Significant Disproportionality State Survey

SIGNIFICANT DISPROPORTIONALITY INFORMATION COLLECTION QUESTIONS

Instructions: The purpose of this information collection is to support States and LEAs in their efforts to comply with the statutory requirement at section 618(d) of the IDEA. Please email your responses to: [email protected]

1. States and LEA Implementation of the December 2016 Regulation for SY 2018-2019

1. Describe what challenges, if any, your State and LEAs confronted when the State made its annual determination for SY 2018-2019.

2. Describe any data quality or data availability issues that you have encountered with implementing the December 2016 regulation and how you are addressing these issues.

3. Describe any successful practices or lessons learned that other States might find useful regarding making annual determinations, accessing data, or other areas related to implementing the 2016 regulation.

4. Describe any unintended consequences that you have observed in your State and LEAs that are the result of implementing the December 2016 regulation in your State.

2. Comprehensive CEIS

1. Describe what challenges, if any, your State and LEAs encountered in identifying and addressing the factors contributing to significant disproportionality in an LEA.

2. Please describe successful strategies your State and LEAs have employed for identifying and addressing the factors contributing to significant disproportionality , innovative and/or effective examples of uses of CEIS funding to address significant disproportionality or other general lessons learned that other States might find useful.

3. If your State elected to provide comprehensive CEIS to students ages 3-5 and/or to children with disabilities, please describe what challenges, if any, your State and LEAs encountered in the delivery of comprehensive CEIS to those populations.

3. Flexibilities and Reasonableness under the December 2016 Regulation

1. Did your State apply either of the flexibilities available under 34 C.F.R. §300.647(d) when it made its annual determinations for SY 2018-2019? If yes, please describe.

2. If applicable, describe the process your State used to define “reasonable progress,” under 34 C.F.R. §300.647(d)(2), including how “reasonable progress” was ultimately defined, for its SY 2018-2019 annual determinations, and please identify lessons learned.

3. Describe the process your State used to determine that the risk ratio thresholds, minimum cell and n-sizes, , were “reasonable,” and please identify any lessons learned that other States might find useful.

4. Based on your State’s experience, do you have suggestions on how the Department should monitor and enforce the reasonableness of risk ratio thresholds, minimum cell and n-sizes, and standard for reasonable progress, if any, in a manner that protects students and minimizes burden on States and school districts?

4. Technical Assistance

1. Describe how your State is meeting the capacity and training needs of teachers and staff in implementing the December 2016 regulations. Please distinguish between SEA and LEA staff in your response.

2. Describe the support you need from the Department to--

   1. Implement and improve your State’s standard methodology;

   2. Support LEAs in identifying and addressing the factors contributing to the significant disproportionality

   3. Implement comprehensive CEIS;

   4. Understand the connection between the use of IDEA Part B funds for comprehensive CEIS and the LEA MOE adjustment provision in 34 C.F.R. 300.205;

   5. Apply the standard methodology to LEAs with small or homogenous populations; and

   6. Meet any other capacity or training needs pertaining to implementing the December 2016 regulations.

3. Describe any unique challenges to identifying and addressing significant disproportionality in your State.

Public Burden Statement

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 1820-New. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to 2 hours per response, including time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The obligation to respond to this collection is voluntary. If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate, or suggestions for improving this survey, please contact Mary Louise Dirrigl, U. S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 5156, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-2600. Telephone: 202-245-7324.

3