2019 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters PART B — Bureau of Indian Education
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
PDFView PDF
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON DC 20202 -2600
www.ed.gov
The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by
fostering educational excellence and ensuring equ al access.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
July 1, 201 9
Honorable Tony L. Dearman
Director
Bureau of Indian Education
1849 C Street, NW
MS -3609 -MIB
Washington, DC 20240
Dear Director Dearman :
I am writing to advise you of the U. S. Department of Education ’s (Department) 201 9
determination under section 616 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The
Department has determined that the Bureau of Indian Education (the BIE) needs intervention in
implementing the requirements of Part B of the IDEA. This determination is based on the totality
of the BIE ’s data and information, including th e Federal fiscal year (FFY) 201 7 State
Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR ), other State -reported data, and other
publicly available information.
I also want to make you aware that, absent significant progress in implementing the requirements
of the IDEA , as detailed below, the BIE is at risk of being determined to be in need of substantial
intervention pursuant to section 616(e)(3) of the IDEA in 2020 , a designation reserved for States
and entities with the most significant performance and compliance issues .
Protecting the rights of children with disabilities and their families is a key responsibility of
States , but it is not sufficient if children are not attaining the knowledge and skills necessary to
achieve the goals of the IDEA as refle cted in Congressional findings in section 601(c)(1) of the
IDEA: equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self -
sufficiency. To address this concern, the Office of Special Education Programs ( OSEP ) has been
using results data when making annual determinations for States under section 616(d) of the
IDEA since 2014 . OSEP is continuing to use both results and compliance data in making
determinations for outlying areas, freely associated States , and the BIE (the Entities) in 2019, as
it did for determinations in 2018 .
The BIE ’s 201 9 determination is based on the dat a reflected in the BIE ’s “201 9 Part B Results -
Driven Accountability Matrix ” (RDA Matrix). The RDA Matrix is individualized for each State
and consists of:
(1) a Compliance Matrix that includes scoring on Compliance Indicators and other
comp liance factors;
(2) a Results Matrix that includes scoring on Result s Elements ;
(3) a Compliance Score and a Results Score ;
Page 2— Chief State School Officer
(4) an RDA Percentage based on both the Compliance Score and the Results Score ; and
(5) the BIE ’s Determination.
The RDA Matrix is further explained in a document, entitled “How the Department Made
Determination s under Section 616(d) of the Individuals with Di sabilities Education Act in 201 9:
Freely Associated States, Outlying Areas, and the Bureau of Indian Education -Part B ”
(HTDMD).
The specifics of the determination procedures and criteria are set forth in the HTDMD and
reflected in the RDA Matrix for the BIE . In maki ng Part B determinations in 201 9, OSEP
continued to use results data related to:
(1) the participation of children with disabilities (CWD) on regular Statewide assessments;
(2) the percentage of CWD who graduated with a regular high school diploma; and
(3) the percentage of CWD who drop ped out.
The Secretary is considering modifying the factors the Department will use in making its
determinations in June 2020 as part of its continuing emphasis on results for children with
disabilities. Section 616(a)(2) of the IDEA requires that the primary focus of the IDEA
monitoring must be on improving educa tional results and functional outcomes for all children
with disabilities, and ensuring that States meet the IDEA program requirements, with an
emphasis on those requirements that are most closely related to improving educational results for
children with disabilities.
The proposed Part B determinations process will include the same compliance factors as in past
years, with one addition. For the 2020 determinations, rather than weighting each compliance
factor equally, OSEP is considering assigning greater weight to those compliance factors most
directly related to improving results for children with disabilities. For the 2020 determinations
process we are also considering, as two additional results factors, State -reported data on:
preschool child outcomes a nd the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP). Using preschool
outcomes for Part B determinations is consistent with the use of the early childhood outcomes
factor that has been used for Part C determinations since 2015. Use of this factor emphasizes the
importance of preschool outcomes in promoting later school success for students with
disabilities. The inclusion of the SSIP as a results factor in making determinations would
continue OSEP ’s emphasis on incorporating a results -driven approach as States ide ntify
evidence -based practices that lead to improved outcomes for children and youth with disabilities .
