2020 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters PART C — California
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
PDF2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — California
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 Nancy Bargmann
Dir ector
California Department of Developmental Services
1600 9th Street
P.O. Box 944202
Sacramento , California 94244
Dear Director Bargmann :
I am writing to advise you of the U.S. Department of Education’s (Department) 2020
determination under sections 616 and 642 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA). The Department has determined that California needs assistance in meeting the
requirements 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 Sc ore and a Results Score;
(4) an RDA Percentage based on both the Compliance Score and the Results Score; and
(5) the State’s Determination.
The RDA Matrix is further explained in a document, entitled “How the Department Made
Determinations under Sections 616(d) a nd 642 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
in 2020 : Part 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 the Part C
determinations in 2015, 201 6 , 201 7, 2018, and 2019 . (The specifics 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 con tinue to include consideration
Page 2 — Lead Agency Director
of each State’s Child Outcomes data, which measure how children who receive Part C services
are improving functioning in three outcome areas that are critical to school readiness:
• p ositive social - emotional skills;
• acquisiti on and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/communication);
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 FF Y 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 Stat e 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 to the Progress
Page:
(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 enti tled “Dispute Resolution 201 8 - 1 9 ,” which includes the IDEA section
618 data that OSEP used to calculate the State’s “Timely State Complaint Decisions” and
“Timely Due Process Hearing Decisions” scores in the Compliance Matrix.
As noted above, the State’s 2020 determination is Needs Assistance. A State’s 2020 RDA
Determination is Needs Assistance if the RDA Percentage is at least 60% but less than 80%. A
State would also be Needs Assistance if its RDA Determination percentage is 80% or above, but
the Depart ment has imposed Special or Specific Conditions on the State’s last three IDEA Part C
grant awards (for FFYs 201 7 , 201 8 , and 2019 ), and those Specific Conditions are in effect at the
time of the 20 20 determination.
The State’s determination for 2019 was al so Needs Assistance. In accordance with section
616(e)(1) of the IDEA and 34 C.F.R. § 303.704(a), if a State is determined to need assistance for
two consecutive years, the Secretary must take one or more of the following actions:
Page 3 — Lead Agency Director
(1) advise the State of available sources of technical assistance that may help the State
address the areas in which the State needs assistance and require the State to work with
appropriate entities; and/or
(2) identify the State as a high - risk grantee and impose Special Conditions on the State’s
IDEA Part C grant award.
Pursuant to these requirements, the Secretary is advising the State of available sources of
technical assistance, including OSEP - funded technical assistance centers and resources at the
following website: https://osep.grads360.org/#program/highlighted - resources , and requiring the
State to work with appropriate en tities. In addition, the State should consider accessing technical
assistance from other Department - funded centers such as the Comprehensive Centers with
resources at the following link: https://compcenternetwork.org/states . The Secretary directs the
State to determine the results elements and/or compliance indicators, and improvement
strategies, on which it will focus its use of available technical assistance, in order to impr ove its
performance. We strongly encourage the State to access technical assistance related to those
results elements and compliance indicators for which the State received a score of zero. Your
State must report with its FFY 2019 SPP/APR submission, due F ebruary 1 , 2 021 , on:
(1) the technical assistance sources from which the State received assistance; and
(2) the actions the State took as a result of that technical assistance.
As required by IDEA section 616(e)(7) and 34 C . F . R . § 303.706, your State must notify the
public that the Secretary of Education has taken the above enforcement action, including, at a
minimum, by posting a public notice on its website and distributing the notice to the media and
to early intervention service ( EIS ) programs.
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 hav e 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 EIS program located in the State on the targets in
the SPP/APR as soon as practicable, but no later than 120 days a fter the State’s submission of its
FFY 2018 SPP/APR. In addition, your State must:
(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 inte rvention,” 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.
Page 4 — Lead Agency Director
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 a re a ccessible 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 next year as we
continue our important work of improving the lives of children with disabilities and their
families. Please contact your OSEP State Lead if you have any questions, would like to discuss
this further, or want to requ est technical assistance.
