Transition Outcomes Project Data Collection for Program Improvement NSTTAC Secondary Transition State Planning Institute May 2, 2007 Ed O’Leary, MPRRC

Transition Outcomes ProjectTransition Outcomes ProjectData Collection for Program Data Collection for Program

ImprovementImprovement

NSTTAC Secondary Transition State NSTTAC Secondary Transition State Planning InstitutePlanning Institute

May 2, 2007May 2, 2007

Ed O’Leary, MPRRCEd O’Leary, MPRRC

Develop and field test a process and a Develop and field test a process and a model to:model to:

• Assist local districts in meeting the transition service Assist local districts in meeting the transition service requirements of IDEA 2004requirements of IDEA 2004

• Evaluate the effectiveness of providing and delivering Evaluate the effectiveness of providing and delivering transition services to students and families through the transition services to students and families through the IEP process.IEP process.

• Provide training and resource materials on the Provide training and resource materials on the transition process for educators, administrators, adult transition process for educators, administrators, adult agency personnel, parents and others.agency personnel, parents and others.

• Improve graduation rates and post school outcomes of Improve graduation rates and post school outcomes of students with disabilities.students with disabilities.

PurposePurpose

Projects are currently or have been in place in Projects are currently or have been in place in districts/regions in 27 states/territories and districts/regions in 27 states/territories and over 1,500 districts:over 1,500 districts:

Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, the Bureau of Indian Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, the Bureau of Indian Education, Colorado, Delaware, Iowa, Kansas, Education, Colorado, Delaware, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Nevada, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, the U.S. South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Virgin Islands, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, and WyomingWyoming

ParticipantsParticipants

Conceptual FrameworkConceptual Framework

• VolunteerVolunteer• Focused and ManageableFocused and Manageable• Emphasis on Program ImprovementEmphasis on Program Improvement• Clear and ConciseClear and Concise• TrainingTraining• Empowerment of LEAEmpowerment of LEA• Building CapacityBuilding Capacity

Achieving ResultsAchieving ResultsTransition Outcomes ProjectTransition Outcomes Project

Sequence of Steps/ActivitiesSequence of Steps/ActivitiesPhase 1 — Identification and Commitment from Local DistrictsPhase 1 — Identification and Commitment from Local Districts

Phase 2 — IEP ReviewsPhase 2 — IEP Reviews

Phase 3 — Report Findings, Set Target Goals/Timelines, Brainstorm Phase 3 — Report Findings, Set Target Goals/Timelines, Brainstorm Strategies Strategies

Phase 4 — Implementation and Follow AlongPhase 4 — Implementation and Follow Along

Phase 5 — Follow-up Reviews/Report of Final ResultsPhase 5 — Follow-up Reviews/Report of Final Results

Achieving Achieving ResultsResults

Transition Outcomes Transition Outcomes ProjectProject

• Understand the “what/how” – baseline, report-outUnderstand the “what/how” – baseline, report-out• Own the problemOwn the problem• Own the solutionsOwn the solutions• Implement changesImplement changes• Determine and see results – final dataDetermine and see results – final data

Critical mass = 50% >Critical mass = 50% >

Increase likelihood for institutionalizing and sustaining Increase likelihood for institutionalizing and sustaining changechange

TOPS – Change for TOPS – Change for Results ProcessResults Process

O’Leary, E., 2003 © Copyright

Transition Outcomes ProjectTransition Outcomes ProjectSequence of Project ActivitiesSequence of Project Activities

Proximity-Proximity-

RequirementsRequirementsQualityQuality Follow-upFollow-up

O’Leary, E., 1998 © Copyright

Indicator 13Indicator 13 Indicator 14Indicator 14

Baseline and Final Data from: AZ, IA, MD, Baseline and Final Data from: AZ, IA, MD, MI, MT, NM, PA, TX, USVI, WI, WV & MI, MT, NM, PA, TX, USVI, WI, WV & MPSMPS

Total Number of IEPsTotal Number of IEPs

National Baseline National Baseline = 11,472= 11,472Seven States Final Seven States Final = 2,452= 2,452

Transition Transition OutcomesOutcomes Projects ProjectsPreliminary Data and FindingsPreliminary Data and Findings

4. Will this student need involvement from 4. Will this student need involvement from any outside agency in order to make a any outside agency in order to make a

successful transition?successful transition?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

# 1# 2# 4# 5# 6# 7

64%

35%

62%

53%

35%

75%

56%

78%71%

76%

BaselineBaseline 52%52%

FinalFinal 68%68%

73%

76%

4a. Did the Public Agency invite a representative of any 4a. Did the Public Agency invite a representative of any other agency that is likely to be responsible for providing other agency that is likely to be responsible for providing

or paying for transition services?or paying for transition services?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