In addition, we are considering several changes to the results factors related to the participation
and performance of children with disabilities on as sessments, including: (1) using Statewide
assessment results, rather than the National Assessment of Educational Progress performance
data; (2) looking at year -to-year improvements in Statewide assessment results and taking into
account the full Statewide assessment system, including alternate assessments; and (3) no longer
comparing each State ’s assessment performance with that of other States. Finally, OSEP will be
revisiting ways of measuring improvement in the graduation rate of students with disabiliti es. As
we consider changes to how we use the data under these factors in making the Department ’s
2020 determinations, OSEP will provide parents, States, entities, LEAs, and other stakeholders
with an opportunity to comment and provide input through OSEP ’s Leadership Conference in
July 2019 and other meetings.
Page 3— Chief State School Officer
You may access the results of OSEP ’s review of the BIE ’s SPP/APR and other relevant data by
accessing the SPP/APR module using your Entity -specific log -on information at
https:// osep.grads360.org . When you access your Entity ’s SPP/APR on th e site, you will find , in
applicable Indicators 1 through 16, the OSEP Response to the indicator and any actions that the
Entity is required to take. The actions that the Entity is required to take are in two places:
(1) actions related to the correction of findings of noncompliance are in the “OSEP
Response ” section of the indicator; and
(2) any other actions that the Entity is required to take are in the “Required Actions ” section
of the indicator.
It is important for you to review the Introduction to the SPP/APR, which may also include
language in the “OSEP Response ” and/or “Required Actions ” sections .
You will also find all of the following important documents saved as attachments to the Progress
Page:
(1) the BIE ’s RDA Mat rix;
(2) the HTDMD document;
(3) a spreadsheet entitled “201 9 Data Rubric Part B, ” which shows how OSEP calculated the
BIE ’s “Timely and Accurate State -Reported Data ” score in the Compliance Matrix; and
(4) a document e ntitled “Dispute Resolution 201 7-18,” which includes the IDEA section 618
data that OSEP used to calcula te the BIE ’s “Timely State Complaint Decisions ” and
“Timely Due Process Hearing Decisions ” scores in the Compliance Matrix .
As noted above, the Department has determined that the BIE needs intervention in implementing
the requirements of Part B of the IDEA. The Department identifies a State or Entity as needing
intervention under the IDEA Part B if its RDA Percentage is less than 60 percent . The BIE ’s
RDA Percentage is 22 .5 percent. T he major factors contributing to the BIE ’s 201 9 Needs
Intervention determination are: (1) the BIE ’s low performance under Indicator 13 (secondary
transition requirements) ; (2) the BIE ’s RDA score of zero for the exiting data elements and
certain reading and math assessment results elements ; (3) the BIE ’s longstanding
noncompliance ; and (4) the BIE ’s failure to submit required information in a timely manner .
I. Major Factor s Contributing to the BIE’s 201 9 RDA Needs Intervention Determination
A. Low Performance under Indicator 13
The data that the BIE provided in its FFY 201 7 SPP/APR demonstrate continued noncompliance
with the secondary transition requirements in section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII) of the IDEA and 34
C.F.R. §§ 300.320(b) and 300.321(b). Under Indicator 13, the BIE was required to provide data
on the percent of youth with individualized education programs (IEPs) aged 16 and above with
an IEP that includes appropriate measurable postsecondary goals that are annual ly updated and
based upon an age appropriate transition assessment, transition 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 transition service s needs. There also must be evidence that the
student was invited to the IEP Team meeting where transition services were to be discussed and
evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency was invited to the IEP
Page 4— Chief State School Officer
Team meeting wit h the prior consent of the parent or student who has reached the age of
majority. In its FFY 201 7 SPP/APR, the BIE ’s reported FFY 201 7 data for Indicator 13 were
8.39 percent . These data reflect continued slippage from the FFY 201 6 data of 14.98 percent the
BIE reported for Indicator 13 in its FFY 201 6 SPP/APR.