Sincerely,
Laurie VanderPloeg
Director
Office of Special Education Programs
cc: State Part C Coordinator
View File
2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — California
State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseThe State's determinations for both 2018 and 2019 were Needs Assistance. Pursuant to sections 616(Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in the Office of Special Education PrFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data85.04%82.05%88.84%78.45%82.15%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21928082.15%100%82.86%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay including: Service provider availability (e.g. rural locations, l222020FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcBaseline200572.09%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=86.41%86.41%87.00%87.50%88.00%Data93.60%94.15%93.24%91.34%95.62%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=88.50%89.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this ASourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs50,17FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the 95.62%88.50%93.81%Met TargetNo SlippageProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)2 - Prior FFY RequiA. Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships); B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (inIn the measurement, include in the numerator and denominator only infants and toddlers with IFSPs who received early int2017A12013Target>=44.32%44.32%44.32%45.00%47.00%A144.32%Data44.32%46.54%46.15%46.93%48.24%A1 ALL2015Target>=44.32%45.00%47.00%A1 ALL46.19%Data46.19%47.12%49.29%A22013Target>=65.88%65.88%65.88%66.00%66.50%A265.88%Data65.88%67.74%67.13%67.75%68.90%A2 ALL2015Target>=65.88%66.00%66.50%A2 ALL67.14%Data67.14%67.83%69.11%B12013Target>=49.53%49.53%49.53%50.00%50.50%B149.53%Data49.53%50.55%50.87%50.53%50.78%B1 ALL2015Target>=49.53%50.0%50.50%B1 ALL50.92%Data50.92%50.60%50.98%B22013Target>=52.23%52.23%52.23%53.00%53.50%B252.23%Data52.23%54.03%54.39%54.91%56.23%B2 ALL2015Target>=52.23%53.00%53.50%B2 ALL54.44%Data54.44%55.01%56.39%C12013Target>=37.85%37.85%37.85%38.50%39.00%C137.85%Data37.85%39.31%39.26%39.11%38.94%C1 ALL2015Target>=37.85%38.50%39.00%C1 ALL39.30%Data39.30%39.39%40.10%C22013Target>=61.83%61.83%61.83%62.00%62.50%C261.83%Data61.83%63.56%62.81%63.76%63.71%C2 ALL2015Target>=61.83%62.00%62.50%C2 ALL62.82%Data62.82%63.85%63.80%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1 >=49.00%49.50%Target A1 ALL >=49.00%49.50%Target A2 >=67.00%67.50%Target A2 ALL >=67.00%67.50%Target B1 >=51.00%51.50%Target B1 ALL >=51.00%51.50%Target B2 >=54.00%54.50%Target B2 ALL >=54.00%54.50%Target C1 >=39.50%40.00%Target C1 ALL >=39.50%40.00%Target C2 >=63.00%63.50%Target C2 ALL >=63.00%63.50%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed25,080Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3855.79%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98012.46%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,86824.54%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,54844.11%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3945.56%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98311.89%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers6,46825.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,77942.98%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the progra68.65%Met TargetNo SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFNo SlippageA2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome A by the timea. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6492.71%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,21826.00%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers7,79632.60%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,61223.47%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6572.62%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,22424.82%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers8,35133.30%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,74422.90%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B, the percent wJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataS14,09525,08056.39%54.00%56.2%Met TargetNo SlippageOutcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNot includa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4325.99%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,08912.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers4,79820.06%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,33843.23%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4485.77%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,09312.33%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,32921.25%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,50441.88%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFYC2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome C by the time they turneThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Was sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP Response The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - ReC. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2005Target>=70.00%70.00%70.0%70.00%70.00%A48.00%Data75.37%78.00%78.74%80.97%80.70%B2005Target>=80.00%80.00%80.00%80.00%B42.00%Data81.18%82.21%87.00%83.71%83.91%C2005Target>=75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%C71.00%Data76.66%78.26%86.00%81.62%81.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=70.00%70.50%Target B>=80.00%80.50%Target C>=75.00%75.50%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includin9,681Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,207A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights2B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas 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. California continuesIf 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 enInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of thThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.79%0.80%0.81%0.82%0.83%Data0.79%0.83%0.93%1.07%1.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.84%1.09%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1477,320FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,023477,3201.08%0.85 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEPFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%Data2.30%2.45%2.68%2.94%3.18%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.20%2.70%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 31,446,871FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage50,1751,446,8713.18%None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - RequBaseline200590.43%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data86.14%82.05%85.54%78.80%86.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19828086.87%100%78.21%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort of RC Early Start programs each year as part of a three-year monitoring cycle. 