2020 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters PART C — Alabama
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
PDF2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — Alabama
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 23, 20 20
Honorable Jane Elizabeth Bur deshaw
Commissioner
Alabama Department of Rehabilitation Services
602 South Lawrence Street
Montgomery , Alabama 36104
Dear Commissioner Burdeshaw :
I am writing to advise you of the U.S. Department of Education’s (Department) 2020
determination under sectio ns 616 and 642 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA). The Department has determined that Alabama meets the requirements and purposes of
Part C 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 2020 determination is based on the data reflected in the State’s “ 2020 Part C
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
compliance factors;
(2) Results Components and Appendices that include scoring on Results Elements;
(3) a Compliance Score and a Results Score;
(4) an RDA Percentage based on both the Complia nce 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 Sections 616(d) and 642 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
in 2020 : P art C” (HTDMD).
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) is continuing to use both results data and
compliance data in making the Department’s determinations in 2020 , as it did for Part C
determinations in 2015, 2016, 201 7 , 2018, and 201 9 . (The spec ifics of the determination
procedures and criteria are set forth in the HTDMD and reflected in the RDA Matrix for your
State.) For 2020 , the Department’s IDEA Part C determinations continue to include consideration
of each State’s Child Outcomes data, whic h measure how children who receive Part C services
are improving functioning in three outcome areas that are critical to school readiness:
Page 2 — Lead Agency Director
• p ositive social - emotional skills;
• acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/communicati on); and
• use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs .
Specifically, the Department considered the data quality and the child performance levels in each
State’s Child Outcomes FFY 2018 data .
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 10, 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 Response” 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 “ 2020 Data Rubric Part C,” 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
6 18 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 20 20 determination is Meets Requirements. A State’s 20 20 RDA
Determi nation is Meets Requirements 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 C
grant awards (for FFYs 201 7 , 201 8 , and 201 9 ), and those Speci fic Conditions are in ef fect at the
time of the 20 20 determination.
States were required to submit Phase III 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 infants and
toddlers with disabilities and their families. We have carefully reviewed and responded to your
submission and 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, 20 21 .
As a reminder, your State must report annually to the public, by posting on the State lead
agency’s website, on the performance of each early intervention service ( EIS ) program located in
the State on the targets in the SPP/ APR as soon as practicable, but no later than 120 days after
the State’s submission of its FFY 2018 SPP/APR. In addition, your State must:
Page 3 — Lead Agency Director
(1) review EIS program performance against targets in the State’s SPP/APR;
(2) determine if each EIS program “meets the requirements” of Part C, or “needs assistance,”
“needs intervention,” or “needs substantial intervention” in implementing Part C of the
IDEA ;
(3) take appropriate enforcement action; and
(4) inform each EIS program of its determination.
Further, your State must make its SPP/APR available to the public by posting it on the State lead
agency’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 Rehabilitation 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 infants and toddlers with disabilities
and their families and looks forward to working with your State over the n ext year as we
continue our important work of improving the lives of children with disabilities and their
families. Please contact your OSEP State Lead if 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 Part C Coordinator
View File
2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — Alabama
State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisaInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the SIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SS1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200596.60%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.54%98.22%95.85%95.75%95.37%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on FFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage68479495.37%100%91.56%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicablDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring.All AEIS programs are required to participate in techni353500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFind1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 1 - Required Actions1 - State Attachments EMBED Word.Document.12 s EMBED Word.Document.12 s Indicator 2: S87.40%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=94.00%95.00%96.00%97.00%98.00%Data99.87%99.77%99.87%99.91%99.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providinSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs3,6Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-b2 - Required ActionsIndicator 3: Early Childhood OutcomesInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early Interd. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers = [(# of inHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=76.20%77.00%77.50%78.00%71.50%A171.40%Data76.11%76.52%75.87%74.61%79.09%A2208Target>=74.20%74.30%74.40%74.50%73.40%A273.30%Data71.22%72.29%67.71%61.23%62.85%B12008Target>=82.20%82.30%82.4%82.50%80.00%B179.60%Data82.11%82.94%81.84%83.19%84.09%B22008Target>=60.70%60.80%60.90%7057.00%B256.90%Data52.95%53.61%51.27%49.92%51.12%C12008Target>=82.70%82.80%82.90%83.00%80.50%C180.40%Data82.57%82.91%83.62%76.99%81.91%C22008Target>=76.10%76.20%76.30%76.40%75.20%C275.10%Data73.51%74.74%71.55%61.13%60.9TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=71.60%71.70%Target A2>=73.50%73.60%Target B1>=80.10%80.20%Target B2>=57.10%57.20%Target C1>=80.60%80.70%Target C2>=75.30%75.40% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed2,782Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skila. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning511.83%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it67524.26%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,02636.88%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61922.25%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who s59.13%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determinia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning441.58%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it99435.