The BIE ’s low level of compliance with the secondary transition requirements has been a needs
intervention factor and a Special or Specific Condition 1 since June 2016. Because the BIE did
not ensure compliance with the secondary transition requirements, the Department continued to
impose Special or Speci fic Conditions on the BIE ’s FFY 2017 and FFY 2018 IDEA Part B grant
award s in this area. In OSEP ’s Ju ne 30, 2017, and July 18, 2018, determination letter s, pursuant
to section 616(e)(2)(B)(i) of the IDEA , the Secretary required the BIE to submit a corrective
action plan (CAP) that addressed the actions the BIE would take to demonstrate compliance with
the secondary transition requirements . Further, in OSEP ’s July 18, 2018 , determination letter,
pursuant to section 616(e)(1)(B) and (e)(2)(A) of the IDEA , the Department directed the BIE to
use $300,000 of its FFY 2018 administrative funds under section 611(h)(1 )(A) of the IDEA and
34 C .F.R. § 300.710(a) to address its continued low level of compliance with the requirements
for secondary transition and to improve the accuracy of its secondary transition data.
B. RDA Score of Zero for Certain Results Elements
The BIE ’s 201 9 RDA Percentage is 22 .5 percent, whi ch consists of 60 percent of the BIE ’s
Compliance Score and 40 percent of the BIE ’s Results Score. In the 201 9 Part B Results Matrix,
the BIE received a score of zero on both exiting data elements (i.e., the percentage of children
with disabilities who dropped out over the previous three reporting years, and the percentage of
children with disabilities who graduate d with a regular high school diploma over the previous
three reporting years). As demonstrated by the section 618 exiting data reported by the BIE, a
high percentage of students with disabilities drop out of BIE -funded schools and a low
percentage of stud ents with disabilities graduate with a regular high school diploma (See Results
Matrix). This means that many of the BIE ’s students with disabilities leaving school are not
adequately prepared for further education, employment, and independent living.
In a ddition, the BIE submitted School Year (SY) 2017 -2018 math assessment data to EDFacts on
April 18, 2019 and SY 2017 -2018 reading assessment data to EDFacts on April 17, 2019, past
the March 27, 2019, deadline for both sets of data. Therefore, the BIE received a score of zero on
the average percentage of third through eighth grade children with disabilities participating in
regular Statewide assessments for reading and math, because its data for those Results Elements
were not reported in a time ly fashion .2
C. Longstanding Noncompliance
The Department has imposed Special or S pecific Conditions on the BIE’s last 1 2 (FFY 2007 -
FFY 201 8) IDEA Part B grant awards, and the BIE has failed to meet the Speci fic Conditions
imposed on its FFY 201 8 IDEA Part B grant award. OSEP determined that the BIE failed to
1 Pursuant to the requirements in 2 C .F.R. § 200. 207, the term “Specific Condition” is used, rather than “Special
Condition ,” beginning with FFY 2018 IDEA Part B grant awards that are issued subject to additional requirements.
In this letter, the term “Special Conditions” is used when referencing the BIE ’s IDEA Part B grant awards and
required reporting associated with the receipt of those funds for years pr ior to FFY 2018. 2 OSEP notes that even if the untimely submitted assessment data were to be accepted, the BIE’s RDA percentage
would be 42. 5 percent , which would still result in a determination of needs intervention .
Page 5— Chief State School Officer
complete the corrective actions contained in Section C of its 201 8-201 9 CAP. Those corrective
actions, which the BIE was required to complete under the Spec ific Conditions imposed on its
FFY 201 8 IDEA Part B grant award, related to: (1) the BIE’s implementation of fiscal
monitoring procedures to ensure that BIE -operated schools and tribally -operated schools are
ensuring the appropriate use of Part B funds allocated under section 611(h)(1)(A) of the IDEA ;
(2) the BIE’s compliance with the timeline requirements for resolving State complaints under 34
C.F.R. § 300.152(a); (3) the BIE’s compliance with the data reporting requirements under
sections 612(a)(16)(D), 616(b)(2)(B) and 618 of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. § 30 0.160(f); (4) the
BIE’s compliance with the secondary transition requirements under section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII)
of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. §§ 300.320(b) and 300.321(b) ; and (5) improving its exiting data
required under section 618(a) (1)(A)(iv) of t he IDEA by utilizing available technical assistance
resources .