222200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Indicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent diFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data74.06%91.41%80.36%79.12%74.47%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transitNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitieProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay inc8710FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data64.85%74.54%76.07%78.85%87.23%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 prioState monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort7610FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCalifornia confirms that the LEA and SEA notification occurred, although late, for any child whose transition notificati8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data72.01%86.20%87.86%88.60%90.91%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitioNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at thWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. YESProvide an explanation of why it is not applicable beloDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target.States are not required to establish baseSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held8SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints3SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey;11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints4Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputInput on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includingFFY20132014201520162017Target>=85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%Data88.24%86.67%88.89%100.00%80.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=85.00%85.00%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 Taremic Improvement Plan EMBED Word.Document.12 s CertificationInstructionsChoose the approproExch.Document.DC ument.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC Prepopulated 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 DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseThe State's determinations for both 2018 and 2019 were Needs Assistance. Pursuant to sections 616(Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in the Office of Special Education PrFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data85.04%82.05%88.84%78.45%82.15%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21928082.15%100%82.86%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay including: Service provider availability (e.g. rural locations, l222020FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcBaseline200572.09%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=86.41%86.41%87.00%87.50%88.00%Data93.60%94.15%93.24%91.34%95.62%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=88.50%89.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this ASourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs50,17FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the 95.62%88.50%93.81%Met TargetNo SlippageProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)2 - Prior FFY RequiA. Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships); B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (inIn the measurement, include in the numerator and denominator only infants and toddlers with IFSPs who received early int2017A12013Target>=44.32%44.32%44.32%45.00%47.00%A144.32%Data44.32%46.54%46.15%46.93%48.24%A1 ALL2015Target>=44.32%45.00%47.00%A1 ALL46.19%Data46.19%47.12%49.29%A22013Target>=65.88%65.88%65.88%66.00%66.50%A265.88%Data65.88%67.74%67.13%67.75%68.90%A2 ALL2015Target>=65.88%66.00%66.50%A2 ALL67.14%Data67.14%67.83%69.11%B12013Target>=49.53%49.53%49.53%50.00%50.50%B149.53%Data49.53%50.55%50.87%50.53%50.78%B1 ALL2015Target>=49.53%50.0%50.50%B1 ALL50.92%Data50.92%50.60%50.98%B22013Target>=52.23%52.23%52.23%53.00%53.50%B252.23%Data52.23%54.03%54.39%54.91%56.23%B2 ALL2015Target>=52.23%53.00%53.50%B2 ALL54.44%Data54.44%55.01%56.39%C12013Target>=37.85%37.85%37.85%38.50%39.00%C137.85%Data37.85%39.31%39.26%39.11%38.94%C1 ALL2015Target>=37.85%38.50%39.00%C1 ALL39.30%Data39.30%39.39%40.10%C22013Target>=61.83%61.83%61.83%62.00%62.50%C261.83%Data61.83%63.56%62.81%63.76%63.71%C2 ALL2015Target>=61.83%62.00%62.50%C2 ALL62.82%Data62.82%63.85%63.80%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1 >=49.00%49.50%Target A1 ALL >=49.00%49.50%Target A2 >=67.00%67.50%Target A2 ALL >=67.00%67.50%Target B1 >=51.00%51.50%Target B1 ALL >=51.00%51.50%Target B2 >=54.00%54.50%Target B2 ALL >=54.00%54.50%Target C1 >=39.50%40.00%Target C1 ALL >=39.50%40.00%Target C2 >=63.00%63.50%Target C2 ALL >=63.00%63.50%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed25,080Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3855.79%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98012.46%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,86824.54%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,54844.11%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3945.56%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98311.89%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers6,46825.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,77942.98%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the progra68.65%Met TargetNo SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFNo SlippageA2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome A by the timea. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6492.71%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,21826.00%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers7,79632.60%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,61223.47%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6572.62%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,22424.82%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers8,35133.30%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,74422.90%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B, the percent wJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataS14,09525,08056.39%54.00%56.2%Met TargetNo SlippageOutcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNot includa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4325.99%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,08912.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers4,79820.06%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,33843.23%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4485.77%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,09312.33%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,32921.25%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,50441.88%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFYC2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome C by the time they turneThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Was sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP Response The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - ReC. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2005Target>=70.00%70.00%70.0%70.00%70.00%A48.00%Data75.37%78.00%78.74%80.97%80.70%B2005Target>=80.00%80.00%80.00%80.00%B42.00%Data81.18%82.21%87.00%83.71%83.91%C2005Target>=75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%C71.00%Data76.66%78.26%86.00%81.62%81.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=70.00%70.50%Target B>=80.00%80.50%Target C>=75.00%75.50%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includin9,681Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,207A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights2B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas 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. California continuesIf 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 enInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of thThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.79%0.80%0.81%0.82%0.83%Data0.79%0.83%0.93%1.07%1.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.84%1.09%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1477,320FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,023477,3201.08%0.85 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEPFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%Data2.30%2.45%2.68%2.94%3.18%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.20%2.70%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 31,446,871FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage50,1751,446,8713.18%None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - RequBaseline200590.43%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data86.14%82.05%85.54%78.80%86.