2020 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters PART B – Arkansas
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
PDF2020 SPP/APR Submission PART B — Arkansas
MS WORDView 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 equal access.
U NITED S TATES D EPARTMENT OF E DUCATION
O FFICE OF S PECIAL E DUCATION AND R EHABILITATIVE S ERVICES
June 25 , 2020
Honorable Johnny Key
Commiss ioner
Arkansas Department of Education
Four Capitol Mall, Room 304 - A
Little Rock , Arkansas 72201
Dear Commissioner Key :
I am writing to advise you of the U.S. Department of Education’s (Department) 2020
determination under section 616 of the Individuals wi th Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The
Department has determined that Arkansas meets the requirements and purposes of Part B of the
IDEA. This determination is based on the totality of the State’s data and information, including
the Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2018 State Performance Plan/ Annual Performance Report
(SPP/APR), other State - reported data, and other publicly available information.
Your State’s 20 20 determination is based on the dat a reflected in the State’s “20 20 Part B
Results - Driven Accountabi lity 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 Results Elements ;
(3) a Compliance Score and a Results Score ;
(4) an RDA Percentage based on both the Compliance Score and the Results Score ; and
(5) the State’s Determination.
The RDA Matrix is further explained in a document, entitled “How the Department Made
Determinations under Section 616(d) of the Individuals with Di sabilities Education Act in 20 20 :
Part B ” (HTDMD).
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) is continuing to use both results data and
complian ce data in making determinations in 20 20 , as it did for Part B determinations in 201 4,
2015, 2016, 2017 , 2018 and 201 9 . (The specifics of the determination procedures and criteria are
set forth in the HTDMD and reflected in the RDA Matrix for your State.) In maki ng Part B
determinations in 20 20 , OSEP continued to use results data related to:
Page 2 — Chief State School Officer
(1) the participation of children with disabilities (CWD) on regular Statewide assessments;
(2) the participation and performance of CWD on the most recently administered (sc hool
year 201 8 - 201 9 ) National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP);
(3) t he percentage of CWD who graduated with a regular high school diploma; and
(4) the percentage of CWD who drop ped out.
You may access the results of OSEP’s review of your State’s SPP/A PR and other relevant data
by accessing the EMAPS SPP/APR reporting tool using your State - specific log - on information at
https://emaps.ed.gov/suite/ . When you access your State’s SPP/APR on the site, you will find , in
Indicators 1 through 16, the OSEP Response to the indicator and any actions that the State is
required to take. The actions that the State 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 State 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 R esponse ” and/or “ Required Actions ” sections .
You will also find all of the following important documents saved as attachments:
(1) the State’s RDA Matrix;
(2) the HTDMD document;
(3) a spreadsheet entitled “20 20 Data Rubric Part B,” which shows how OSEP calculated the
State’s “Timely and Accurate State - Reported Data” score in the Compliance Matrix; and
(4) a document entitled “Dispute Resolution 201 8 - 20 1 9 ,” which includes the IDEA section
618 data that OSEP used to c alculate the State’s “Timely State Complaint Decisions” and
“Timely Due Process Hearing Decisions” scores in the Compliance Matrix .
As noted above, the State’s 20 20 determination is Meets Requirements. A State’s 20 20 RDA
Determination is Meets Requirement s if the RDA Percentage is at least 80%, unless the
Department has imposed Special or Specific Conditions on the State’s last three IDEA Part B
grant awards (for FFYs 201 7 , 201 8 , and 201 9 ), and those Speci fic Conditions are i n effect at the
time of the 20 2 0 determination.
States were required to submit Phase II I Year Four of the SSIP by April 1, 20 20 . OSEP
appreciates the State’s ongoing work on its SSIP and its efforts to improve results for students
with disabilities. We have carefully reviewed and respon ded to your submission and will provide
additional feedback in the upcoming weeks. Additionally, OSEP will continue to work with your
State as it implement s the fifth year of Phase III of the SSIP , which is due on Ap ril 1 , 202 1 .
As a reminder, your State must report annually to the public, by posting on the State educational
agency’s (SEA’s) website , the performance of each local educational agency (LEA) located in
Page 3 — Chief State School Officer
the State on the targets in the SPP/APR as soon as practicable, bu t no later than 120 days after
the State’s submission of its FFY 201 8 SPP/APR. In addition, your State must:
(1) review LEA performance against targets in the State’s SPP/APR;
(2) determine if each LEA “meets the requirements” of Part B, or “needs assistance,” “ needs
intervention,” or “needs substantial intervention” in implementing Part B of the IDEA ;
(3) take appropriate enforcement action; and
(4) inform each LEA of its determination.