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,17342.16%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1886.76%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome BProvide reasons for B2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defines "coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning471.69%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it72125.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,21243.57%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers42815.38%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome CSlippageProvide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the i3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets.Sampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling m98.70%98.80%98.90%99.00%A94.50%Data99.32%100.00%99.25%98.54%99.21%B2006Target>=95.10%95.20%95.30%95.40%95.50%B95.40%Data93.88%95.58%94.12%95.19%95.32%C2006Target>=98.50%98.60%98.70%98.80%98.90%C98.00%Data94.22%99.00%98.19%99.34%98.79%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=99.10%99.20%Target B>=95.60%95.70%Target C>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing gu1,152Number of respondent families participating in Part C 568A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the A2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the B2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the C2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family knowB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effeC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family helpWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Alabama continues If yes, is it a new or revised collection tool? NOThe demographics of the families responding are representative of the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families Include the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.59%0.60%0.61%0.62%0.63%Data0.49%0.55%0.71%0.68%0.72%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.64%0.65%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 156,739FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage39456,7390.72%0.645 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.73%1.74%1.75%1.76%1.77%Data1.71%1.76%1.83%1.87%2.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.78%1.79%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3174,131FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,623174,1312.06%1None6 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.67%100.00%99.85%98.40%99.53%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage51453999.53%100%99.26%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of dCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified in FFY 2017Findings of Noncompliance IdentifiedFindings of Noncompl4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 A7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not provide the reasons for delay, as required by thedhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisioIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.13%94.28%91.27%95.67%96.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitAll AEIS programs are required to participate in technical assistance annually and program monitoring every three year202000FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data95.90%98.17%96.53%98.83%96.95%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where notification to the SEA and LEA occurred at least 90 days prDo you have a written opt-out policy? (yes/no)YESIf yes, is the policy on file with the Department? (yes/no)YESWhat is7700FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaEach program that had findings of noncompliance was issued an action plan that included assurances that the program wa8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%98.65%97.98%99.61%98.98%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at Describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. All AEIS programs are required to participate in techn1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP Response8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructionsNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. NOSelect yes to use target ranges. Target Range not usedSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resolSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resolTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guiFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageN/AN/AProvide additional info9 - Required ActionsIndicator 10: MediationInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SuperviSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agr0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guidance and input into the development of tFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Temic Improvement PlanThe attachment(s) included are in compliance with Section 508. Non-comp334-324-6731Submitted on: 04/27/20 1:20:58 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC ch.DocumenPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisaInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the SIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SS1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200596.60%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.54%98.22%95.85%95.75%95.37%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on FFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage68479495.37%100%91.56%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicablDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring.All AEIS programs are required to participate in techni353500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFind1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 1 - Required Actions1 - State Attachments EMBED Word.Document.12 s EMBED Word.Document.12 s Indicator 2: S87.40%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=94.00%95.00%96.00%97.00%98.00%Data99.87%99.77%99.87%99.91%99.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providinSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs3,6Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-b2 - Required ActionsIndicator 3: Early Childhood OutcomesInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early Interd. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers = [(# of inHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=76.20%77.00%77.50%78.00%71.50%A171.40%Data76.11%76.52%75.87%74.61%79.09%A2208Target>=74.20%74.30%74.40%74.50%73.40%A273.30%Data71.22%72.29%67.71%61.23%62.85%B12008Target>=82.20%82.30%82.4%82.50%80.00%B179.60%Data82.11%82.94%81.84%83.19%84.09%B22008Target>=60.70%60.80%60.90%7057.00%B256.90%Data52.95%53.61%51.27%49.92%51.12%C12008Target>=82.70%82.80%82.90%83.00%80.50%C180.40%Data82.57%82.91%83.62%76.99%81.91%C22008Target>=76.10%76.20%76.30%76.40%75.20%C275.10%Data73.51%74.74%71.55%61.13%60.9TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=71.60%71.70%Target A2>=73.50%73.60%Target B1>=80.10%80.20%Target B2>=57.10%57.20%Target C1>=80.60%80.70%Target C2>=75.30%75.40% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed2,782Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skila. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning511.83%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it67524.26%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,02636.88%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61922.25%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who s59.13%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determinia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning441.58%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it99435.