IDEA & Disproportionality

Perry Williams, Ph.D.Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education

What we will cover:

Extent of the Problem IDEA 2004 Policies & 2006 Regulations

Related to Disproportionality Requirements for determining disproportionate

representation Requirements for significant disproportionality

Why Disproportionality is a Problem

Risk Ratio Trends: Mental Retardation and Emotional DisturbanceDisability Area

Year African-American

% of AA Risk Increase

White Hispanic Asian American Indian

MR2002 3.04

38% growth from

1994 to 2001

.61 .60 .45 1.10

2001 2.99 .63 .58 .44 1.09

1994 2.20 .66 .9 .34 1.13

ED2002 2.25

41% growth from

1994 to 2001

.86 .52 .28 1.30

2001 2.21 .87 .52 .29 1.25

1992 1.60 .99 .56 .14 N/A

Impact of Disproportionality: More likely to be assigned to segregated

classrooms or placements; Have limited access to inclusive and general

educational environments; Experience higher dropout rates and low

academic performance; Are exposed to substandard and less

rigorous curricula May be missclassified or inappropriately

labeled

May receive services that do not meet their needs; and

Are less likely than their white counterparts to return to general education classrooms.

Post-School Outcomes

Unemployed 2 years 75% AA students

Out of high school 47% White

Still not employed 52% AA young adult

3-5 years out of school 39% White

Arrest rate 40% AA w/disab.

27% Whites w/disab

Why? Some Hypothesis: Failure of general education to educate

children from diverse backgrounds Misidentification, misuse of tests Lack of access to effective instruction Insufficient resources Teachers who are less well prepared Poverty

Reauthorization of IDEA 2004 and its implementing regulations

Priority Areas and Indicatorsin the SPP

Provision of FAPE in the LRE State exercise of general supervision,

including child find, effective monitoring, the use of resolution meetings, mediation, and a system of transition services; and

Disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services, to the extent the representation is the result of inappropriate identification

WWhat States Must Do Regarding Disproportionate Representation

§300.600(d)(3)

Monitoring

Identify LEAs with disproportionate representation, and of those, the number where the disproportionate representation is the result of inappropriate identification for:

Indicator 9 - children with disabilities including

Indicator 10 - children with disabilities with particular impairments.

Measurement Information:

Definition of disproportionate representation Exam data for both over- and

underrepresentation Use OSEP Child Count data Racial/ethnic data for children ages 6 through

21 Description of how DR is calculated Analyze data for each district, for all

racial/ethnic groups, n size…

Areas for review

School-wide approaches & EIS/RTI Referral practices Comprehensiveness of evaluations Validity & reliability – nonbiased –

assessments Eligibility determination process Suspensions/expulsions Graduation and dropout rates Student performance

If Disproportionality is due to inappropriate identification, require the LEA to correct the noncompliance, including revising deficient policies, procedures, and practices.

RReportingeporting

States must annually report in the Annual Performance Report on:

% of districts with DR of racial and ethnic groups

that results from inappropriate identification.

in special education and related services

in specific disability categories

WWhat States Must Do Regarding Significant Disproportionality

§300.646

DDefining “Significant Disproportionality”

State determines criteria for what level of disproportionality is significant

State defines for LEAs and for state in general

What are the requirements for determining significant disproportionality and the use of IDEA funds for comprehensive CEIS?

States are required to collect and examine data to determine if significant disproportionality based on race and ethnicity is occurring in the state and LEAs of the state with respect to:

Identification of children with disabilities; Identification of children as children with a

particular disability; Placement of children with disabilities in

particular educational settings; and Incidence, duration, and type of disciplinary

actions, including suspensions and expulsions.

DDetermining “Significant Disproportionality”

Is based on collection and examination of data --

-- and not on a district’s policies, procedures, or

practices.

For DDeterminations of Significant Disproportionality

States must:

Provide for the review and revision (as necessary) of policies, procedures, and practices used in identification or placement of children*

* Do these comply with requirements of IDEA?

Require LEAs to use 15% of Part B funds for Coordinated early intervening services

…particularly, but not exclusively, for children in those groups significantly overidentified.

For DDeterminations of Significant Disproportionality

States must:

For DDeterminations of Significant Disproportionality

LEA must:

Publicly report on the revision of policies, practices, and procedures