2020 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters PART C — Michigan
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
PDF2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — Michigan
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 Michael F. Rice
St ate Superintendent
Michigan Department of Education
608 West Allegan Street
P.O. Box 30008
Lansing , Michigan 48909
Dear Superintendent Rice :
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 Michigan needs assistance in meeting t he
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 Matri x” (RDA Matrix). The RDA Matrix is individualized for
each State and consists of:
(1) a Compliance Matrix that includes scoring on Compliance Indicators and other
compliance factors;
(2) Results Components and Appendices that include scoring on Results Elements ;
(3) a Compliance Score and a Results Score;
(4) an RDA Percentage based on both the 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) and 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 202 0 , 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 d eterminations continue 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 s kills;
• acquisition 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 FFY 2018 data .
You may access the results of OSEP’s review of your State’s SPP/APR and other relevant data
by accessing the EMAPS SPP/APR reporting tool using your State - specific log - on information at
https://emaps.ed.gov/suite/ . When you access your State’s SPP/APR on the site, you will find, in
Indicators 1 through 10, the OSEP Response to the indicator and any actions that the State is
required to take. The acti ons that the State is required to take are in two places:
(1) actions related to the correction of findings of noncompliance are in the “OSEP
Response” section of the indicator; and
(2) any other actions that the State is required to take are in the “Required Ac tions” 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 save d 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; an d
(4) a document entitled “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 ab ove, 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 Department has imposed Special or Specific Conditions on the State’s last three IDEA Part C
grant awards (for FFYs 201 7 , 201 8 , and 2019 ), and those Specific Conditions are in effect at the
time of the 20 20 determination.
The State’s determination for 2019 was also 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 Conditio ns 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 entities. In additi on, 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 improve its
performan ce. 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 February 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 su bmit Phase III Year Four of the SSIP by April 1 , 20 20 . OSEP
appreciates the State’s ongoing work on its SSIP and its efforts to improve results for infants and
toddlers with disabilities and their families. We have carefully reviewed and responded to your
submission and will provide additional feedback in the upcoming weeks. Additionally, OSEP
will continue to work with your State as it implements the fifth year of Phase III of the SSIP,
which is due on April 1, 20 21 .
As a reminder, your State must report annually to the public, by posting on the State lead
agency’s website, on the performance of each EIS program located in the State on the targets in
the SPP/APR as soon as practicable, but no later than 120 days after the State’s submission of its
FFY 2018 SPP/APR. In addition, your State must:
(1) review EIS program performance against targets in the State’s SPP/APR;
(2) determine if each EIS program “meets the requirements” of Part C, or “needs assistance,”
“needs intervention,” or “needs substantial interventi on” 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
conti nue our important work of improving the lives of children with disabilities and their
families. Please contact your OSEP State Lead if you have any questions, would like to discuss
this further, or want to request technical assistance.
Sincerely,
Laurie VanderPloeg
Director
Office of Special Education Programs
cc: State Part C Coordinator
View File
2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — Michigan
State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSI1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200647.80%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.83%99.07%99.60%99.84%99.86%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19,50319,72499.86%100%99.89%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attribData from the full reporting period are included.If needed, provide additional information about this indicator here.Da7520FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindi1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, t1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EarlyFFY20132014201520162017Target>=93.00%93.50%93.50%94.00%94.00%Data96.34%95.00%95.28%96.47%97.10%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=94.00%94.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GoverSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primaSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs11,0Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-baThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Required ActionsIndicc. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it =Historical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=75.00%75.30%75.60%75.90%76.20%A174.00%Data78.21%64.00%74.82%76.49%75.19%A22008Target>=60.40%60.50%60.60%60.70%60.80%A259.20%Data54.19%54.79%54.26%54.06%52.15B12008Target>=79.50%79.70%79.90%80.10%80.30%B179.10%Data80.94%67.60%79.08%80.04%78.72%B22008Target>=51.20%51.80%52.40%53.00%53.60%B254.00%Data48.63%49.04%48.79%48.33%47.27%C12008Target>=78.80%79.00%79.20%79.40%79.60%C178.10%Data81.10%68.17%78.3%80.40%78.24%C22008Target>=59.20%59.40%59.60%59.80%60.00%C259.40%Data52.44%51.95%49.89%50.29%47.54%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=76.50%76.50%Target A2>=60.90%60.90%Target B1>=80.50%80.50%Target B2>=54.10%54.10%Target C1>=79.80%79.80%Target C2>=60.20%60.20% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,336Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skilla. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.17%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,75727.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,22135.05%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,15218.18%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who su53.24%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageOutcome B: Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning100.16%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,10533.22%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,43238.38%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers6179.74%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Outcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning130.21%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not c. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,93830.59%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,44838.64%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers76112.01%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectationDid Not Meet TargetNo SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for atThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeDid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - RequiSampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling me58.60%58.80%59.00%59.20%A56.0%Data70.08%70.65%69.07%69.21%71.12%B2005Target>=53.40%53.60%53.80%54.00%54.20%B51.00%Data63.98%63.75%62.81%62.73%64.75%C2005Target>=77.40%77.60%77.80%78.00%78.20%C73.00%Data84.40%84.05%83.98%84.14%84.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=59.40%59.40%Target B>=54.40%54.40%Target C>=78.40%78.40%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointe7,467Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,965A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightsB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commuC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childrFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know B. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effecC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help Was sampling used? NOWas a collection tool used?YESIf 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 eInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of tFFY 2018 data are representative in terms of ethnicity for the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families enrolled1.03%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.24%1.24%1.24%1.25%1.26%Data1.18%1.16%1.13%1.30%1.38%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.27%1.27%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1110,301FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,400110,3011.38%1.5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.70%2.70%2.70%2.80%2.90%Data2.64%2.62%2.60%2.86%3.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.00%3.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3338,573FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage11,025338,5733.08%3None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200663.10%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.12%95.07%96.81%99.12%98.97%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and asseFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage9,94511,92998.97%100%99.20%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were collected through the Michigan Student Data Sys121200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, tdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent dFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%99.45%92.89%95.91%97.70%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transiNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitiData from full reporting period are included.Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were co4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsFFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe data for one LEIC. Percent = [(# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 daysFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%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 priState databaseProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarte0000Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP Response8B - Required Actionsdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicators 8A, 8B, and 8C: Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in OSEP'sFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.68%99.29%94.31%96.23%96.99%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitiNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at tProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarter, selection f5500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor some of the children, a traFFY 2016220FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsTStates are not required to establish baseline or targets if the number of resolution sessions is less than 10. In a repSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resoluSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resoluTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointedFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DatThe State reported fewer than ten resolution sessions held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide targets unPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held2SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agre1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints1Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointed advisory council. The MICC includes multFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not relNone10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to proviDepartmental ManagerEmail: waltersk5@michigan.govPhone: 517-335-0543Submitted on: 04/24/20 1:31:42 PMED Attachments Preloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSI1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200647.80%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.83%99.07%99.60%99.84%99.86%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19,50319,72499.86%100%99.89%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attribData from the full reporting period are included.If needed, provide additional information about this indicator here.Da7520FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindi1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, t1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EarlyFFY20132014201520162017Target>=93.00%93.50%93.50%94.00%94.00%Data96.34%95.00%95.28%96.47%97.10%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=94.00%94.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GoverSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primaSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs11,0Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-baThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Required ActionsIndicc. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it =Historical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=75.00%75.30%75.60%75.90%76.20%A174.00%Data78.21%64.00%74.82%76.49%75.19%A22008Target>=60.40%60.50%60.60%60.70%60.80%A259.20%Data54.19%54.79%54.26%54.06%52.15B12008Target>=79.50%79.70%79.90%80.10%80.30%B179.10%Data80.94%67.60%79.08%80.04%78.72%B22008Target>=51.20%51.80%52.40%53.00%53.60%B254.00%Data48.63%49.04%48.79%48.33%47.27%C12008Target>=78.80%79.00%79.20%79.40%79.60%C178.10%Data81.10%68.17%78.3%80.40%78.24%C22008Target>=59.20%59.40%59.60%59.80%60.00%C259.40%Data52.44%51.95%49.89%50.29%47.54%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=76.50%76.50%Target A2>=60.90%60.90%Target B1>=80.50%80.50%Target B2>=54.10%54.10%Target C1>=79.80%79.80%Target C2>=60.20%60.20% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,336Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skilla. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.17%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,75727.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,22135.05%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,15218.18%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who su53.24%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageOutcome B: Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning100.16%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,10533.22%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,43238.38%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers6179.74%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Outcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning130.21%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not c. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,93830.59%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,44838.64%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers76112.01%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectationDid Not Meet TargetNo SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for atThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeDid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - RequiSampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling me58.60%58.80%59.00%59.20%A56.0%Data70.08%70.65%69.07%69.21%71.12%B2005Target>=53.40%53.60%53.80%54.00%54.20%B51.00%Data63.98%63.75%62.81%62.73%64.75%C2005Target>=77.40%77.60%77.80%78.00%78.20%C73.00%Data84.40%84.05%83.98%84.14%84.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=59.40%59.40%Target B>=54.40%54.40%Target C>=78.40%78.40%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointe7,467Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,965A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightsB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commuC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childrFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know B. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effecC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help Was sampling used? NOWas a collection tool used?YESIf 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 eInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of tFFY 2018 data are representative in terms of ethnicity for the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families enrolled1.03%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.24%1.24%1.24%1.25%1.26%Data1.18%1.16%1.13%1.30%1.38%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.27%1.27%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1110,301FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,400110,3011.38%1.5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.70%2.70%2.70%2.80%2.90%Data2.64%2.62%2.60%2.86%3.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.00%3.