Office of the Independent Monitor 2003 - 2004 Monitoring Activities

Office of the Independent Monitor

2003 - 2004 Monitoring Activities

Monitoring

Data Systems

Performance Outcomes

2

Overview of Data

Systems Monitoring

3

Data Systems

Concerns of accuracy of the data based on discrepancies found between data sources:

SIS, SESAC, and Welligent

Discrepancies highlighted by AIR study, suspension data and disproportionality study.

We conducted a survey of the implementation of the Welligent system to determine accuracy of data (2/17/04 – 2/27/04).

4

Data Systems Welligent Survey Findings

Results from 460 Schools identified as fully training 60% schools were fully implementing21% schools partially implementing19% schools not implementing

Top Reasons for Not Implementing WelligentTechnical ProblemsLack of TrainingAccess to the SystemChanges in Administration

District continues to address these areas and improvement has been noted.

5

Overview of Outcomes Monitoring

6

Process for Developing New Outcomes Review of data

Expert consultation/reports

Scientific studies

Negotiations with parties

7

Outcome #1: Participation on State-wide Assessments Goal is to increase the number of students with disabilities

participating in the state-wide assessments.

2003-2004 data expected September 2004.

School Year Outcome Benchmark Status

2003-04 75% 65% No Data

2002-03 65% 91.8%

8

Outcome #2: Performance on Statewide Assessments The parties agreed to the following outcome:

By June 30, 2006, the Percentage of Students with disabilities in grades 2-11 participating in the California Standards Test (CST) whose scores place them in the combined rankings of Basic, Proficient and Advanced will increase to at least 32.4% in English Language Arts and at least 32.8% in Mathematics.

2003-2004 data will be available September 2004.

Status (2002-2003):

Category# of Special Education Students

# of SPED Students Ranked as Basic or

AboveOutcome %

English Language Arts

50,605 11,318 32.4% 22.4%

Mathematics 50,605 10,060 32.8% 19.9%9

Outcome #3: Special Education Graduation Rate The goal is to increase the number of students with disabilities

that receive a high school diploma. The rate of students with disabilities who graduated declined

from 2001-2002 to 2002-2003. Data will be available September 2004.


2003-2004 55% 45% No Data

2002-2003 33.4%

2001-2002 40.0%

10

Outcome #4: Special Education Completion Rate This outcome measures special education students that

complete high school with a diploma or certificate and tracks drop-out.

Data will be available September 2004.


2003-04 Increase 49.7% No Data

2002-03 46.7%

2001-02 72.6%

11

Outcome #5a: Long-Term Suspensions (over 6 days)

Goal is to reduce the percent of long-term suspensions to no more than 2% of the total number of special education students suspended.

School Year Outcome Status

2003-04* 2% 8.5%

2002-03 9.9%

2001-02 9.1%

* Data from 7/1/03 to 6/15/04

12

Outcome #5b: Overall Suspensions and Suspensions in Comparison to Non-Disabled Students

The parties agreed to the following outcome:

By June 30, 2006, the District will reduce the risk of suspension for the population of students with disabilities by 30% from the rate of 14.7% in the 2002-03 school year, to a rate lower than 10.3%.

By June 30, 2006, the District will reduce disproportionality in the District-wide rate of suspension of students with disabilities in comparison to their non-disabled peers to a relative risk ratio of no more than 1.75X discrepant, such that the population of students with disabilities is nor more than 1.75 times more likely to be suspended than the population of their non-disabled peers.

School Year

Outcome 1 Reduction in % of all

SPED Students Suspended

Status 1

Outcome 2: Reduction in Ratio of Sped Students Suspended vs.

General Education Students Suspended

Status 2

2003-04* 10.3% 12.7%1.75 Special Education Suspension

to 1.00 General Education Suspension

2.24 to 1

2002-03 14.7% 2.30 to 1

* Data from 7/1/03 to 6/15/0413

Outcome #6: Least Restrictive Environment Students with Learning Disabilities and Speech and

Language Impairments placed at least 60% of their school day in general education.

School Year Outcome Benchmark Status*

2003-04 74% 63% 63.2%

2002-03 66.1%

* CASEMIS Data

14

Outcome #7: Least Restrictive Environment Students with all other disabilities spending at least

60% of their school day in General Education.