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19828086.87%100%78.21%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort of RC Early Start programs each year as part of a three-year monitoring cycle. 222200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Indicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent diFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data74.06%91.41%80.36%79.12%74.47%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transitNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitieProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay inc8710FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data64.85%74.54%76.07%78.85%87.23%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 prioState monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort7610FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCalifornia confirms that the LEA and SEA notification occurred, although late, for any child whose transition notificati8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data72.01%86.20%87.86%88.60%90.91%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitioNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at thWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. YESProvide an explanation of why it is not applicable beloDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target.States are not required to establish baseSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held8SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints3SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey;11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints4Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputInput on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includingFFY20132014201520162017Target>=85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%Data88.24%86.67%88.89%100.00%80.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=85.00%85.00%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 Taremic Improvement Plan EMBED Word.Document.12 s CertificationInstructionsChoose the approproExch.Document.DC ument.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC Prepopulated 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 DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseThe State's determinations for both 2018 and 2019 were Needs Assistance. Pursuant to sections 616(Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in the Office of Special Education PrFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data85.04%82.05%88.84%78.45%82.15%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21928082.15%100%82.86%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay including: Service provider availability (e.g. rural locations, l222020FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcBaseline200572.09%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=86.41%86.41%87.00%87.50%88.00%Data93.60%94.15%93.24%91.34%95.62%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=88.50%89.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this ASourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs50,17FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the 95.62%88.50%93.81%Met TargetNo SlippageProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)2 - Prior FFY RequiA. Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships); B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (inIn the measurement, include in the numerator and denominator only infants and toddlers with IFSPs who received early int2017A12013Target>=44.32%44.32%44.32%45.00%47.00%A144.32%Data44.32%46.54%46.15%46.93%48.24%A1 ALL2015Target>=44.32%45.00%47.00%A1 ALL46.19%Data46.19%47.12%49.29%A22013Target>=65.88%65.88%65.88%66.00%66.50%A265.88%Data65.88%67.74%67.13%67.75%68.90%A2 ALL2015Target>=65.88%66.00%66.50%A2 ALL67.14%Data67.14%67.83%69.11%B12013Target>=49.53%49.53%49.53%50.00%50.50%B149.53%Data49.53%50.55%50.87%50.53%50.78%B1 ALL2015Target>=49.53%50.0%50.50%B1 ALL50.92%Data50.92%50.60%50.98%B22013Target>=52.23%52.23%52.23%53.00%53.50%B252.23%Data52.23%54.03%54.39%54.91%56.23%B2 ALL2015Target>=52.23%53.00%53.50%B2 ALL54.44%Data54.44%55.01%56.39%C12013Target>=37.85%37.85%37.85%38.50%39.00%C137.85%Data37.85%39.31%39.26%39.11%38.94%C1 ALL2015Target>=37.85%38.50%39.00%C1 ALL39.30%Data39.30%39.39%40.10%C22013Target>=61.83%61.83%61.83%62.00%62.50%C261.83%Data61.83%63.56%62.81%63.76%63.71%C2 ALL2015Target>=61.83%62.00%62.50%C2 ALL62.82%Data62.82%63.85%63.80%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1 >=49.00%49.50%Target A1 ALL >=49.00%49.50%Target A2 >=67.00%67.50%Target A2 ALL >=67.00%67.50%Target B1 >=51.00%51.50%Target B1 ALL >=51.00%51.50%Target B2 >=54.00%54.50%Target B2 ALL >=54.00%54.50%Target C1 >=39.50%40.00%Target C1 ALL >=39.50%40.00%Target C2 >=63.00%63.50%Target C2 ALL >=63.00%63.50%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed25,080Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3855.79%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98012.46%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,86824.54%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,54844.11%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3945.56%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98311.89%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers6,46825.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,77942.98%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the progra68.65%Met TargetNo SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFNo SlippageA2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome A by the timea. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6492.71%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,21826.00%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers7,79632.60%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,61223.47%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6572.62%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,22424.82%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers8,35133.30%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,74422.90%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B, the percent wJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataS14,09525,08056.39%54.00%56.2%Met TargetNo SlippageOutcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNot includa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4325.99%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,08912.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers4,79820.06%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,33843.23%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4485.77%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,09312.33%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,32921.25%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,50441.88%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFYC2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome C by the time they turneThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Was sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP Response The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - ReC. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2005Target>=70.00%70.00%70.0%70.00%70.00%A48.00%Data75.37%78.00%78.74%80.97%80.70%B2005Target>=80.00%80.00%80.00%80.00%B42.00%Data81.18%82.21%87.00%83.71%83.91%C2005Target>=75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%C71.00%Data76.66%78.26%86.00%81.62%81.