1

2

3

4

5

6

7


FinalFinal 34%34%

22%

13%

46%

14%

48%

28% 29%

27% 19%

14%

65%

20%

I

18%

5%

20%

4b. If a representative from any other agency did not 4b. If a representative from any other agency did not attend, did the public agency take other steps to obtain attend, did the public agency take other steps to obtain their participation in the planning of any transition their participation in the planning of any transition services?services?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

12

45

67


FinalFinal 26%26%

37%

12%

26%

48% 26%

16%

58%

19%

9% 3%

19%

6%

15. Are the activities in the statement of needed 15. Are the activities in the statement of needed transition services presented as a coordinated set transition services presented as a coordinated set of activities?of activities?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

1234567


FinalFinal 61%61%

56%

19%

77%

42%

77%

33% 38%43%

60%

36%

88%

23%

26%26%

17. If appropriate, does the IEP include a 17. If appropriate, does the IEP include a statement of the interagency responsibilities or statement of the interagency responsibilities or any needed linkages?any needed linkages?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

1234557


FinalFinal 57%57%

81%

47% 47%

17%

40%

29%

82%

49%

15% 14%

42%

23%

78%

46%

WSTI Baseline and Final DataWSTI Baseline and Final Data2003-20042003-2004

Total Number of IEPsTotal Number of IEPs

National Baseline National Baseline = 1,984= 1,984WSTI - 2003WSTI - 2003 = 4,446= 4,446WSTI Review 2 – 2004WSTI Review 2 – 2004 = 3,321= 3,321

Transition Outcomes ProjectsTransition Outcomes ProjectsPreliminary Data and FindingsPreliminary Data and Findings

1. Did the Public Agency Invite the 1. Did the Public Agency Invite the Student?Student?

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Baseline Review 2 Review 2-04

WSTI

National

75%

89%95% 87%

96%

2. Did the Student Attend?2. Did the Student Attend?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%


WSTI

National

65%63%

73%77%

73%

3. Ensure Student Preferences and 3. Ensure Student Preferences and Interests ConsideredInterests Considered

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%


WSTI

National

54%56%

83%

94%92%

4a. Did the Public Agency Invite a 4a. Did the Public Agency Invite a Representative…?Representative…?

0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%20%


WSTI

National

5%

10%

15%

17%19%

12. Does the IEP Include a Course of 12. Does the IEP Include a Course of Study?Study?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%


WSTI

National

43%

32%

54%

79%85%

15. Are the Activities a Coordinated 15. Are the Activities a Coordinated Set…Set…

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%


WSTI

National

37%

21%

43%

54%57%

16. Do the Activities Promote 16. Do the Activities Promote Movement to Student Desired Post Movement to Student Desired Post

School Goals?School Goals?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%


WSTI

National

37%

21%

43%

54%57%

22

Comparisons of Post School OutcomesComparisons of Post School Outcomes

2004 2004 N= 3,321N= 3,321

WSTIWSTI Non WSTINon WSTI

83%83% 51%51%

57%57% 29%29%

52%52% 20%20%

80%80% 66%66%

42%42% 26%26%

Percent of IEP’sPercent of IEP’s

• With post high school employment With post high school employment adult living objectiveadult living objective

• Indicate need for outside agenciesIndicate need for outside agencies

• Student invited to the IEP meetingStudent invited to the IEP meeting

• Currently paid work Currently paid work

• Identify self as having disability to Identify self as having disability to post-secondary advisorpost-secondary advisor

DelawareDelawareMark ChamberlinMark Chamberlin

November 2006November 2006

The TOPs effort has had a tremendous impact The TOPs effort has had a tremendous impact in our state. In the almost 500 IEPs I have in our state. In the almost 500 IEPs I have reviewed for Indicator 13 this fall, over 90% reviewed for Indicator 13 this fall, over 90% of the students are attending their IEP of the students are attending their IEP meetings, and all but one school district has meetings, and all but one school district has documented the invitation of students to the documented the invitation of students to the IEP meetings.IEP meetings.

This obviously wasn’t a requirement for this This obviously wasn’t a requirement for this indicator, but I did it for the districts anyway.indicator, but I did it for the districts anyway.

Thanks for all you’ve done to help us.Thanks for all you’ve done to help us.

The Emphasis of IDEAThe Emphasis of IDEA

Improving educational resultsImproving educational results for children for children with disabilities is an essential element of with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy of ensuring:our national policy of ensuring:

– equality of opportunityequality of opportunity– full participationfull participation– independent living, andindependent living, and– economic self-sufficiencyeconomic self-sufficiency

for individuals with disabilitiesfor individuals with disabilities(sec. 1400 (c) (1))(sec. 1400 (c) (1))

Accountability in IDEAAccountability in IDEA

““The primary focus of Federal and State The primary focus of Federal and State monitoring activities … shall be on—monitoring activities … shall be on—

‘‘ ‘‘(A)(A) improving educational results and improving educational results and functional outcomes functional outcomes for all children with for all children with disabilities; anddisabilities; and

‘‘‘‘(B)(B) ensuring that States meet the program ensuring that States meet the program requirements requirements under this part, with a particular under this part, with a particular emphasis on those requirements that are most emphasis on those requirements that are most closely related to improving educational results closely related to improving educational results for children with disabilities.”for children with disabilities.”

