2020 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters PART B – Indiana
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
PDF2020 SPP/APR Submission PART B — Indiana
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 equ al 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 Jennifer McCormick
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Indiana Department of Education
115 West Washington Street South, #600
Indianapolis , Indiana 46204
Dear Superintendent McCormick :
I am writing to advise you of the U. S. Department of Education’s (Department) 2020
determination under section 616 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The
Department has determined that Indiana needs assist ance in implementing the requirements of
Part B of the IDEA . This determination is based on the totality of the State’s data and
information, including th e Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2018 State Performance Plan/An nual
Performance Report (SPP/APR), other Sta te - reported data, and other publicly available
information.
Your State’s 2020 determina tion is based on the dat a reflected in the State’s “2020 Part B
Results - Driven Accountability Matrix” (RDA Matrix). The RDA Matrix is individualized for
each State and c onsists 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 Complianc e 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 2020 :
Part B ” (HTDMD).
The Office of Special Education Programs ( OSEP ) is continuing to use both results data and
compliance data in making determinations in 2020 , as it did for Part B determinations in 201 4,
2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 . (The specifics of the deter mination 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 2020 , OSEP continued to use results data related to:
(1) the participation of children with disabilities (CWD) on r egular Statewide assessments;
Page 2 — Chief State School Officer
(2) the participation and performance of CWD on the most recently administered (school
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; a nd
(4) the percentage of CWD who drop ped out.
You may access the results of OSEP’s review of your State’s SPP/APR 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 t ake. 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) a ny 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) t he HTDMD document;
(3) a spreadsheet entitled “ 2020 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 doc ument e ntitled “Dispute Resolution 2018 - 2019 ,” which includes the IDEA section
618 data that OSEP used to calculate the State’s “Timely State Complaint Decisions” and
“Timely Due Process Hearing Decisions” scores in the Compliance Matrix .
As noted above, the State’s 2020 determination is Needs Assistance. A State’s 2020 RDA
Det ermination is Needs Assistance if the RDA Percentage is at least 6 0% but less than 80%. A
State’s determination would also be Needs Assistance if its RDA Determination percentage is
80% or above but the Department has imposed Special or Specific Conditions on the State’s last
three IDEA Pa rt B grant awards (for FFYs 2017, 2018, and 2019 ), and those Speci fic Conditions
are i n effect at the time of the 2020 determination.
States were required to submit Phase II I Year Four of the SSIP by April 1, 2020 . 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 responded to your submission a nd will provide
additional feedback in the upcoming weeks. Additionally, OSEP will continue to work with your
State as it implements the fifth year of Phase III of the SSIP, which is due on April 1, 2021 .
As a reminder, your State must report annually to the public, by posting on the Stat e educational
agency’s (SEA’s) webs ite, the performance of each local educational agency (LEA) located in
the State on the targets in the SPP/APR as soon as practicable, but no later than 120 days after
the St ate’s submis sion of its FFY 2018 SPP/APR. In addition, your State must:
(1) review LEA performance against targets in the State’s SPP/APR;
Page 3 — Chief State School Officer
(2) d etermine 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 pos ting it on the SEA’s
web site. 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 al l State
attachments that are accessible in accordance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973 ; and
(2) w ill be accessible to the public via the ed.gov website.
OSEP appreciates the State’s efforts to improve results for children and youth with disa bilities
and looks forward to working with your State over the next year as we continue 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,
Laurie VanderPloeg
Director
Office of Special Education Programs
cc: State Director of Special Education
View File
2020 SPP/APR Submission PART B — Indiana
State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part BforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary aHow and where the State reported to the public on the FFY17 performance of each LData SourceSame data as used for reporting to the Department of Education (DepartFFY20132014201520162017Target >=64.00%67.00%70.00%72.00%74.00%Data69.29%73.41%70.87%72.03%70.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=76.00%76.50%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionData SY 2017-18 Cohorts for Regulatory Adjusted-Cohort Graduation 10/02/2019Number of youth with IEPs graduating with a regular diploma6,891 SY 201Number of youth with IEPs eligible to graduate9,487 SY 2017-18 Regulatory Adjuste72.64%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of youth with IEPs in the current year's adjusted cohort graduating with aProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)1 - Prior FFY RequiOPTION 2:Use same data source and measurement that the State used to report in itFFY20132014201520162017Target =95.00%95.00%95.00%95.00%95.00%AOverall96.87%96.03%97.52%TargetsGroupGroup Name20182019ReadingA >=Overall95.00%95.00%MathA >=Overall95.00%95.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input OSE met with the Executive Board of theFFY 2018 Data Disaggregation from EDFactsInclude the disaggregated data in your f13,21413,30213,52612,92212,49412,26210,883b. IEPs in regular assessment with no a7,9828,7519,5889,4739,2668,9798,489f. IEPs in alternate assessment against alternData Source: SY 2018-19 Assessment Data Groups - Math (EDFacts file spec FS185; 12,92612,49712,26410,887b. IEPs in regular assessment with no accommodations4,4099,7189,5579,3468,599f. IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate standards68GroupGroup NameNumber of Children with IEPsNumber of Children with IEPs ParticipaFFY 2018 SPP/APR Data: Math AssessmentGroupGroup NameNumber of Children with IEPsThe SEA, (or, in the case of a district-wide assessment, LEA) must make available(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))Data Source3C. Same data as used for reporting to the D 6Grade 7Grade 8Grade 9Grade 10Grade 11Grade 12HSAOverallXXXXXXXXXXXHistorical Data: Reading GroupGroup NameBaseline FFY20132014201520162017AOverall2Actual55.12%32.33%25.72%27.58%26.96%Historical Data: MathGroup Group NameBaselineTarget >=57.00%61.00%65.00%67.00%69.00%AOverall18.91%Actual63.37%35.41%25.69%25.32019ReadingA >=Overall17.90%18.15%MathA >=Overall18.91%19.26%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input OSE met with the Executive Board of thea. Children with IEPs who received a valid score and a proficiency was assigned13c. IEPs in regular assessment with accommodations scored at or above proficient aData Source: SY 2018-19 Assessment Data Groups - Math (EDFacts file spec FS175; 13,15513,21613,45112,82612,39512,16410,498b. IEPs in regular assessment with no a1,1851,063799635477386546f. IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate standaFFY 2018 SPP/APR Data: Reading AssessmentGroupGroup NameChildren with IEPs who reFFY 2018 SPP/APR Data: Math AssessmentGroupGroup NameChildren with IEPs who receiRegulatory InformationThe SEA, (or, in the case of a district-wide assessment, LEA. Percent of districts that have a significant discrepancy in the rate of suspen0.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target
(Grant Year 2018-2019—Issued June 25, 2020)
How the department made determinations
idea_file-template-default single single-idea_file postid-80813 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