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=70.00%70.50%Target B>=80.00%80.50%Target C>=75.00%75.50%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includin9,681Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,207A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights2B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas 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. California continuesIf 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 enInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of thThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.79%0.80%0.81%0.82%0.83%Data0.79%0.83%0.93%1.07%1.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.84%1.09%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1477,320FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,023477,3201.08%0.85 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEPFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%Data2.30%2.45%2.68%2.94%3.18%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.20%2.70%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 31,446,871FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage50,1751,446,8713.18%None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - RequBaseline200590.43%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data86.14%82.05%85.54%78.80%86.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19828086.87%100%78.21%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort of RC Early Start programs each year as part of a three-year monitoring cycle. 222200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Indicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent diFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data74.06%91.41%80.36%79.12%74.47%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transitNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitieProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay inc8710FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data64.85%74.54%76.07%78.85%87.23%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 prioState monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort7610FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCalifornia confirms that the LEA and SEA notification occurred, although late, for any child whose transition notificati8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data72.01%86.20%87.86%88.60%90.91%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitioNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at thWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. YESProvide an explanation of why it is not applicable beloDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target.States are not required to establish baseSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held8SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints3SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey;11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints4Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputInput on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includingFFY20132014201520162017Target>=85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%Data88.24%86.67%88.89%100.00%80.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=85.00%85.00%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 Taremic Improvement Plan EMBED Word.Document.12 s CertificationInstructionsChoose the approproExch.Document.DC ument.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC Prepopulated 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 DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseThe State's determinations for both 2018 and 2019 were Needs Assistance. Pursuant to sections 616(Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in the Office of Special Education PrFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data85.04%82.05%88.84%78.45%82.15%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21928082.15%100%82.86%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay including: Service provider availability (e.g. rural locations, l222020FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcBaseline200572.09%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=86.41%86.41%87.00%87.50%88.00%Data93.60%94.15%93.24%91.34%95.62%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=88.50%89.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this ASourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs50,17FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the 95.62%88.50%93.81%Met TargetNo SlippageProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)2 - Prior FFY RequiA. Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships); B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (inIn the measurement, include in the numerator and denominator only infants and toddlers with IFSPs who received early int2017A12013Target>=44.32%44.32%44.32%45.00%47.00%A144.32%Data44.32%46.54%46.15%46.93%48.24%A1 ALL2015Target>=44.32%45.00%47.00%A1 ALL46.19%Data46.19%47.12%49.29%A22013Target>=65.88%65.88%65.88%66.00%66.50%A265.88%Data65.88%67.74%67.13%67.75%68.90%A2 ALL2015Target>=65.88%66.00%66.50%A2 ALL67.14%Data67.14%67.83%69.11%B12013Target>=49.53%49.53%49.53%50.00%50.50%B149.53%Data49.53%50.55%50.87%50.53%50.78%B1 ALL2015Target>=49.53%50.0%50.50%B1 ALL50.92%Data50.92%50.60%50.98%B22013Target>=52.23%52.23%52.23%53.00%53.50%B252.23%Data52.23%54.03%54.39%54.91%56.23%B2 ALL2015Target>=52.23%53.00%53.50%B2 ALL54.44%Data54.44%55.01%56.39%C12013Target>=37.85%37.85%37.85%38.50%39.00%C137.85%Data37.85%39.31%39.26%39.11%38.94%C1 ALL2015Target>=37.85%38.50%39.00%C1 ALL39.30%Data39.30%39.39%40.10%C22013Target>=61.83%61.83%61.83%62.00%62.50%C261.83%Data61.83%63.56%62.81%63.76%63.71%C2 ALL2015Target>=61.83%62.00%62.50%C2 ALL62.82%Data62.82%63.85%63.80%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1 >=49.00%49.50%Target A1 ALL >=49.00%49.50%Target A2 >=67.00%67.50%Target A2 ALL >=67.00%67.50%Target B1 >=51.00%51.50%Target B1 ALL >=51.00%51.50%Target B2 >=54.00%54.50%Target B2 ALL >=54.00%54.50%Target C1 >=39.50%40.00%Target C1 ALL >=39.50%40.00%Target C2 >=63.00%63.50%Target C2 ALL >=63.00%63.50%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed25,080Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3855.79%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98012.46%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,86824.54%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,54844.11%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3945.56%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98311.89%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers6,46825.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,77942.98%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the progra68.65%Met TargetNo SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFNo SlippageA2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome A by the timea. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6492.71%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,21826.00%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers7,79632.60%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,61223.47%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6572.62%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,22424.82%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers8,35133.30%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,74422.90%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B, the percent wJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataS14,09525,08056.39%54.00%56.2%Met TargetNo SlippageOutcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNot includa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4325.99%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,08912.