Further, your State must make its SPP/APR available to the public by posting it o n the SEA’s
website . Within the upcoming weeks , OSEP will be finalizing a State Profile that:
(1) includes the State’s determination letter and SPP/APR, OSEP attachments , and all State
attachments that are accessible in accordance with Section 508 of the Reha bilitation Act
of 1973 ; and
(2) will be accessible to the public via the ed.gov website.
OSEP appreciates the State’s efforts to improve results for children and youth with disabilities
and looks forward to working with your State over the next year as we con tinue our important
work of improving the lives of children with disabilities and their families. 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,
Lau rie VanderPloeg
Director
Office of Special Education Programs
cc: State Director of Special Education
View File
2020 SPP/APR Submission PART B — Arkansas
State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part BforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PRProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary anHow and where the State reported to the public on the FFY17 performance of each LESame data as used for reporting to the Department of Education (Department) under FFY20132014201520162017Target >=85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%85.10%Data80.44%83.14%81.89%84.29%83.80%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=85.91%86.72%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Arkansas' target for Indicator 1: GraduaDateDescriptionData SY 2017-18 Cohorts for Regulatory Adjusted-Cohort Graduation R10/02/2019Number of youth with IEPs graduating with a regular diploma3,446 SY 2017Number of youth with IEPs eligible to graduate4,073 SY 2017-18 Regulatory Adjusted84.61%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of youth with IEPs in the current year's adjusted cohort graduating with a Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)1 - Prior FFY RequirOPTION 2:Use same data source and measurement that the State used to report in itsFFY20132014201520162017Target =40.13%38.17%37.19%39.15%41.11%AOverall12.95%Actual40.56%10.42%16.00%1Group Name20182019ReadingA >=Overall10.50%11.38%MathA >=Overall12.95%14.30%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The following was discussed with stakehoa. Children with IEPs who received a valid score and a proficiency was assigned5,4c. IEPs in regular assessment with accommodations scored at or above proficient agData Source: SY 2018-19 Assessment Data Groups - Math (EDFacts file spec FS175; D5,4285,5885,3315,2784,9024,5694,3304,043436b. IEPs in regular assessment with no a55660834752625419813694f. IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate standardsFFY 2018 SPP/APR Data: Reading AssessmentGroupGroup NameChildren with IEPs who recFFY 2018 SPP/APR Data: Math AssessmentGroupGroup NameChildren with IEPs who receivRegulatory InformationThe SEA, (or, in the case of a district-wide assessment, LEAA. Percent of districts that have a significant discrepancy in the rate of suspens30.14%FFY20132014201520162017Target =49.04%49.B48.55%Data52.19%51.66%24.11%44.32%50.19%C2009Target >=59.36%60.14%60.92%61.70%62.63.03%51.26%52.02%54.89%FFY 2018 TargetsFFY20182019Target A >=15.80%15.80%Target B >=51.49%51.49%Target C >=63.26%63.26%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Arkansas' targets for Indicator 14: Post1. Number of respondent youth who enrolled in higher education within one year of 2. Number of respondent youth who competitively employed within one year of leavin3. Number of respondent youth enrolled in some other postsecondary education or tr4. Number of respondent youth who are in some other employment within one year of Number of respondent youthNumber of respondent youth who are no longer in secondar7059410.53%15.80%11.78%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageB. Enrolled in higher educatiPartReasons for slippage, if applicableBThere appears to be a drop in the in the number of students in competitive employmPlease select the reporting option your State is using: Option 1: Use the same defIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed?NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reIf yes, is it a new or revised survey?NOInclude the State's analyses of the extent to which the response data are represenIf no, describe the strategies that the State will use to ensure that in the futur The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts thosPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Com23SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process C3.1(a) Number resolution sessions resolved through settlement agreements18Select yTargets: Description of Stakeholder Input Arkansas' targets for Indicator 15: ResoFFY20132014201520162017Target >=56.96%58.92%60.88%62.84%64.80%Data86.96%3.45%2.70%12.50%55.56%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=66.76%66.76%FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved throu3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSnstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EffectiveSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation RequeSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Reque1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requ2.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints10Select yes ifProvide an explanation belowThe Arkansas Mediation Project housed at the UniversitFFY20132014201520162017Target >=73.60%75.56%77.52%79.48%81.44%Data97.06%100.00%92.31%100.0%93.55%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=83.40%83.40%FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaintFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1212293.55%83.40%100.00%Met TargetNo SlippageProvide ademic Improvement Plan EMBED Acrobat.Document.DC Certjafields@ualr.eduPhone:501-682-4221Submitted on:04/29/20 3:09:45 PM ED Attachmen
(Grant Year 2018-2019—Issued June 25, 2020)
How the department made determinations
idea_file-template-default single single-idea_file postid-80672 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
Last modified on September 17, 2020