D. Failure to Submit Required Information in a Timely Manner
As part of the Specific Conditions imposed on its FFY 2018 IDEA Part B grant award , the BIE
was required to meet the timeline requirements for reporting the information required in the
2018 -2019 CAP and the quarterly progress reports, the report on and analysis of disaggregated
secondary transition data, and the spending plan for use of the directed FFY 2018 IDEA Part B
administr ative funds to address noncompliance with secondary transition requirements and to
improve accuracy of secondary transition data . The BIE has failed to meet all of the timelines
indicated below :
• Report on and Analysis of Disaggregat ed Secondary Transition Data: Due October 1 ,
2018, and submitted late on March 27, 2019
• Proposed spending plan for use of directed FFY 2018 IDEA Part B administrative funds :
Due October 1, 2018, and submitted late on March 27, 2019
• Q1 CAP progress report : Due October 31 , 2018, and submitted late on March 27, 2019
• Q2 CAP progress report : Due January 31 , 2019, and submitted late on April 8, 2019
• Q3 CAP progress report : Due April 3 0, 2019 , and submitted late on June 18, 2019
In addition to the information required under the CAP , on August 8, 2018, OSEP issued a letter
to the BIE regarding its failure to resolve the systemic problems underlying the disruption of
required related services in several BIE -funded schools , including San Felipe Pueblo Elementary
School . A series of corrective actions were due to OSEP starting on September 8, 2018 ; to date,
the BIE has provided no ne of the required submissions.
II. 201 9 RDA Determination and Enforcement Action
The BIE also received a determination of needs intervention in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016
2017 , and 2018 for its FFYs 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 , 2015 , and 2016 SPP/APRs, and this
is the eighth consecutive year t hat the BIE is receiving a determination of needs intervention .
Under section 616(e)(2) of the IDEA , if the Secretary determines a State to need intervention for
three or more consecutive years, the Secretary may take, under section 616(e)(2)(A) of the
IDEA , one of the three enforcement actions identified in the IDEA section 616(e)(1) and must
take one or more of the six enforcement actions identified in the IDEA section 616(e)(2)(B) .
Page 6— Chief State School Officer
Pursuant to section 616(d)(2)(B) of the IDEA and 34 C.F.R. § 300.603(b)(2), a State or Entity
that is determined to be “needs intervention” or “needs substantial inter vention” and does not
agree with this determination, may request an opportunity to meet with the Assistant Secretary
for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services to demonstrate why the Department should
change its determination. To request a hearing, submit a letter to Johnny W. Collett, Assistant
Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, U.S. Department of Education, 400
Maryland Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20202 within 15 calendar days of the date of this
letter. The letter must include the basis for your request for a change in your Entity’s
determination.
A. Withholding of Funds
Given the nature of the noncompliance noted in this letter and that the BIE has had Special or
Spec ific Conditions placed on its grant award un der Part B of the IDEA since 200 7 and has been
in the category of needs intervention for eight consecutive years , the Department has concluded
that a more serious enforcement action is warranted for 2019 . The Department has significant
concerns about the BIE’s longstanding noncompliance with the requirements of the IDEA that
directly affect the appropriate provision of special education and related services to children with
disabilities attending BIE -funded schools , and its failure to provide required information in a
timely manner . As a result, pursuant to section s 616(e)(2)(B)(iii) and 611(h)(3) of the IDEA and
34 C .F.R. §§ 300.604(b)(2)(iii) , 300.708 (d) , and 300.716 , the Department intends to withhold 20
percent of the BIE’s FFY 20 19 funds reserved for administrative costs under section
611( h)(1)(A) of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. § 300 .710 until the BIE has sufficiently addressed the
areas which were the basis for the determination of needs intervention.
In accordance with section 616(e)(4)(A) of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. §§ 300.605(a) , 300.708(d)
and 300.716 , the BIE may request a hearing pursuant to the procedures in 34 C .F.R. §§ 300.180
through 300.183 to appeal the Department’s decision to withhold these funds . To request a
hearing, the BIE must submit a letter to Johnny W. Collett, Assistant Secretary, Office of Special
Education and Re habilitative Services, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, D.C . 20202 -
2600 (facsimile number 202 -245 -7638 ) within 30 calendar days of the date of this letter . The
filing date for any written submission by a party under 34 C .F.R. §§ 300.179 through 300.184 is
the date the document is hand -delivered, mailed, or sent by facsimile transmission . 34 C .F.R. §
300.183(a) -(b) .