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,17342.16%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1886.76%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome BProvide reasons for B2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defines "coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning471.69%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it72125.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,21243.57%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers42815.38%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome CSlippageProvide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the i3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets.Sampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling m98.70%98.80%98.90%99.00%A94.50%Data99.32%100.00%99.25%98.54%99.21%B2006Target>=95.10%95.20%95.30%95.40%95.50%B95.40%Data93.88%95.58%94.12%95.19%95.32%C2006Target>=98.50%98.60%98.70%98.80%98.90%C98.00%Data94.22%99.00%98.19%99.34%98.79%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=99.10%99.20%Target B>=95.60%95.70%Target C>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing gu1,152Number of respondent families participating in Part C 568A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the A2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the B2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the C2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family knowB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effeC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family helpWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Alabama continues If yes, is it a new or revised collection tool? NOThe demographics of the families responding are representative of the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families Include the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.59%0.60%0.61%0.62%0.63%Data0.49%0.55%0.71%0.68%0.72%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.64%0.65%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 156,739FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage39456,7390.72%0.645 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.73%1.74%1.75%1.76%1.77%Data1.71%1.76%1.83%1.87%2.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.78%1.79%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3174,131FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,623174,1312.06%1None6 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.67%100.00%99.85%98.40%99.53%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage51453999.53%100%99.26%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of dCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified in FFY 2017Findings of Noncompliance IdentifiedFindings of Noncompl4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 A7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not provide the reasons for delay, as required by thedhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisioIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.13%94.28%91.27%95.67%96.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitAll AEIS programs are required to participate in technical assistance annually and program monitoring every three year202000FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data95.90%98.17%96.53%98.83%96.95%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where notification to the SEA and LEA occurred at least 90 days prDo you have a written opt-out policy? (yes/no)YESIf yes, is the policy on file with the Department? (yes/no)YESWhat is7700FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaEach program that had findings of noncompliance was issued an action plan that included assurances that the program wa8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%98.65%97.98%99.61%98.98%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at Describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. All AEIS programs are required to participate in techn1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP Response8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructionsNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. NOSelect yes to use target ranges. Target Range not usedSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resolSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resolTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guiFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageN/AN/AProvide additional info9 - Required ActionsIndicator 10: MediationInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SuperviSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agr0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guidance and input into the development of tFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Temic Improvement PlanThe attachment(s) included are in compliance with Section 508. Non-comp334-324-6731Submitted on: 04/27/20 1:20:58 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC ch.DocumenPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisaInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the SIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SS1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200596.60%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.54%98.22%95.85%95.75%95.37%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on FFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage68479495.37%100%91.56%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicablDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring.All AEIS programs are required to participate in techni353500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFind1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 1 - Required Actions1 - State Attachments EMBED Word.Document.12 s EMBED Word.Document.12 s Indicator 2: S87.40%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=94.00%95.00%96.00%97.00%98.00%Data99.87%99.77%99.87%99.91%99.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providinSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs3,6Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-b2 - Required ActionsIndicator 3: Early Childhood OutcomesInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early Interd. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers = [(# of inHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=76.20%77.00%77.50%78.00%71.50%A171.40%Data76.11%76.52%75.87%74.61%79.09%A2208Target>=74.20%74.30%74.40%74.50%73.40%A273.30%Data71.22%72.29%67.71%61.23%62.85%B12008Target>=82.20%82.30%82.4%82.50%80.00%B179.60%Data82.11%82.94%81.84%83.19%84.09%B22008Target>=60.70%60.80%60.90%7057.00%B256.90%Data52.95%53.61%51.27%49.92%51.12%C12008Target>=82.70%82.80%82.90%83.00%80.50%C180.40%Data82.57%82.91%83.62%76.99%81.91%C22008Target>=76.10%76.20%76.30%76.40%75.20%C275.10%Data73.51%74.74%71.55%61.13%60.9TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=71.60%71.70%Target A2>=73.50%73.60%Target B1>=80.10%80.20%Target B2>=57.10%57.20%Target C1>=80.60%80.70%Target C2>=75.30%75.40% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed2,782Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skila. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning511.83%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it67524.26%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,02636.88%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61922.25%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who s59.13%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determinia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning441.58%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it99435.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,17342.16%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1886.76%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome BProvide reasons for B2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defines "coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning471.69%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it72125.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,21243.57%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers42815.38%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome CSlippageProvide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the i3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets.Sampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling m98.70%98.80%98.90%99.00%A94.50%Data99.32%100.00%99.25%98.54%99.21%B2006Target>=95.10%95.20%95.30%95.40%95.50%B95.40%Data93.88%95.58%94.12%95.19%95.32%C2006Target>=98.50%98.60%98.70%98.80%98.90%C98.00%Data94.22%99.00%98.19%99.34%98.79%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=99.10%99.20%Target B>=95.60%95.70%Target C>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing gu1,152Number of respondent families participating in Part C 568A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the A2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the B2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the C2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family knowB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effeC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family helpWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Alabama continues If yes, is it a new or revised collection tool? NOThe demographics of the families responding are representative of the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families Include the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.59%0.60%0.61%0.62%0.63%Data0.49%0.55%0.71%0.68%0.72%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.64%0.65%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 156,739FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage39456,7390.72%0.645 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.73%1.74%1.75%1.76%1.77%Data1.71%1.76%1.83%1.87%2.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.78%1.79%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3174,131FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,623174,1312.06%1None6 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.67%100.00%99.85%98.40%99.53%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage51453999.53%100%99.26%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of dCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified in FFY 2017Findings of Noncompliance IdentifiedFindings of Noncompl4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 A7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not provide the reasons for delay, as required by thedhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisioIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.13%94.28%91.27%95.67%96.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitAll AEIS programs are required to participate in technical assistance annually and program monitoring every three year202000FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data95.90%98.17%96.53%98.83%96.95%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where notification to the SEA and LEA occurred at least 90 days prDo you have a written opt-out policy? (yes/no)YESIf yes, is the policy on file with the Department? (yes/no)YESWhat is7700FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaEach program that had findings of noncompliance was issued an action plan that included assurances that the program wa8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%98.65%97.98%99.61%98.98%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at Describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. All AEIS programs are required to participate in techn1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP Response8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructionsNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. NOSelect yes to use target ranges. Target Range not usedSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resolSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resolTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guiFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageN/AN/AProvide additional info9 - Required ActionsIndicator 10: MediationInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SuperviSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agr0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guidance and input into the development of tFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Temic Improvement PlanThe attachment(s) included are in compliance with Section 508. Non-comp334-324-6731Submitted on: 04/27/20 1:20:58 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC ch.DocumenPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisaInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the SIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SS1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200596.60%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.54%98.22%95.85%95.75%95.37%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on FFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage68479495.37%100%91.56%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicablDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring.All AEIS programs are required to participate in techni353500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFind1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 1 - Required Actions1 - State Attachments EMBED Word.Document.12 s EMBED Word.Document.12 s Indicator 2: S87.40%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=94.00%95.00%96.00%97.00%98.00%Data99.87%99.77%99.87%99.91%99.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providinSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs3,6Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-b2 - Required ActionsIndicator 3: Early Childhood OutcomesInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early Interd. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers = [(# of inHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=76.20%77.00%77.50%78.00%71.50%A171.40%Data76.11%76.52%75.87%74.61%79.09%A2208Target>=74.20%74.30%74.40%74.50%73.40%A273.30%Data71.22%72.29%67.71%61.23%62.85%B12008Target>=82.20%82.30%82.4%82.50%80.00%B179.60%Data82.11%82.94%81.84%83.19%84.09%B22008Target>=60.70%60.80%60.90%7057.00%B256.90%Data52.95%53.61%51.27%49.92%51.12%C12008Target>=82.70%82.80%82.90%83.00%80.50%C180.40%Data82.57%82.91%83.62%76.99%81.91%C22008Target>=76.10%76.20%76.30%76.40%75.20%C275.10%Data73.51%74.74%71.55%61.13%60.9TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=71.60%71.70%Target A2>=73.50%73.60%Target B1>=80.10%80.20%Target B2>=57.10%57.20%Target C1>=80.60%80.70%Target C2>=75.30%75.40% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed2,782Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skila. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning511.83%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it67524.26%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,02636.88%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61922.25%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who s59.13%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determinia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning441.58%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it99435.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,17342.16%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1886.76%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome BProvide reasons for B2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defines "coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning471.69%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it72125.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,21243.57%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers42815.38%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome CSlippageProvide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the i3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets.Sampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling m98.70%98.80%98.90%99.00%A94.50%Data99.32%100.00%99.25%98.54%99.21%B2006Target>=95.10%95.20%95.30%95.40%95.50%B95.40%Data93.88%95.58%94.12%95.19%95.32%C2006Target>=98.50%98.60%98.70%98.80%98.90%C98.00%Data94.22%99.00%98.19%99.34%98.79%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=99.10%99.20%Target B>=95.60%95.70%Target C>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing gu1,152Number of respondent families participating in Part C 568A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the A2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the B2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the C2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family knowB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effeC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family helpWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Alabama continues If yes, is it a new or revised collection tool? NOThe demographics of the families responding are representative of the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families Include the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.59%0.60%0.61%0.62%0.63%Data0.49%0.55%0.71%0.68%0.72%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.64%0.65%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 156,739FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage39456,7390.72%0.645 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.73%1.74%1.75%1.76%1.77%Data1.71%1.76%1.83%1.87%2.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.78%1.79%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3174,131FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,623174,1312.06%1None6 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.67%100.00%99.85%98.40%99.53%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage51453999.53%100%99.26%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of dCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified in FFY 2017Findings of Noncompliance IdentifiedFindings of Noncompl4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 A7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not provide the reasons for delay, as required by thedhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisioIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.13%94.28%91.27%95.67%96.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitAll AEIS programs are required to participate in technical assistance annually and program monitoring every three year202000FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data95.90%98.17%96.53%98.83%96.95%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where notification to the SEA and LEA occurred at least 90 days prDo you have a written opt-out policy? (yes/no)YESIf yes, is the policy on file with the Department? (yes/no)YESWhat is7700FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaEach program that had findings of noncompliance was issued an action plan that included assurances that the program wa8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%98.65%97.98%99.61%98.98%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at Describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. All AEIS programs are required to participate in techn1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP Response8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructionsNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. NOSelect yes to use target ranges. Target Range not usedSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resolSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resolTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guiFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageN/AN/AProvide additional info9 - Required ActionsIndicator 10: MediationInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SuperviSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agr0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guidance and input into the development of tFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Temic Improvement PlanThe attachment(s) included are in compliance with Section 508. Non-comp334-324-6731Submitted on: 04/27/20 1:20:58 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC ch.DocumenPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisaInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the SIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SS1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200596.60%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.54%98.22%95.85%95.75%95.37%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on FFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage68479495.37%100%91.56%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicablDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring.All AEIS programs are required to participate in techni353500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFind1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 1 - Required Actions1 - State Attachments EMBED Word.Document.12 s EMBED Word.Document.12 s Indicator 2: S87.40%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=94.00%95.00%96.00%97.00%98.00%Data99.87%99.77%99.87%99.91%99.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providinSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs3,6Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-b2 - Required ActionsIndicator 3: Early Childhood OutcomesInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early Interd. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers = [(# of inHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=76.20%77.00%77.50%78.00%71.50%A171.40%Data76.11%76.52%75.87%74.61%79.09%A2208Target>=74.20%74.30%74.40%74.50%73.40%A273.30%Data71.22%72.29%67.71%61.23%62.85%B12008Target>=82.20%82.30%82.4%82.50%80.00%B179.60%Data82.11%82.94%81.84%83.19%84.09%B22008Target>=60.70%60.80%60.90%7057.00%B256.90%Data52.95%53.61%51.27%49.92%51.12%C12008Target>=82.70%82.80%82.90%83.00%80.50%C180.40%Data82.57%82.91%83.62%76.99%81.91%C22008Target>=76.10%76.20%76.30%76.40%75.20%C275.10%Data73.51%74.74%71.55%61.13%60.9TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=71.60%71.70%Target A2>=73.50%73.60%Target B1>=80.10%80.20%Target B2>=57.10%57.20%Target C1>=80.60%80.70%Target C2>=75.30%75.40% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed2,782Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skila. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning511.83%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it67524.26%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,02636.88%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61922.25%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who s59.13%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determinia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning441.58%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it99435.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,17342.16%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1886.76%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome BProvide reasons for B2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defines "coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning471.69%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it72125.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,21243.57%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers42815.38%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome CSlippageProvide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the i3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets.Sampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling m98.70%98.80%98.90%99.00%A94.50%Data99.32%100.00%99.25%98.54%99.21%B2006Target>=95.10%95.20%95.30%95.40%95.50%B95.40%Data93.88%95.58%94.12%95.19%95.32%C2006Target>=98.50%98.60%98.70%98.80%98.90%C98.00%Data94.22%99.00%98.19%99.34%98.79%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=99.10%99.20%Target B>=95.60%95.70%Target C>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing gu1,152Number of respondent families participating in Part C 568A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the A2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the B2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the C2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family knowB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effeC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family helpWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Alabama continues If yes, is it a new or revised collection tool? NOThe demographics of the families responding are representative of the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families Include the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.59%0.60%0.61%0.62%0.63%Data0.49%0.55%0.71%0.68%0.72%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.64%0.65%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 156,739FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage39456,7390.72%0.645 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.73%1.74%1.75%1.76%1.77%Data1.71%1.76%1.83%1.87%2.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.78%1.79%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3174,131FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,623174,1312.06%1None6 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.67%100.00%99.85%98.40%99.53%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage51453999.53%100%99.26%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of dCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified in FFY 2017Findings of Noncompliance IdentifiedFindings of Noncompl4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 A7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not provide the reasons for delay, as required by thedhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisioIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.13%94.28%91.27%95.67%96.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitAll AEIS programs are required to participate in technical assistance annually and program monitoring every three year202000FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data95.90%98.17%96.53%98.83%96.95%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where notification to the SEA and LEA occurred at least 90 days prDo you have a written opt-out policy? (yes/no)YESIf yes, is the policy on file with the Department? (yes/no)YESWhat is7700FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaEach program that had findings of noncompliance was issued an action plan that included assurances that the program wa8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%98.65%97.98%99.61%98.98%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at Describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. All AEIS programs are required to participate in techn1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP Response8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructionsNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. NOSelect yes to use target ranges. Target Range not usedSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resolSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resolTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guiFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageN/AN/AProvide additional info9 - Required ActionsIndicator 10: MediationInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SuperviSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agr0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guidance and input into the development of tFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Temic Improvement PlanThe attachment(s) included are in compliance with Section 508. Non-comp334-324-6731Submitted on: 04/27/20 1:20:58 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC ch.DocumenPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisaInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the SIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SS1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200596.60%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.54%98.22%95.85%95.75%95.37%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on FFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage68479495.37%100%91.56%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicablDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring.All AEIS programs are required to participate in techni353500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFind1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 1 - Required Actions1 - State Attachments EMBED Word.Document.12 s EMBED Word.Document.12 s Indicator 2: S87.40%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=94.00%95.00%96.00%97.00%98.00%Data99.87%99.77%99.87%99.91%99.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providinSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs3,6Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-b2 - Required ActionsIndicator 3: Early Childhood OutcomesInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early Interd. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers = [(# of inHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=76.20%77.00%77.50%78.00%71.50%A171.40%Data76.11%76.52%75.87%74.61%79.09%A2208Target>=74.20%74.30%74.40%74.50%73.40%A273.30%Data71.22%72.29%67.71%61.23%62.85%B12008Target>=82.20%82.30%82.4%82.50%80.00%B179.60%Data82.11%82.94%81.84%83.19%84.09%B22008Target>=60.70%60.80%60.90%7057.00%B256.90%Data52.95%53.61%51.27%49.92%51.12%C12008Target>=82.70%82.80%82.90%83.00%80.50%C180.40%Data82.57%82.91%83.62%76.99%81.91%C22008Target>=76.10%76.20%76.30%76.40%75.20%C275.10%Data73.51%74.74%71.55%61.13%60.9TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=71.60%71.70%Target A2>=73.50%73.60%Target B1>=80.10%80.20%Target B2>=57.10%57.20%Target C1>=80.60%80.70%Target C2>=75.30%75.40% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed2,782Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skila. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning511.83%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it67524.26%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,02636.88%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61922.25%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who s59.13%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determinia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning441.58%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it99435.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,17342.16%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1886.76%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome BProvide reasons for B2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defines "coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning471.69%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-ac. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it72125.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,21243.57%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers42815.38%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome CSlippageProvide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable AEIS uses the COS process in determining child outcomes and defThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the i3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets.Sampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling m98.70%98.80%98.90%99.00%A94.50%Data99.32%100.00%99.25%98.54%99.21%B2006Target>=95.10%95.20%95.30%95.40%95.50%B95.40%Data93.88%95.58%94.12%95.19%95.32%C2006Target>=98.50%98.60%98.70%98.80%98.90%C98.00%Data94.22%99.00%98.19%99.34%98.79%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=99.10%99.20%Target B>=95.60%95.70%Target C>=99.00%99.10%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing gu1,152Number of respondent families participating in Part C 568A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the A2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the B2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the C2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family knowB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effeC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family helpWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Alabama continues If yes, is it a new or revised collection tool? NOThe demographics of the families responding are representative of the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families Include the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.59%0.60%0.61%0.62%0.63%Data0.49%0.55%0.71%0.68%0.72%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.64%0.65%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 156,739FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage39456,7390.72%0.645 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.73%1.74%1.75%1.76%1.77%Data1.71%1.76%1.83%1.87%2.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.78%1.79%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing Prepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3174,131FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,623174,1312.06%1None6 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.67%100.00%99.85%98.40%99.53%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage51453999.53%100%99.26%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of dCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified in FFY 2017Findings of Noncompliance IdentifiedFindings of Noncompl4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 A7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not provide the reasons for delay, as required by thedhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisioIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.13%94.28%91.27%95.67%96.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitAll AEIS programs are required to participate in technical assistance annually and program monitoring every three year202000FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data95.90%98.17%96.53%98.83%96.95%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where notification to the SEA and LEA occurred at least 90 days prDo you have a written opt-out policy? (yes/no)YESIf yes, is the policy on file with the Department? (yes/no)YESWhat is7700FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaEach program that had findings of noncompliance was issued an action plan that included assurances that the program wa8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%98.65%97.98%99.61%98.98%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at Describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. All AEIS programs are required to participate in techn1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliaDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedVerification of correction of 8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP Response8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructionsNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. NOSelect yes to use target ranges. Target Range not usedSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resolSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resolTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guiFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageN/AN/AProvide additional info9 - Required ActionsIndicator 10: MediationInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SuperviSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agr0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe ICC serves as one of the primary stakeholder groups providing ongoing guidance and input into the development of tFFY20132014201520162017Target>=DataTargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Temic Improvement PlanThe attachment(s) included are in compliance with Section 508. Non-comp334-324-6731Submitted on: 04/27/20 1:20:58 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC ch.DocumenPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part C
(Grant Year 2018–2019 — Issued June 23, 2020)
How the department made determinations
idea_file-template-default single single-idea_file postid-80718 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 15, 2020