School Year Outcome Benchmark Status*

2003-04 52% 20.8% 28.8%

2002-03 34.5%

* CASEMIS Data

15

Outcome #8: Placement of Students with

Disabilities at their Home School

The parties agreed to the following outcome:

8a: The District will ensure that the percentage ofstudents with disabilities with the eligibilities ofspecific learning disabilities (SLD) and speech

and language impaired (SLI) who are in their home school does not fall below 92.9% by June 30, 2006.

Status:Total % in Home School % Not in Home School

32,215 92.5% 7.5%

16

Home School Placement (continued)

8b: By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of students with disabilities with all other eligibilities in kindergarten and sixth grade to 65% and the percentage of students with disabilities with all other eligibilities in ninth grade to 60%.

Status:Total

% in Home School

% Not in Home School

Kindergarten 609 51.7% 48.3%

Grade 6 979 54.8% 45.3%

Grade 9 950 45.5% 54.5%

17

Home School Placement (continued)

8c: By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of students with disabilities in the elementary grades one through five in their home school to 62.0%. By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of students with disabilities in middle school grades seven and eight in their home school to 55.2%. By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the percentage of students within high school grades ten and above in their home school to 36.4%.

Status:

Grades Total % in Home School

% Not in Home School

1-5 5,603 59.0% 41.0%

7-8 1,963 52.6% 47.4%

10-PG 2,540 34.7% 65.3%18

Outcome #9: Students with Transition Plans Students with disabilities who are 14 and older are

required under the law to have an individual transition plan that will contribute to their ability to transition into post-school life.

Status:


2003-04 98% 90% 92.1%

19

Outcome# 10: Timely Completion of Evaluations Federal law requires that all assessments be

completed within 50 days.

Service Benchmark % Benchmark % Benchmark %

Psycho-Educational Evaluation

65% 64.6% 75% 81.1% 98% 89.8%

DIS Services Evaluation 65% 70.6% 75% 83.0% 98% 90.2%

District Totals 65% 66.2% 75% 81.6% 98% 89.9%

Within 50 Days Final Outcome 90%



20

Outcome #11: Parent Complaint Response Time

Based on current performance District is on course to meet outcome.

OutcomeWithin 5

DaysOutcome

Within 10 Days

OutcomeWithin 20

DaysOutcome

Within 30 Days

25% 36% 50% 64.4% 75% 91.1% 90% 97.8%

21

Outcome #12: Informal Dispute Resolution The District agreed to establish a systemic

structure for the informal resolution of IEP disputes prior to due process.

The District piloted IDR in four local Districts (B,C,E and H).

As of 6/23/04, 140 families utilized the process.

22

Outcome #13: Delivery of Services

During the 2003-2004 School Year, the Independent Monitor and the American Institutes for Research conducted a study of the delivery of special education services in LAUSD.

Based on the results of the study, the following two-part outcome was agreed upon by the parties:

By June 30, 2006, 93% of the services identified on

the IEPs of Students with Disabilities in all disability

categories except specific learning disability will show

evidence of service provision. In addition, by June 30,

2006, 93% of the services identified on the IEPs of

students with specific learning disability will show evidence

of service provision.

23

Outcome #13: Study Findings

# of Service Observations

% of Services with evidence of

Provision*


% of Observed Services Provided

4,316 42.7% 340 89%

*Exclusion of SLD population increases log to service agreement to 63.7%.

IEP-Log Service Agreement

IEP-Site Visits Service Agreement

24

Outcome #13 (continued)

By June 30, 2006, The District will provide evidence that at least 85% of the services identified on the IEPs of students with disabilities will have a frequency and duration that meets compliance with the IEP.


% of services with monthly frequency

at least equal to IEP

# of service observations

% of services with monthly duration at least equal to IEP

2,200 57.2% 1,876 61.5%

IEP-Log Frequency Agreement IEP-Log Duration Agreement

25

Outcome #14: Parent Participation

During the 2003-2004 School Year, the Independent Monitor and WestEd conducted a study on levels of parent participation.

Based on the study results and Welligent data, the parties agreed to the following outcome:

By June 30, 2006, the District will increase the rate of parent participation in IEP meetings in the area of attendance to 75%. By June 30, 2006, 95% of the records of IEP meetings in whichthe parent does not attend will provide evidence of recordedattempts to convince the parent to attend the IEP meeting inaccordance with Section 300.345(d) of the IDEA regulations.