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers4,79820.06%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,33843.23%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4485.77%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,09312.33%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,32921.25%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,50441.88%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFYC2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome C by the time they turneThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Was sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP Response The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - ReC. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2005Target>=70.00%70.00%70.0%70.00%70.00%A48.00%Data75.37%78.00%78.74%80.97%80.70%B2005Target>=80.00%80.00%80.00%80.00%B42.00%Data81.18%82.21%87.00%83.71%83.91%C2005Target>=75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%C71.00%Data76.66%78.26%86.00%81.62%81.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=70.00%70.50%Target B>=80.00%80.50%Target C>=75.00%75.50%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includin9,681Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,207A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights2B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas 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. California continuesIf 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 enInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of thThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.79%0.80%0.81%0.82%0.83%Data0.79%0.83%0.93%1.07%1.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.84%1.09%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1477,320FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,023477,3201.08%0.85 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEPFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%Data2.30%2.45%2.68%2.94%3.18%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.20%2.70%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 31,446,871FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage50,1751,446,8713.18%None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - RequBaseline200590.43%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data86.14%82.05%85.54%78.80%86.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19828086.87%100%78.21%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort of RC Early Start programs each year as part of a three-year monitoring cycle. 222200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Indicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent diFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data74.06%91.41%80.36%79.12%74.47%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transitNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitieProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay inc8710FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data64.85%74.54%76.07%78.85%87.23%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 prioState monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort7610FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCalifornia confirms that the LEA and SEA notification occurred, although late, for any child whose transition notificati8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data72.01%86.20%87.86%88.60%90.91%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitioNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at thWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. YESProvide an explanation of why it is not applicable beloDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target.States are not required to establish baseSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held8SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints3SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey;11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints4Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputInput on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includingFFY20132014201520162017Target>=85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%Data88.24%86.67%88.89%100.00%80.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=85.00%85.00%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 Taremic Improvement Plan EMBED Word.Document.12 s CertificationInstructionsChoose the approproExch.Document.DC ument.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC Prepopulated 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 DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseThe State's determinations for both 2018 and 2019 were Needs Assistance. Pursuant to sections 616(Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in the Office of Special Education PrFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data85.04%82.05%88.84%78.45%82.15%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21928082.15%100%82.86%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay including: Service provider availability (e.g. rural locations, l222020FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcBaseline200572.09%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=86.41%86.41%87.00%87.50%88.00%Data93.60%94.15%93.24%91.34%95.62%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=88.50%89.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this ASourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs50,17FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the 95.62%88.50%93.81%Met TargetNo SlippageProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)2 - Prior FFY RequiA. Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships); B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (inIn the measurement, include in the numerator and denominator only infants and toddlers with IFSPs who received early int2017A12013Target>=44.32%44.32%44.32%45.00%47.00%A144.32%Data44.32%46.54%46.15%46.93%48.24%A1 ALL2015Target>=44.32%45.00%47.00%A1 ALL46.19%Data46.19%47.12%49.29%A22013Target>=65.88%65.88%65.88%66.00%66.50%A265.88%Data65.88%67.74%67.13%67.75%68.90%A2 ALL2015Target>=65.88%66.00%66.50%A2 ALL67.14%Data67.14%67.83%69.11%B12013Target>=49.53%49.53%49.53%50.00%50.50%B149.53%Data49.53%50.55%50.87%50.53%50.78%B1 ALL2015Target>=49.53%50.0%50.50%B1 ALL50.92%Data50.92%50.60%50.98%B22013Target>=52.23%52.23%52.23%53.00%53.50%B252.23%Data52.23%54.03%54.39%54.91%56.23%B2 ALL2015Target>=52.23%53.00%53.50%B2 ALL54.44%Data54.44%55.01%56.39%C12013Target>=37.85%37.85%37.85%38.50%39.00%C137.85%Data37.85%39.31%39.26%39.11%38.94%C1 ALL2015Target>=37.85%38.50%39.00%C1 ALL39.30%Data39.30%39.39%40.10%C22013Target>=61.83%61.83%61.83%62.00%62.50%C261.83%Data61.83%63.56%62.81%63.76%63.71%C2 ALL2015Target>=61.83%62.00%62.50%C2 ALL62.82%Data62.82%63.85%63.80%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1 >=49.00%49.50%Target A1 ALL >=49.00%49.50%Target A2 >=67.00%67.50%Target A2 ALL >=67.00%67.50%Target B1 >=51.00%51.50%Target B1 ALL >=51.00%51.50%Target B2 >=54.00%54.50%Target B2 ALL >=54.00%54.50%Target C1 >=39.50%40.00%Target C1 ALL >=39.50%40.00%Target C2 >=63.00%63.50%Target C2 ALL >=63.00%63.50%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed25,080Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3855.79%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98012.46%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,86824.54%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,54844.11%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3945.56%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98311.89%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers6,46825.