Pursuant to section 616(e)(4)(B) of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. §§.300.605(b) , 300 .708(d) and
300.716 , pending the outcome of any hearing to withhold payments, the Secretary intends to
suspend the BIE’s authority to obligate 20 percent of the FFY 2019 funds it reserves for
administration under 34 C .F.R. § 300.710. The BIE has the opportunity to show cause in writing
why its authority to obligate those funds should not be suspended. To show cause, the BIE must
submit a letter explaining why its authority to obligate those funds should not be suspended to
Johnny W. Collett, Assistant Secretary, Office of Special Educati on and Rehabilitative Services,
400 Maryland Avenue SW , Washington , D.C . 20202 -2600 (facsimile number 202 -245 -7638 ).
Assistant Secretary Collett must receive the letter within 15 calendar days of the date of this
letter. If the Department determines that the BIE has failed to show cause why its authority to
obligate those funds should not be suspended, the Department will suspend the BIE’s authority
to obligate 20 percent of the FFY 2019 funds it reserves for administration under 34 C .F.R. §
300.710.
Page 7— Chief State School Officer
If the BIE believes that full compliance with the applicable requirements of IDEA is not feasible
within a year, under section 457 of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA) (at 20 U.S.C.
1234 (f)), the BIE has the option of requesti ng to enter into a compliance agreement between the
Department and the BIE . The purpose of a compliance agreement is to bring a grant recipient
into full compliance with the applicable requirements of law as soon as feasible and not to
excuse or remedy past violations of such requirements . Under section 457(b)(1) of GEPA,
“[b]efore entering into a compliance agreement with a recipient, the Secretary shall hold a
hearing at which the recipient, affected students and parents or their representatives , and other
interested parties are invited to participate. The recipient shall have the burden of persuading the
Secretary that full compliance with the applicable requirements of law is not feasible until a
future date.” A compliance agreement allows for the recipient to continue to receive its full grant
award while it works toward achieving full compliance under the terms and conditions of the
agreement. If the BIE were to successfully enter into a compliance agreement, it would be
eligible to receive the full amount of its IDEA Part B grant award , including the 20% of the
administrative fund s that the Department is proposing to withhold, while the BIE is meeting the
terms and conditions of the compliance agreement.
B. Directed Use of Funds
In OSEP ’s July 18, 2018 , determination letter, pursuant to section 616(e)(1)(B) and (e)(2)(A) of
the IDEA , the Department directed the BIE to use $300,000 of its FFY 2018 administrative
funds under section 611(h)(1)(A) of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. § 300.710(a) to address its
continued low level of compliance with the requirements for secondary transition and to improve
the accuracy of its secondary transition data. Further , the Department required the BIE to
develop, implement, and report progress on, a spending plan to expend directed funds by July 1,
2019 , that demonstrates how the directed funds will be used to pay for strategies and activities
that address the suspected or known reasons for the noncompliance with the secondary transition
requirements in section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII) of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. §§ 300.320(b) and
300.321(b) and that are reasonably designed to correct that noncompliance and improve the
accuracy of the data .
However, after the late submission of i ts proposed spending plan , the BIE indicated it would be
unable to expend any of the directed FFY 2018 funds by the July 1 , 2019, deadline . On June 3,
2019 , the BIE verbally requested a six -month extension to expend the directed FFY 2018 funds
in accordance with the FFY 2018 spending plan approved by OSEP . The Department has granted
the BIE’s request and extends the deadline for the BIE’s expendi ture of the directed FFY 2018
funds to December 31, 2019 .
In addition, p ursuant to section 616(e)(1)(B) and (e)(2)(A) of t he IDEA , the Department is
directing the BIE to use $300,000 of its FFY 201 9 administrative funds under section
611(h)(1)(A) of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. § 300.710(a) to address its continued low level of
compliance with the requirements for secondary transition and to improve the accuracy of its
secondary transition data. Directing the use of funds is an appropriate enforcement action
because it supports the ability of the BIE and BIE -funded schools to meet secondary transition
requirements, which are critical IDEA requirements that directly impact a child’s right to receive
a free appropriate public education. The failure of a State to comply with secondary transition
requirements impacts a student’s ability to make a successful transition from school to post -
school activities, including postsecondary education, vocational education, integrated
Page 8— Chief State School Officer
employment, and independent living. The amount of $300,000 represents a sign ificant
commitment of resources that will be targeted to ensure that the BIE and BIE -funded schools
take the necessary action to increase compliance with the secondary transition requirements .
