Upload
jeneva
View
58
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
State Performance Plan/ Annual Performance Report/Continuous Improvement Performance Plan (SPP/APR/CIPP). Buncombe County Schools 2013. Monitoring Priorities 616(a)(3) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
State Performance Plan/State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Annual Performance
Report/Continuous Improvement Report/Continuous Improvement Performance Plan Performance Plan
(SPP/APR/CIPP)(SPP/APR/CIPP)
Buncombe County SchoolsBuncombe County Schools
20132013
Monitoring Priorities 616(a)(3)
The Secretary shall monitor States and require each state to monitor its LEAs using quantifiable indicators to measure performance in the following areas:
1. FAPE in the LRE 2. Disproportionality 3. Effective General Supervision
State Performance Plan Reporting616(b)(2)(C)
States must annually collect data in these priority areas to analyze the performance of each LEA.
Each state must report annually to the Secretary on its performance under its performance plan.
States must report annually to the public on the performance of each LEA on the identified targets in the state’s performance plan.
Continuous Improvement Performance Plan (CIPP)
Buncombe County Schools Data Story
2013
Indicator 1:Percentage of youth with IEPs graduating from high Indicator 1:Percentage of youth with IEPs graduating from high school with a regular diplomaschool with a regular diploma
State Target: 80%State Target: 80%
2010-20112010-2011
53.6%53.6%
2011-20122011-2012
61.9%61.9%
Indicator 2: Percent of SWD dropping out of high schoolIndicator 2: Percent of SWD dropping out of high school
State Target: 4.7%State Target: 4.7%
2010-20112010-2011
6.8%6.8%
2011-20122011-2012
5.5%5.5%
Indicator 3A: District Indicator 3A: District PerformancePerformance on State Assessments Compared to on State Assessments Compared to State AYP State AYP
2010-20112010-2011
Did not meet AYPDid not meet AYP
2011-20122011-2012
Did not calculate AYPDid not calculate AYP
B. State Target-Participation Rate: 95%B. State Target-Participation Rate: 95% Did not calculate LEA participation rates Did not calculate LEA participation rates
C. State Target-ProficiencyC. State Target-ProficiencyReading 3-8: 71.6 %Reading 3-8: 71.6 %
10: 69.3% 10: 69.3%Math 3-8: 88.6%Math 3-8: 88.6%
10: 84.2% 10: 84.2%
Indicator 3 B & C : State Assessment Participation and Indicator 3 B & C : State Assessment Participation and Performance for SWDPerformance for SWD
Indicator 4a: Rate of suspension and expulsions of SWD>10 Indicator 4a: Rate of suspension and expulsions of SWD>10 consecutive days in the school year that is greater than twice the consecutive days in the school year that is greater than twice the
state average.state average.State Target: 5%State Target: 5%
2010-20112010-2011
n/a%n/a%
2011-20122011-2012
< 5 students< 5 students
4B: 4B: Percent of districts identified by the State as having a significant Percent of districts identified by the State as having a significant discrepancy in rates of suspensions and expulsions of children with discrepancy in rates of suspensions and expulsions of children with IEPs of greater than 10 days in a school year by race and ethnicity and IEPs of greater than 10 days in a school year by race and ethnicity and have policies, procedures or practices that contribute to the significant have policies, procedures or practices that contribute to the significant discrepancy and that do not comply with requirements relating to the discrepancy and that do not comply with requirements relating to the development and implementation of IEPs, the use of positive development and implementation of IEPs, the use of positive interventions, behavioral supports and procedural safeguards.interventions, behavioral supports and procedural safeguards.
2010-20112010-2011
n/a%n/a%
2011-20122011-2012
n/a%n/a%
Indicator 5: Percent of SWD aged 6-21 served: Indicator 5: Percent of SWD aged 6-21 served: Measurement A. Inside the regular class 80% or more of the dayMeasurement A. Inside the regular class 80% or more of the day
State Target: 65.6%State Target: 65.6%
2010-20112010-2011
60.1%60.1%
2011-20122011-2012
64.1%64.1%
Indicator 5 B: Percent of SWD aged 6 through 21 served inside the Indicator 5 B: Percent of SWD aged 6 through 21 served inside the regular class less than 40% of the dayregular class less than 40% of the day
State Target: 15.3%State Target: 15.3%
2010-20112010-2011
17.0%17.0%
2011-20122011-2012
16.8 %16.8 %
Indicator 5C: Percent of SWD served in separate schools, residential Indicator 5C: Percent of SWD served in separate schools, residential facilities, or homebound/hospital placementsfacilities, or homebound/hospital placements
State Target: 2.0%State Target: 2.0%
2010-20112010-2011
.9 %.9 %
2011-20122011-2012
.7 %.7 %
Indicator 6: Percent of preschool children with IEPs who received Indicator 6: Percent of preschool children with IEPs who received special education and related services in settings with typically special education and related services in settings with typically
developing peersdeveloping peers
Not SampledNot Sampled
Indicator 7: Percent of preschool SWD who demonstrate improved: Indicator 7: Percent of preschool SWD who demonstrate improved: A. Positive social emotional skills; A. Positive social emotional skills;
B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and Skills; B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and Skills; C. Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsC. Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs
2010-20112010-2011
A.1. 92.9%A.1. 92.9% 2. 42.2%2. 42.2% B. 1. 93.2%B. 1. 93.2% 2. 53.3%2. 53.3% C. 1. 89.3%C. 1. 89.3% 2. 62.2%2. 62.2%
2011-2012 2011-2012
A.1. 81.4%A.1. 81.4% 2. 28.8%2. 28.8%B.1. 81.9%B.1. 81.9%
2. 40.4%2. 40.4% C.1. 80.8%C.1. 80.8% 2. 58.7% 2. 58.7%
Indicator 8: Percent of parents with a child receiving special education Indicator 8: Percent of parents with a child receiving special education services who report that school facilitates parent involvement as a services who report that school facilitates parent involvement as a
means of improving services and results for children with disabilities.means of improving services and results for children with disabilities.
