “other”, please specify below:

42. During the last school year (2007–2008), how many state/federal judicial reviews of hearings did your state complete?

 If none, enter 0, then skip to end of survey

43. Of the number of state/federal judicial reviews reported in Item 42, how many concerned each of the following issues? Count reviews more than once if they involved more than one issue.

Evaluation of students for special education services
Eligibility of students for special education services
Student’s educational program (e.g., academic, functional, and life skills) as set forth in the IEP
Educational placement
Discipline (including suspension or expulsion)
Procedural safeguards (e.g., prior written notice, confidentiality)
Related services (e.g., transportation, speech therapy, counseling
Tuition reimbursement (e.g., private school placement)
Other

If “other”, please describe below:

THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO COMPLETE THE SURVEY!

Please use the space below to provide any additional information or comments that you have.

Contact Information

Please provide us with your name, title, address, phone number, fax number and email address in case we need to contact you to clarify responses to any of these questions.

Name
Title
Address
Phone
Fax
Email

If more than one person filled out this survey, please indicate their positions below and the sections each completed.

Position/Section… c…
Position/Section…
Position/Section…

Please estimate how long it took, in total, to complete this questionnaire.

hours

minutes

Thank you for completing this questionnaire.

29

SEA Part B- final