The BIE must develop, implement, and report progress on, a spe nding plan to expend directed
FFY 2019 funds by July 1, 20 20 that demonstrates how the directed funds will be used to pay for
strategies and activities that address the suspected or known reasons for the noncompliance with
the secondary transition requirem ents in section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII) of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R.
§§ 300.320(b) and 300.321(b) that are reasonably designed to correct that noncompliance and
improve the accuracy of the data. The BIE must submit, along with its proposed FFY 2019
spending plan, a report of the BIE’s FFY 201 8 secondary transition compliance data
disaggregated by compliance item and BIE -funded school, and the BIE’s analysis of the
disaggregated data, including suspected or known reasons for any noncompliance. The BIE ’s
proposed FFY 2019 spending plan must include: (1) the activities that will be carried out with
those funds; (2) the costs associated with each of the activities; (3) a projected timeline for using
the funds to pay the costs associated with each of the a ctivities that demonstrates that the FFY
2019 funds will be used by July 1, 20 20 ; and (4) an explanation of how the activities will result
in improved compliance with secondary transition requirements and improved data accuracy.
The BIE must also describe the documentation it will provide to demonstrate the FFY 2019
funds were used in accordance with the FFY 201 9 spending plan. In addition, to ensure that the
BIE can increase compliance with the secondary transition requirements within one year, the BIE
mus t expedite the use of the directed FFY 201 9 IDEA Part B administrative funds and target the
use of those funds for activities that are based on a careful review of the BIE’s FFY 201 8
secondary transition data.
C. Technical Assistance
Pursuant to section 616(e)(1)(A) and (e)(2)(A) of the IDEA , the Department is advising the BIE
of available sources of technical assistance, including OSEP -funded technical assistance centers
and resources at https://osep.grads360.org/#program/highlighted -resources and requiring the BIE
to work with appropriate entities. In addition, the BIE should consider accessing technical
assistance from other Department -funded centers such as the Comprehensive Centers with
resources at the following link: https://www2.ed.gov/programs/newccp/index.html . The
Department directs the BIE to access technical assistance related to those exiting data elements
for which the BIE received a score of zero (i.e., those exiting d ata elements identified on the Part
B Results Matrix and described in section I.B of this letter) .
The BIE must report, in the quarterly progress reports it submits for the 201 9-20 20 CAP, on: (1)
the sources from which it received technical assistance rel ated to those exiting data elements for
which the BIE received a score of zero on the Part B Results Matrix; and (2) the actions the BIE
took as a result of that technical assistance.
D. Corrective Action Plan
In addition, pursuant to section 616(e)(2)(B )(i) of the IDEA , the Secretary is requiring the BIE to
submit a CAP, because the Secretary has determined that, in combination with directing the use
of funds as described above, the BIE should be able to correct the major areas of noncompliance
that contributed to i ts determination of needs intervention within one year from the date of this
Page 9— Chief State School Officer
determination letter, and other enforcement remedies under section 616(e)(2)(B) of the IDEA are
not appropriate at this time.
Therefore, the BIE must submit a CAP that ensures that it can meet, by the end of the fourth
quarterly reporting period for the 201 9-20 20 school year under Section C of the CAP, all of the
Specific Conditions that will be imposed on its FFY 201 9 IDEA Part B grant award. For the
reasons explained in the BIE’s FFY 201 9 Specific Conditions, the corrective action plan must
address the steps the BIE will take to: (1) implement fiscal monitoring procedures to ensure that
BIE -operated schools and tribally -op erated schools are ensuring the appropriate use of Part B
funds allocated under section 611(h)(1)(A) of the IDEA ; (2) demonstrate compliance with the
timeline requirements for resolving State complaints under 34 C .F.R. § 300.152(a); (3)
demonstrate compliance wit h the data reporting requirements under sections 612(a)(16)(D),
616(b)(2)(B) and 618 of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. § 300.160(f); and (4) demonstrate compliance
with the secondary transition requirements in section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII) of the I DEA and 34
C.F.R. §§ 300.320(b) and 300.321(b) and improve the accuracy of the secondary transition data.