State Target: 50% State Target: 50%
2010-20112010-2011
Not sampledNot sampled
2011-20122011-2012
50%50%
Indicator 9: LEA data indicate the disproportionate representation of Indicator 9: LEA data indicate the disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that
is the result of inappropriate identificationis the result of inappropriate identification
State Target:0%State Target:0%
2010-20112010-2011
NoNo
2011-20122011-2012
NoNo
Indicator Indicator 10:LEA10:LEA data indicate disproportionate representation of racial and data indicate disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories that is the result of inappropriate ethnic groups in specific disability categories that is the result of inappropriate
identificationidentification
State Target: 0%State Target: 0%
2010-20112010-2011
NoNo
2011-20122011-2012
NoNo
Indicator 11: Percent of students referred for whom a referral was Indicator 11: Percent of students referred for whom a referral was received and placement determined in 90 days.received and placement determined in 90 days.
State Target: 100%State Target: 100%
2010-20112010-2011
92.1%92.1%
2011-20122011-2012
97.1%97.1%
Indicator 12: Percent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3, who Indicator 12: Percent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3, who are found eligible for Part B and who have an IEP developed and are found eligible for Part B and who have an IEP developed and
implemented by their third birthdaysimplemented by their third birthdays
State Target: 100%State Target: 100%
2010-20112010-2011
100%100%
2011-20122011-2012
100%100%
Indicator 13a: Percent of youth with IEPs aged 16 and above with an IEP that Indicator 13a: Percent of youth with IEPs aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes appropriate measurable postsecondary goals that are annually includes appropriate measurable postsecondary goals that are annually
updated and based upon an age appropriate transition assessment, transition updated and based upon an age appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those postsecondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s meet those postsecondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s
transition service needs. There must also be evidence that the student was transition service needs. There must also be evidence that the student was invited to the IEP team meeting where transition services are to be discussed invited to the IEP team meeting where transition services are to be discussed and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency
was invited to the IEP team meeting with the prior consent of the parent or was invited to the IEP team meeting with the prior consent of the parent or student who has reached the age of majority.student who has reached the age of majority.
State Target:100%State Target:100%
2010-20112010-2011
100%100%
2011-20122011-2012
100%100%
Indicator 13b: Percent of noncompliance identified in the previous Indicator 13b: Percent of noncompliance identified in the previous school year corrected within 1 yearschool year corrected within 1 year
State Target: 100%State Target: 100%
2010-20112010-2011
100%100%
2011-20122011-2012
100%100%
Indicator 14: Percent of youth who are no longer in secondary school, Indicator 14: Percent of youth who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they left school and were:had IEPs in effect at the time they left school and were:
Enrolled in higher education within one year of leaving high schoolEnrolled in higher education within one year of leaving high schoolEnrolled in higher education or competitively employed within one year Enrolled in higher education or competitively employed within one year of leaving high schoolof leaving high schoolEnrolled in higher education or in some other postsecondary education Enrolled in higher education or in some other postsecondary education or training program; or competitively employed or in some or in some or training program; or competitively employed or in some or in some other employment within one year of leaving high schoolother employment within one year of leaving high school
Not SampledNot Sampled
Indicator 15a: Percent of noncompliance identified in the previous Indicator 15a: Percent of noncompliance identified in the previous school year corrected within 1 yearschool year corrected within 1 year
State Target: 100%State Target: 100%
2010-20112010-2011
100%100%
2011-20122011-2012
100%100%
Indicator 15b: Percent of compliance for the Internal Record ReviewIndicator 15b: Percent of compliance for the Internal Record Review
State Target: 100%State Target: 100%
2010-20112010-2011
100%100%
2011-20122011-2012
100%100%