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,77942.98%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the progra68.65%Met TargetNo SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFNo SlippageA2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome A by the timea. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6492.71%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,21826.00%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers7,79632.60%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,61223.47%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6572.62%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,22424.82%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers8,35133.30%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,74422.90%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B, the percent wJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataS14,09525,08056.39%54.00%56.2%Met TargetNo SlippageOutcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNot includa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4325.99%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,08912.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers4,79820.06%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,33843.23%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4485.77%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,09312.33%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,32921.25%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,50441.88%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFYC2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome C by the time they turneThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Was sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP Response The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - ReC. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2005Target>=70.00%70.00%70.0%70.00%70.00%A48.00%Data75.37%78.00%78.74%80.97%80.70%B2005Target>=80.00%80.00%80.00%80.00%B42.00%Data81.18%82.21%87.00%83.71%83.91%C2005Target>=75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%C71.00%Data76.66%78.26%86.00%81.62%81.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=70.00%70.50%Target B>=80.00%80.50%Target C>=75.00%75.50%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includin9,681Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,207A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights2B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas 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. California continuesIf 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 enInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of thThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.79%0.80%0.81%0.82%0.83%Data0.79%0.83%0.93%1.07%1.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.84%1.09%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1477,320FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,023477,3201.08%0.85 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEPFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%Data2.30%2.45%2.68%2.94%3.18%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.20%2.70%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 31,446,871FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage50,1751,446,8713.18%None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - RequBaseline200590.43%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data86.14%82.05%85.54%78.80%86.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19828086.87%100%78.21%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort of RC Early Start programs each year as part of a three-year monitoring cycle. 222200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Indicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent diFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data74.06%91.41%80.36%79.12%74.47%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transitNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitieProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay inc8710FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data64.85%74.54%76.07%78.85%87.23%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 prioState monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort7610FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCalifornia confirms that the LEA and SEA notification occurred, although late, for any child whose transition notificati8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data72.01%86.20%87.86%88.60%90.91%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitioNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at thWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. YESProvide an explanation of why it is not applicable beloDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target.States are not required to establish baseSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held8SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints3SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey;11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints4Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputInput on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includingFFY20132014201520162017Target>=85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%Data88.24%86.67%88.89%100.00%80.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=85.00%85.00%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 Taremic Improvement Plan EMBED Word.Document.12 s CertificationInstructionsChoose the approproExch.Document.DC ument.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC Prepopulated 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 DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseThe State's determinations for both 2018 and 2019 were Needs Assistance. Pursuant to sections 616(Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in the Office of Special Education PrFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data85.04%82.05%88.84%78.45%82.15%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21928082.15%100%82.86%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay including: Service provider availability (e.g. rural locations, l222020FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcBaseline200572.09%FFY20132014201520162017Target>=86.41%86.41%87.00%87.50%88.00%Data93.60%94.15%93.24%91.34%95.62%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=88.50%89.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this ASourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs50,17FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the 95.62%88.50%93.81%Met TargetNo SlippageProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)2 - Prior FFY RequiA. Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships); B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (inIn the measurement, include in the numerator and denominator only infants and toddlers with IFSPs who received early int2017A12013Target>=44.32%44.32%44.32%45.00%47.00%A144.32%Data44.32%46.54%46.15%46.93%48.24%A1 ALL2015Target>=44.32%45.00%47.00%A1 ALL46.19%Data46.19%47.12%49.29%A22013Target>=65.88%65.88%65.88%66.00%66.50%A265.88%Data65.88%67.74%67.13%67.75%68.90%A2 ALL2015Target>=65.88%66.00%66.50%A2 ALL67.14%Data67.14%67.83%69.11%B12013Target>=49.53%49.53%49.53%50.00%50.50%B149.53%Data49.53%50.55%50.87%50.53%50.78%B1 ALL2015Target>=49.53%50.0%50.50%B1 ALL50.92%Data50.92%50.60%50.98%B22013Target>=52.23%52.23%52.23%53.00%53.50%B252.23%Data52.23%54.03%54.39%54.91%56.23%B2 ALL2015Target>=52.23%53.00%53.50%B2 ALL54.44%Data54.44%55.01%56.39%C12013Target>=37.85%37.85%37.85%38.50%39.00%C137.85%Data37.85%39.31%39.26%39.11%38.94%C1 ALL2015Target>=37.85%38.50%39.00%C1 ALL39.30%Data39.30%39.39%40.10%C22013Target>=61.83%61.83%61.83%62.00%62.50%C261.83%Data61.83%63.56%62.81%63.76%63.71%C2 ALL2015Target>=61.83%62.00%62.50%C2 ALL62.82%Data62.82%63.85%63.80%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1 >=49.00%49.50%Target A1 ALL >=49.00%49.50%Target A2 >=67.00%67.50%Target A2 ALL >=67.00%67.50%Target B1 >=51.00%51.50%Target B1 ALL >=51.00%51.50%Target B2 >=54.00%54.50%Target B2 ALL >=54.00%54.50%Target C1 >=39.50%40.00%Target C1 ALL >=39.50%40.00%Target C2 >=63.00%63.50%Target C2 ALL >=63.00%63.50%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed25,080Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3855.79%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98012.46%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,86824.54%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,54844.11%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,3945.56%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,98311.89%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers6,46825.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,77942.98%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the progra68.65%Met TargetNo SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFNo SlippageA2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome A by the timea. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6492.71%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,21826.00%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers7,79632.60%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,61223.47%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning6572.62%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it6,22424.82%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers8,35133.30%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers5,74422.90%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B, the percent wJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataS14,09525,08056.39%54.00%56.2%Met TargetNo SlippageOutcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNot includa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4325.99%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,08912.92%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers4,79820.06%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,33843.23%Just at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning1,4485.77%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it3,09312.33%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers5,32921.25%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers10,50441.88%Not including at-risk infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageJust at-risk infants and toddlers/All infants and toddlersNumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFYC2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome C by the time they turneThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Was sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP Response The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - ReC. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2005Target>=70.00%70.00%70.0%70.00%70.00%A48.00%Data75.37%78.00%78.74%80.97%80.70%B2005Target>=80.00%80.00%80.00%80.00%B42.00%Data81.18%82.21%87.00%83.71%83.91%C2005Target>=75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%75.00%C71.00%Data76.66%78.26%86.00%81.62%81.89%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=70.00%70.50%Target B>=80.00%80.50%Target C>=75.00%75.50%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includin9,681Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,207A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights2B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas 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. California continuesIf 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 enInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of thThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.79%0.80%0.81%0.82%0.83%Data0.79%0.83%0.93%1.07%1.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.84%1.09%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1477,320FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage3,023477,3201.08%0.85 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEPFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%2.20%Data2.30%2.45%2.68%2.94%3.18%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.20%2.70%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Input on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APRPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 31,446,871FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 witPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage50,1751,446,8713.18%None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - RequBaseline200590.43%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data86.14%82.05%85.54%78.80%86.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19828086.87%100%78.21%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort of RC Early Start programs each year as part of a three-year monitoring cycle. 222200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 APR7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider correcdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Indicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent diFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data74.06%91.41%80.36%79.12%74.47%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transitNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitieProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Reasons for DelayThere were various reasons for delay inc8710FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data64.85%74.54%76.07%78.85%87.23%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 prioState monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. DDS conducts on-site reviews of a cohort7610FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCalifornia confirms that the LEA and SEA notification occurred, although late, for any child whose transition notificati8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data72.01%86.20%87.86%88.60%90.91%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitioNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at thWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor each individual finding iden8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseThe State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrNot ApplicableSelect yes if this indicator is not applicable. YESProvide an explanation of why it is not applicable beloDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target.States are not required to establish baseSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held8SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints3SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey;11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints4Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputInput on current and future (FFY 19/20) targets included in this APR, includingFFY20132014201520162017Target>=85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%85.00%Data88.24%86.67%88.89%100.00%80.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=85.00%85.00%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 Taremic Improvement Plan EMBED Word.Document.12 s CertificationInstructionsChoose the approproExch.Document.DC ument.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC Prepopulated 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-80745 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