2020 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters PART B — South Dakota
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
PDF2020 SPP/APR Submission PART B — South Dakota
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 Ben Jones
Secretar y of Education
South Dakota Department of Education
800 Governors Drive
Pierre , South Dakota 57501
Dear Secretary Jones :
I am writing to advise you of the U.S. Department of Education’s (Department) 2020
determination under section 616 of the Individuals w ith Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The
Department has determined that South Dakota 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 Accou ntability 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 — South Dakota
State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part BforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and How and where the State reported to the public on the FFY17 performance of each LEA Same data as used for reporting to the Department of Education (Department) under TiFFY20132014201520162017Target >=83.00%84.50%85.00%85.00%85.00%Data59.67%59.35%59.92%60.42%60.18%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=85.00%85.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input SEP presented the SPP/APR FFY 2018 data toDateDescriptionData SY 2017-18 Cohorts for Regulatory Adjusted-Cohort Graduation Rat10/02/2019Number of youth with IEPs graduating with a regular diploma393 SY 2017-18 Number of youth with IEPs eligible to graduate624 SY 2017-18 Regulatory Adjusted Coh62.98%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of youth with IEPs in the current year's adjusted cohortProvide a narrative that describes the conditions youth must meet in order to graduaOPTION 2:Use same data source and measurement that the State used to report in its FFFY20132014201520162017Target =Overall99.40%99.40%MathA >=Overall99.40%99.40%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input SEP presented the SPP/APR FFY 2018 data toFFY 2018 Data Disaggregation from EDFactsInclude the disaggregated data in your fina2,0221,8601,7461,5881,4531,338819b. IEPs in regular assessment with no accommodation97709114111411048f. IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate standards10011292Data Source: SY 2018-19 Assessment Data Groups - Math (EDFacts file spec FS185; Dat1,5881,4551,338819b. IEPs in regular assessment with no accommodations1,9041,5661,3526020818629f. IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate standards10011392102107GroupGroup NameNumber of Children with IEPsNumber of Children with IEPs ParticipatinFFY 2018 SPP/APR Data: Math AssessmentGroupGroup NameNumber of Children with IEPsNumThe SEA, (or, in the case of a district-wide assessment, LEA) must make available to(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))Data Source3C. Same data as used for reporting to the Depa6Grade 7Grade 8Grade 9Grade 10Grade 11Grade 12HSAOverallXXXXXXXXXXXHistorical Data: Reading GroupGroup NameBaseline FFY20132014201520162017AOverall2018Actual0.00%18.86%20.45%18.64%18.83%Historical Data: MathGroup Group NameBaseline FFYTarget >=47.65%25.06%31.87%38.86%AOverall16.73%Actual0.00%18.01%19.25%18.36%17.78%Ta2019ReadingA >=Overall26.26%33.31%MathA >=Overall23.51%28.82%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input South Dakota did not receive preliminary aa. Children with IEPs who received a valid score and a proficiency was assigned2,015113c. IEPs in regular assessment with accommodations scored at or above proficient a36Data Source: SY 2018-19 Assessment Data Groups - Math (EDFacts file spec FS175; D2,0151,8511,7371,5781,4311,328804b. IEPs in regular assessment with no accommodation35106440f. IEPs in alternate assessment against alternate standards scored at or aboFFY 2018 SPP/APR Data: Reading AssessmentGroupGroup NameChildren with IEPs who receiFFY 2018 SPP/APR Data: Math AssessmentGroupGroup NameChildren with IEPs who receivedGroupGroup NameReasons for slippage, if applicableAOverallDue to the state assessing more than 1% of students on the alternate assessment, effProvide links to the page(s) where you provide public reports of assessment results.MeasurementPercent = [(# of districts that meet the State-established n size (if appFFY20132014201520162017Target =77.30%77.30%77.50%78.00%78.50%Data83.85%83.49%84.35%84.74%88.41%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=79.00%79.00%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of respondent parents who report schools facFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage6,2077,07288.41%79.00%87.77%MWas sampling used? NOWas a survey used? YESIf yes, is it a new or revised survey?NOThe demographics of the parents responding are representative of the demographics ofInclude the State's analyses of the extent to which the demographics of the parents 8 - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Disproportionate RepresentationInstructions and MeSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable.NOHistorical DataBaseline20160.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 0%0%0%0%0%Data0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target 0%0%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataHas the state established a minimum n and/or cell size requirNumber of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groupsProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Correction of Findings0000Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings ofFindings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedFindings Not Yet Verified as Correcte9 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone9 - OSEP Response9 - Required ActionsIndicator 10: Disproportionate RepresentatConsider using multiple methods in calculating disproportionate representation of raFFY20132014201520162017Target 0%0%0%0%0%Data0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target 0%0%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataHas the state established a minimum n and/or cell size requirIf yes, the State may only include, in both the numerator and the denominator, distrSouth Dakota collects data for Indicator 10 through the state December 1 child count0000Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings ofFindings Not Yet Verified as Corrected10 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone10 - OSEP Response10 - Required Actionsicator 11: Child FindInstructions andPercent = [(b) divided by (a)] times 100.InstructionsIf data are from State monitoriFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.86%99.84%99.85%99.69%99.