In addition, as required above, the BIE must provide a report and analysis of the disaggregated
FFY 201 8 secondary transition compliance data, and must develop, implement , and report
progress on a spending plan to expend directed FFY 2019 funds by July 1, 20 20 , that
demonstrates how the directed funds will be used to pay for strategies and activities that address
the suspected or known reasons for the noncompliance with th e secondary transition
requirements in section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII) of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. §§ 300.320(b) and
300.321(b) and that are reasonably designed to correct that noncompliance and improve the
accuracy of the data.
The BIE must also report on: (1) the sources from which it received technical assistance related
to those exiting data elements for which the BIE received a score of zero on the Part B Results
Matrix; and (2) the actions it took as a result of that technical assistance.
The BIE must submit its corrective action plan with its final quarterly progress report on Section
C of the CAP for the 201 8-20 19 school year, due on July 31, 20 19 , as well as quarterly progress
reports in accordance with the reporting and timeline requirements specifi ed in the Specific
Conditions that OSEP will impose on the BIE’s FFY 201 9 Part B grant award.
As required by section 616(e)(7) of th e IDEA and 34 C .F.R. § 300.606, the BIE must notify the
public that the Secretary of Education has taken the above enforcement actions, including, at a
minimum, by posting a public notice on its website and distributing the notice to the media and
through public agencies.
States and Entities were required to submit Phase III Year T hree of the SSIP by April 1, 201 9. We
have carefully reviewed your submission and will provide feedback in the upcoming weeks.
Additionally, OSEP will continue to work with the BIE as it implements the fourth year of Phase
III of the SSIP, which is due on April 1, 20 20 .
As a reminder , the BIE must report annually to the public, by posting on the BIE ’s website, the
performance of each school funded by the BIE on the targets in the SPP/APR as soon as
practicable, but no later than 120 days after the BIE ’s submission of its FFY 201 7 SPP/APR. In
addition, the BIE must:
(1) review school performance against targets in the BIE ’s SPP/APR;
Page 10 — Chief State School Officer
(2) determine if each school “mee ts the requirements ” of Part B, or “needs assistance, ”
“needs intervention, ” or “needs substantial intervention ” in implementing Part B of
IDEA ;
(3) take appropriate enforcement action; and
(4) inform each school of its determination .
Further, the BIE must make its SPP/APR available to the public by posting it on its agency ’s
web site . Within the next several days, OSEP will be finalizing an Entity Profile that:
(1) will be accessible to the public;
(2) includes the Entity ’s determination letter and SPP/APR, and all related State and OSEP
attachments; and
(3) can be accessed via a URL unique to your Entity , which you can use to make your
SPP/APR available to the public . We will provide you with the unique URL when it is
live.
Finally, OSEP conducted a monitoring visit in March and April of 2019 and will issue a separate
letter summarizing the results of that visit .
OSEP is committed to working with the BIE to improve educational results for children and
youth with disabilities. Please contact your OSEP State Lead i f you have any questions, would
like to discuss this further, or want to request technical assistance.
Sincerely,
Laurie VanderPloeg
Director
Office of Special Education Programs
cc: Bureau of Indian Education Director of Special Education
(Grant Year 2017–2018 — Issued July 1, 2019)
Some historical APRs can be found on the GRADS360 website Public Domain Clearinghouse for APRs. To find available APRs, filter by the state you want to find and then filter by the year. If you cannot find the APR you are looking for, contact the Partner Support Center at EDEN-Submission-System@ed.gov.
idea_file-template-default single single-idea_file postid-67901 wp-custom-logo wp-embed-responsive with-font-selector no-anchor-scroll footer-on-bottom animate-body-popup social-brand-colors hide-focus-outline link-style-standard has-sidebar content-title-style-normal content-width-normal content-style-boxed content-vertical-padding-show non-transparent-header mobile-non-transparent-header kadence-elementor-colors elementor-default elementor-kit-82278