Section 616 (a) (2)Section 616 (a) (2)

SPP Requirement SPP Requirement Closely Associated Closely Associated

With ResultsWith Results

Transition Services in Transition Services in SchoolsSchools

Indicator 13Indicator 13

Indicator 13Indicator 13Transition Services in SchoolsTransition Services in Schools

Percent of youth aged 16 and above with an Percent of youth aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual goals and transition services that will annual goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet the reasonably enable the student to meet the postsecondary goals.postsecondary goals.

TOPs and Indicator 13 QuestionsTOPs and Indicator 13 Questions

• 4 States, 1 BIE District4 States, 1 BIE District

• 75-100 Local Districts75-100 Local Districts

• Self Assessment following TOPs/I-13 trainingSelf Assessment following TOPs/I-13 training

• Teachers, transition personnel, administratorsTeachers, transition personnel, administrators

• Use of the TOPs and Indicator 13 ChecklistsUse of the TOPs and Indicator 13 Checklists

TOPs Total N = 1,867TOPs Total N = 1,867

TOPs and I-13 IEP ReviewsTOPs and I-13 IEP Reviews2006/20072006/2007

Overall, does the IEP include coordinated, Overall, does the IEP include coordinated, measurable annual IEP goals and transition measurable annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to services that will reasonably enable the student to meet their postsecondary goals?meet their postsecondary goals?

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

Indicator 13 2006/ 2007

TOPs & I-13

6%6%

TOPS and I-13 N = 1,859TOPS and I-13 N = 1,859

Measurable Postsecondary GoalMeasurable Postsecondary GoalA. Education/TrainingA. Education/Training

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Indicator 13

MPG

P.S. Goal NotMeasurable

No Goal

N = 1,867N = 1,867

39%39%

29%29% 32%32%

Measurable Postsecondary GoalMeasurable Postsecondary GoalB. EmploymentB. Employment

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Indicator 13

MPG

P.S. Goal NotMeasurable

No Goal

N = 1,867N = 1,867

41%41%

27%27%32%32%

Measurable Postsecondary GoalMeasurable Postsecondary GoalC. Independent LivingC. Independent Living

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Indicator 13

MPG

P.S. Goal notmeasurable

N = 945N = 945N/A = 922N/A = 922

60%60%

40%40%

Is (are) there annual IEP goal(s) that will Is (are) there annual IEP goal(s) that will reasonably enable the child to meet the reasonably enable the child to meet the postsecondary goal(s)?postsecondary goal(s)?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Indicator 13

Indicator 13

N = 1,175N = 1,175

54%54%

For each measurable postsecondary For each measurable postsecondary goal, is there evidence of age goal, is there evidence of age appropriate transition assessment?appropriate transition assessment?

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%

Indicator 13

Indicator 13

N = 1,175N = 1,175

41%41%

Are there transition services in the IEP that focus Are there transition services in the IEP that focus on improving the academic and functional on improving the academic and functional achievement of the child to facilitate their achievement of the child to facilitate their movement from school to post-school?movement from school to post-school?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Indicator 13

Indicator 13

5252%%

N = 1,175N = 1,175

Do the transition services include courses of Do the transition services include courses of study that focus on improving the academic and study that focus on improving the academic and functional achievement of the child to facilitate functional achievement of the child to facilitate their movement from school to post-school?their movement from school to post-school?

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

Indicator 13

Indicator 13

N = 1,834N = 1,834

49%49%

Overall, does the IEP include coordinated, Overall, does the IEP include coordinated, measurable annual IEP goals and transition measurable annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to services that will reasonably enable the student to meet their postsecondary goals?meet their postsecondary goals?

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

Indicator 13

Indicator 13

66%%

N = 1,859N = 1,859

Involvement of Involvement of Outside Agencies in Outside Agencies in Transition PlanningTransition Planning

TOPs Total Number of IEPsTOPs Total Number of IEPs

2002/2003 through 2004/2005 = 6,8962002/2003 through 2004/2005 = 6,896

TOPs and I-13 Total Number of IEPsTOPs and I-13 Total Number of IEPs2005/2006 & 2006/2007 2005/2006 & 2006/2007 = 2,327= 2,327

Transition Outcomes ProjectsTransition Outcomes ProjectsData and FindingsData and Findings

Did the Public Agency invite a representative of Did the Public Agency invite a representative of any other agency (with consent…) that is likely to any other agency (with consent…) that is likely to

be responsible for providing or paying for be responsible for providing or paying for transition services?transition services?

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

02/03 - 04/05

05/06 - 06/07

7%9%

Documents

Transition Outcomes Project Data Collection for Program Improvement NSTTAC Secondary Transition State Planning Institute May 2, 2007 Ed O’Leary, MPRRC