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target 100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data(a) Number of children for whom parental consent to evaluatFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage5,1495,14699.89%100%99.94%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNDescribe the method used to collect these data, and if data are from the State's mon3201FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verifActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe LEA that did not achieve 100% compliFFY 2016110FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verifi11 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone11 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported lessarents chose to continue early intervention services beyondFFY20132014201520162017Target100%100%100%100%100%Data99.23%99.76%99.54%99.77%97.72%TargetsFFY20182019Target 100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR Dataa. Number of children who have been served in Part C and referrc. Number of those found eligible who have an IEP developed and implemented by theird. Number for whom parent refusals to provide consent caused delays in evaluation ore. Number of children who were referred to Part C less than 90 days before their thif. Number of children whose parents chose to continue early intervention services beNumerator(c)Denominator(a-b-d-e-f)FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippagePercent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3 whoState database that includes data for the entire reporting yearDescribe the method u9702FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verifActions taken if noncompliance not correctedTwo of the nine LEA's did not achieve 1012 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone12 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less12 - Required ActionsIndicator 13: Secondary TransitionInstructions and Measurement2009100.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data86.19%85.28%82.02%90.29%93.71%TargetsFFY20182019Target 100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of youth aged 16 and above with IEPs that contain eaFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage11013193.71%100%83.97%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide NOProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Correction of FindinFindings Not Yet Verified as Corrected202000FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State veriIn FFY 2017, SEP identified 20 individual cases of noncompliance in seven LEAs. All 13 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone13 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must reEnrolled in higher educationas used in measures A, B, and C means youth have been e14 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline FFY20132014201520162017A2009Target >=15.5A14.62%Data11.65%20.18%15.79%20.53%27.35%B2009Target >=66.50%67.00%67.50%68.00%68.5071.65%74.22%76.56%76.00%65.81%C2009Target >=81.00%81.00%81.00%81.00%81.50%C80.41%Dat78.63%FFY 2018 TargetsFFY20182019Target A >=15.50%15.50%Target B >=68.50%68.50%Target C >=82.00%82.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input SEP presented the SPP/APR FFY 2018 data to1. Number of respondent youth who enrolled in higher education within one year of le2. Number of respondent youth who competitively employed within one year of leaving 3. Number of respondent youth enrolled in some other postsecondary education or trai4. Number of respondent youth who are in some other employment within one year of leNumber of respondent youthNumber of respondent youth who are no longer in secondary 5331327.35%15.50%16.93%Met TargetNo SlippageB. Enrolled in higher education or compePlease select the reporting option your State is using: Option 1: Use the same definWas a survey used? NOInclude the State's analyses of the extent to which the responsNOIf no, describe the strategies that the State will use to ensure that in the futurResponse to actions required in FFY 2017 SPP/APRIn FFY 2017, Specific learning disabIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's data under IDSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Compl3SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Comp3.1(a) Number resolution sessions resolved through settlement agreements0Select yes Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input South Dakota remains under 10 resolution sFFY20132014201520162017Target >=Data0.00%100.00%100.00%100.0%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement 3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlinstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective GSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation RequestSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Request1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Reques2.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints2Select yes if thTargets: Description of Stakeholder Input South Dakota remains under 10 mediation seFFY20132014201520162017Target >=Data100.00%75.00%100.00%100.0%62.50%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints22.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage The State reported fewer than meditations sessions held in FFY 2018. The State is n605-773-3327Submitted on:04/30/20 11:50:05 PM ED Attachments EMBED Acrobat.Documen
(Grant Year 2018–2019 — Issued June 25, 2020)
How the department made determinations
idea_file-template-default single single-idea_file postid-80940 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