Status:

# in Welligent

Attended IEP

%Met with

Staff% No Data %

59,659 29,612 49.6% 8,746 14.7% 21,301 35.7%

26

Outcome #14: Parent Participation- WestEd Study Overview Telephone survey was conducted to

determine levels of parent participation within LAUSD.

A representative sample was drawn based on District demographics (ie. ethnicity, disability type, local district, school level).

627 respondents, from a sample of 1,164.

Survey was conducted in 8 languages.

27

Study Results

80% of the respondents reported attending their child’s last IEP.

93.5% of parents report feeling like an equal part of the IEP.

54% of parents not attending the IEP report giving the school permission to proceed with the IEP.

65.7% of parents report being presented with different placement options.

28

Outcome #15: Timely Completion of Future Translations The District has not met the 2003-04 benchmark.

The Office of the Independent Monitor has directed the District to complete those translations over 60 days by August 4, 2004.

# of IEP Translation requested

# Completed

Outcome

30 daysCompleted

30 daysOutcome 45 days

Within 45 days

Outcome

60 daysWithin 60

days

13,543 7,947 85% 7.6% 95% 13.3% 98% 17.6%

29

Outcome #16: Qualified Special Education Teachers The goal is to increase the percentage of

qualified SPED teachers and reduce the gap between qualified SPED and General Education teachers.

School Year% Qualified

Gen. Ed Teachers

% Qualified SPED

TeachersDifference Outcome

2003-2004 85.7% 70.6% 15.1% 3.4%

2002-2003 78.7% 68.3% 10.4

30

Outcome #17: Behavioral Interventions The Office of the Independent Monitor presented the parties

with information regarding the present levels of behavior support plans district-wide.

The parties agreed to the following outcomes: By June 30, 2006, the percentage of students with

autism with a behavior support plan will increase to 40% and the

percentage of students with emotional disturbance with a

behavior support plan will increase to 72%. Eligibility

Total # of Students

Outcome% of Students with Behavior

Plans

Autism 3,382 40% 20.1%

Emotionally Disturbed

2,326 72% 41.1%

31

Outcome #18: Disproportionality

The parties agreed to the following outcome:By June 30, 2006, 90% of African American students identified as emotionally disturbed during an initial or triennial evaluation, will demonstrate evidence of a comprehensive evaluation as defined by the Independent Monitor and consideration for placement in the least restrictive environment as determined by the Independent Monitor.

32

Outcome #18: Disproportionality

African American Students Identified as ED The OIM conducted a District-wide study to identify factors that

may contribute to disproportionality. The OIM consulted with the following experts:

Dr. Gwendyln Cartledge, Ohio State University Dr. Stanley Trent, University of VirginiaDr. Dan Reschly, Vanderbilt University

African Americans are 4.4 times more likely to be identified ED than all other ethnicities.

African Americans are 4.9 times more likely to be placed in a more restrictive placement (non-public schools) than all other ethnicities.

Current rate of Identification for African Americans:

African American % of total population

African American SPED % African American ED %

12.1% 18.0% 36.0%

33

Disproportionality: District-wide Study Overview Review of 270 ED students cumulative files from 32

middle schools and 207 identifying schools.

Sample consists of 123 African American, 118 Latino, 24 White, and 5 other students. Sample is representative of the District’s ED population.

Study reviewed the following areas: Pre-referral interventions; Co-morbidity or additional eligibilities; Assessment practices; Justification of ED; Service Provision; and other considerations for determination.

34

Study Findings

32% of African American students demonstrated evidence of an SST vs. 54.2% of White students.

65.9% of African American and 66.9% of Latino students had evidence of a full psychological evaluation, compared to 83.3% of White students.

37.4% of all students newly identified as ED, demonstrated justification of ED with an eligibility statement.

Approximately 50% of all students had a behavior support plan upon identification.

Systematic deficits found in the identification process for all groups.

35

Other Activities

Selection of DVR parent members.

Recruitment of Parents’ Council Members

Annual Hearing

School Site Visits

Collection of feedback from Teachers, Parents, and Administrators

36

Documents

Office of the Independent Monitor 2003 - 2004 Monitoring Activities