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3338,573FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage11,025338,5733.08%3None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200663.10%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.12%95.07%96.81%99.12%98.97%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and asseFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage9,94511,92998.97%100%99.20%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were collected through the Michigan Student Data Sys121200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, tdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent dFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%99.45%92.89%95.91%97.70%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transiNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitiData from full reporting period are included.Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were co4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsFFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe data for one LEIC. Percent = [(# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 daysFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%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 priState databaseProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarte0000Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP Response8B - Required Actionsdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicators 8A, 8B, and 8C: Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in OSEP'sFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.68%99.29%94.31%96.23%96.99%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitiNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at tProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarter, selection f5500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor some of the children, a traFFY 2016220FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsTStates are not required to establish baseline or targets if the number of resolution sessions is less than 10. In a repSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resoluSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resoluTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointedFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DatThe State reported fewer than ten resolution sessions held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide targets unPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held2SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agre1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints1Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointed advisory council. The MICC includes multFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not relNone10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to proviDepartmental ManagerEmail: waltersk5@michigan.govPhone: 517-335-0543Submitted on: 04/24/20 1:31:42 PMED Attachments Preloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSI1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200647.80%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.83%99.07%99.60%99.84%99.86%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19,50319,72499.86%100%99.89%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attribData from the full reporting period are included.If needed, provide additional information about this indicator here.Da7520FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindi1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, t1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EarlyFFY20132014201520162017Target>=93.00%93.50%93.50%94.00%94.00%Data96.34%95.00%95.28%96.47%97.10%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=94.00%94.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GoverSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primaSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs11,0Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-baThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Required ActionsIndicc. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it =Historical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=75.00%75.30%75.60%75.90%76.20%A174.00%Data78.21%64.00%74.82%76.49%75.19%A22008Target>=60.40%60.50%60.60%60.70%60.80%A259.20%Data54.19%54.79%54.26%54.06%52.15B12008Target>=79.50%79.70%79.90%80.10%80.30%B179.10%Data80.94%67.60%79.08%80.04%78.72%B22008Target>=51.20%51.80%52.40%53.00%53.60%B254.00%Data48.63%49.04%48.79%48.33%47.27%C12008Target>=78.80%79.00%79.20%79.40%79.60%C178.10%Data81.10%68.17%78.3%80.40%78.24%C22008Target>=59.20%59.40%59.60%59.80%60.00%C259.40%Data52.44%51.95%49.89%50.29%47.54%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=76.50%76.50%Target A2>=60.90%60.90%Target B1>=80.50%80.50%Target B2>=54.10%54.10%Target C1>=79.80%79.80%Target C2>=60.20%60.20% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,336Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skilla. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.17%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,75727.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,22135.05%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,15218.18%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who su53.24%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageOutcome B: Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning100.16%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,10533.22%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,43238.38%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers6179.74%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Outcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning130.21%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not c. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,93830.59%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,44838.64%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers76112.01%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectationDid Not Meet TargetNo SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for atThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeDid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - RequiSampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling me58.60%58.80%59.00%59.20%A56.0%Data70.08%70.65%69.07%69.21%71.12%B2005Target>=53.40%53.60%53.80%54.00%54.20%B51.00%Data63.98%63.75%62.81%62.73%64.75%C2005Target>=77.40%77.60%77.80%78.00%78.20%C73.00%Data84.40%84.05%83.98%84.14%84.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=59.40%59.40%Target B>=54.40%54.40%Target C>=78.40%78.40%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointe7,467Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,965A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightsB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commuC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childrFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know B. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effecC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help Was sampling used? NOWas a collection tool used?YESIf 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 eInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of tFFY 2018 data are representative in terms of ethnicity for the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families enrolled1.03%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.24%1.24%1.24%1.25%1.26%Data1.18%1.16%1.13%1.30%1.38%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.27%1.27%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1110,301FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,400110,3011.38%1.5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.70%2.70%2.70%2.80%2.90%Data2.64%2.62%2.60%2.86%3.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.00%3.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3338,573FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage11,025338,5733.08%3None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200663.10%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.12%95.07%96.81%99.12%98.97%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and asseFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage9,94511,92998.97%100%99.20%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were collected through the Michigan Student Data Sys121200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, tdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent dFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%99.45%92.89%95.91%97.70%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transiNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitiData from full reporting period are included.Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were co4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsFFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe data for one LEIC. Percent = [(# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 daysFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%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 priState databaseProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarte0000Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP Response8B - Required Actionsdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicators 8A, 8B, and 8C: Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in OSEP'sFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.68%99.29%94.31%96.23%96.99%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitiNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at tProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarter, selection f5500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor some of the children, a traFFY 2016220FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsTStates are not required to establish baseline or targets if the number of resolution sessions is less than 10. In a repSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resoluSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resoluTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointedFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DatThe State reported fewer than ten resolution sessions held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide targets unPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held2SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agre1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints1Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointed advisory council. The MICC includes multFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not relNone10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to proviDepartmental ManagerEmail: waltersk5@michigan.govPhone: 517-335-0543Submitted on: 04/24/20 1:31:42 PMED Attachments Preloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSI1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200647.80%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.83%99.07%99.60%99.84%99.86%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19,50319,72499.86%100%99.89%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attribData from the full reporting period are included.If needed, provide additional information about this indicator here.Da7520FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindi1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, t1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EarlyFFY20132014201520162017Target>=93.00%93.50%93.50%94.00%94.00%Data96.34%95.00%95.28%96.47%97.10%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=94.00%94.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GoverSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primaSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs11,0Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-baThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Required ActionsIndicc. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it =Historical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=75.00%75.30%75.60%75.90%76.20%A174.00%Data78.21%64.00%74.82%76.49%75.19%A22008Target>=60.40%60.50%60.60%60.70%60.80%A259.20%Data54.19%54.79%54.26%54.06%52.15B12008Target>=79.50%79.70%79.90%80.10%80.30%B179.10%Data80.94%67.60%79.08%80.04%78.72%B22008Target>=51.20%51.80%52.40%53.00%53.60%B254.00%Data48.63%49.04%48.79%48.33%47.27%C12008Target>=78.80%79.00%79.20%79.40%79.60%C178.10%Data81.10%68.17%78.3%80.40%78.24%C22008Target>=59.20%59.40%59.60%59.80%60.00%C259.40%Data52.44%51.95%49.89%50.29%47.54%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=76.50%76.50%Target A2>=60.90%60.90%Target B1>=80.50%80.50%Target B2>=54.10%54.10%Target C1>=79.80%79.80%Target C2>=60.20%60.20% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,336Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skilla. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.17%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,75727.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,22135.05%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,15218.18%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who su53.24%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageOutcome B: Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning100.16%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,10533.22%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,43238.38%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers6179.74%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Outcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning130.21%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not c. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,93830.59%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,44838.64%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers76112.01%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectationDid Not Meet TargetNo SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for atThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeDid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - RequiSampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling me58.60%58.80%59.00%59.20%A56.0%Data70.08%70.65%69.07%69.21%71.12%B2005Target>=53.40%53.60%53.80%54.00%54.20%B51.00%Data63.98%63.75%62.81%62.73%64.75%C2005Target>=77.40%77.60%77.80%78.00%78.20%C73.00%Data84.40%84.05%83.98%84.14%84.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=59.40%59.40%Target B>=54.40%54.40%Target C>=78.40%78.40%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointe7,467Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,965A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightsB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commuC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childrFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know B. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effecC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help Was sampling used? NOWas a collection tool used?YESIf 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 eInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of tFFY 2018 data are representative in terms of ethnicity for the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families enrolled1.03%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.24%1.24%1.24%1.25%1.26%Data1.18%1.16%1.13%1.30%1.38%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.27%1.27%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1110,301FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,400110,3011.38%1.5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.70%2.70%2.70%2.80%2.90%Data2.64%2.62%2.60%2.86%3.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.00%3.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3338,573FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage11,025338,5733.08%3None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200663.10%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.12%95.07%96.81%99.12%98.97%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and asseFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage9,94511,92998.97%100%99.20%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were collected through the Michigan Student Data Sys121200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, tdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent dFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%99.45%92.89%95.91%97.70%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transiNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitiData from full reporting period are included.Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were co4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsFFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe data for one LEIC. Percent = [(# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 daysFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%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 priState databaseProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarte0000Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP Response8B - Required Actionsdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicators 8A, 8B, and 8C: Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in OSEP'sFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.68%99.29%94.31%96.23%96.99%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitiNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at tProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarter, selection f5500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor some of the children, a traFFY 2016220FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsTStates are not required to establish baseline or targets if the number of resolution sessions is less than 10. In a repSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resoluSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resoluTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointedFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DatThe State reported fewer than ten resolution sessions held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide targets unPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held2SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agre1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints1Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointed advisory council. The MICC includes multFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not relNone10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to proviDepartmental ManagerEmail: waltersk5@michigan.govPhone: 517-335-0543Submitted on: 04/24/20 1:31:42 PMED Attachments Preloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSI1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200647.80%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.83%99.07%99.60%99.84%99.86%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19,50319,72499.86%100%99.89%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attribData from the full reporting period are included.If needed, provide additional information about this indicator here.Da7520FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindi1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, t1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EarlyFFY20132014201520162017Target>=93.00%93.50%93.50%94.00%94.00%Data96.34%95.00%95.28%96.47%97.10%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=94.00%94.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GoverSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primaSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs11,0Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-baThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Required ActionsIndicc. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it =Historical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=75.00%75.30%75.60%75.90%76.20%A174.00%Data78.21%64.00%74.82%76.49%75.19%A22008Target>=60.40%60.50%60.60%60.70%60.80%A259.20%Data54.19%54.79%54.26%54.06%52.15B12008Target>=79.50%79.70%79.90%80.10%80.30%B179.10%Data80.94%67.60%79.08%80.04%78.72%B22008Target>=51.20%51.80%52.40%53.00%53.60%B254.00%Data48.63%49.04%48.79%48.33%47.27%C12008Target>=78.80%79.00%79.20%79.40%79.60%C178.10%Data81.10%68.17%78.3%80.40%78.24%C22008Target>=59.20%59.40%59.60%59.80%60.00%C259.40%Data52.44%51.95%49.89%50.29%47.54%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=76.50%76.50%Target A2>=60.90%60.90%Target B1>=80.50%80.50%Target B2>=54.10%54.10%Target C1>=79.80%79.80%Target C2>=60.20%60.20% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,336Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skilla. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.17%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,75727.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,22135.05%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,15218.18%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who su53.24%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageOutcome B: Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning100.16%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,10533.22%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,43238.38%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers6179.74%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Outcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning130.21%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not c. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,93830.59%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,44838.64%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers76112.01%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectationDid Not Meet TargetNo SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for atThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeDid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - RequiSampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling me58.60%58.80%59.00%59.20%A56.0%Data70.08%70.65%69.07%69.21%71.12%B2005Target>=53.40%53.60%53.80%54.00%54.20%B51.00%Data63.98%63.75%62.81%62.73%64.75%C2005Target>=77.40%77.60%77.80%78.00%78.20%C73.00%Data84.40%84.05%83.98%84.14%84.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=59.40%59.40%Target B>=54.40%54.40%Target C>=78.40%78.40%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointe7,467Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,965A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightsB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commuC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childrFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know B. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effecC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help Was sampling used? NOWas a collection tool used?YESIf 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 eInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of tFFY 2018 data are representative in terms of ethnicity for the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families enrolled1.03%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.24%1.24%1.24%1.25%1.26%Data1.18%1.16%1.13%1.30%1.38%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.27%1.27%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1110,301FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,400110,3011.38%1.5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.70%2.70%2.70%2.80%2.90%Data2.64%2.62%2.60%2.86%3.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.00%3.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3338,573FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage11,025338,5733.08%3None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200663.10%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.12%95.07%96.81%99.12%98.97%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and asseFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage9,94511,92998.97%100%99.20%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were collected through the Michigan Student Data Sys121200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, tdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent dFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%99.45%92.89%95.91%97.70%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transiNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitiData from full reporting period are included.Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were co4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsFFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe data for one LEIC. Percent = [(# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 daysFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%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 priState databaseProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarte0000Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP Response8B - Required Actionsdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicators 8A, 8B, and 8C: Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in OSEP'sFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.68%99.29%94.31%96.23%96.99%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitiNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at tProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarter, selection f5500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor some of the children, a traFFY 2016220FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsTStates are not required to establish baseline or targets if the number of resolution sessions is less than 10. In a repSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resoluSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resoluTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointedFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DatThe State reported fewer than ten resolution sessions held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide targets unPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held2SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agre1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints1Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointed advisory council. The MICC includes multFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not relNone10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to proviDepartmental ManagerEmail: waltersk5@michigan.govPhone: 517-335-0543Submitted on: 04/24/20 1:31:42 PMED Attachments Preloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSI1 - Indicator DataHistorical DataBaseline200647.80%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.83%99.07%99.60%99.84%99.86%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage19,50319,72499.86%100%99.89%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attribData from the full reporting period are included.If needed, provide additional information about this indicator here.Da7520FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindi1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, t1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EarlyFFY20132014201520162017Target>=93.00%93.50%93.50%94.00%94.00%Data96.34%95.00%95.28%96.47%97.10%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=94.00%94.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GoverSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primaSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs11,0Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-baThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Required ActionsIndicc. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it =Historical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12008Target>=75.00%75.30%75.60%75.90%76.20%A174.00%Data78.21%64.00%74.82%76.49%75.19%A22008Target>=60.40%60.50%60.60%60.70%60.80%A259.20%Data54.19%54.79%54.26%54.06%52.15B12008Target>=79.50%79.70%79.90%80.10%80.30%B179.10%Data80.94%67.60%79.08%80.04%78.72%B22008Target>=51.20%51.80%52.40%53.00%53.60%B254.00%Data48.63%49.04%48.79%48.33%47.27%C12008Target>=78.80%79.00%79.20%79.40%79.60%C178.10%Data81.10%68.17%78.3%80.40%78.24%C22008Target>=59.20%59.40%59.60%59.80%60.00%C259.40%Data52.44%51.95%49.89%50.29%47.54%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=76.50%76.50%Target A2>=60.90%60.90%Target B1>=80.50%80.50%Target B2>=54.10%54.10%Target C1>=79.80%79.80%Target C2>=60.20%60.20% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,336Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skilla. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.17%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,75727.73%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,22135.05%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,15218.18%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who su53.24%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageOutcome B: Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/coa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning100.16%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,10533.22%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,43238.38%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers6179.74%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Outcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needsNumber of ChildrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning130.21%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not c. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it1,93830.59%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,44838.64%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers76112.01%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectationDid Not Meet TargetNo SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for atThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeDid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 - RequiSampling offamilies participating in Part Cis allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling me58.60%58.80%59.00%59.20%A56.0%Data70.08%70.65%69.07%69.21%71.12%B2005Target>=53.40%53.60%53.80%54.00%54.20%B51.00%Data63.98%63.75%62.81%62.73%64.75%C2005Target>=77.40%77.60%77.80%78.00%78.20%C73.00%Data84.40%84.05%83.98%84.14%84.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=59.40%59.40%Target B>=54.40%54.40%Target C>=78.40%78.40%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointe7,467Number of respondent families participating in Part C 2,965A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rightsB1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively commuC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the fC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childrFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know B. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effecC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help Was sampling used? NOWas a collection tool used?YESIf 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 eInclude the State's analysis of the extent to which the demographics of the families responding are representative of tFFY 2018 data are representative in terms of ethnicity for the demographics of infants, toddlers, and families enrolled1.03%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.24%1.24%1.24%1.25%1.26%Data1.18%1.16%1.13%1.30%1.38%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.27%1.27%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1110,301FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,400110,3011.38%1.5 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - RequFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.70%2.70%2.70%2.80%2.90%Data2.64%2.62%2.60%2.86%3.08%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.00%3.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input Michigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the GovernoPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3338,573FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage11,025338,5733.08%3None6 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Baseline200663.10%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.12%95.07%96.81%99.12%98.97%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and asseFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage9,94511,92998.97%100%99.20%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were collected through the Michigan Student Data Sys121200FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancYear Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone7 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, tdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent dFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%99.45%92.89%95.91%97.70%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transiNumber of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and servicesNumber of toddlers with disabilitiData from full reporting period are included.Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)Data were co4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsFFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe data for one LEIC. Percent = [(# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 daysFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%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 priState databaseProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarte0000Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2017 AP8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP Response8B - Required Actionsdhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General SupervisionIndicators 8A, 8B, and 8C: Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in OSEP'sFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.68%99.29%94.31%96.23%96.99%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transitiNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at tProvide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarter, selection f5500FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedFor some of the children, a traFFY 2016220FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirementsTStates are not required to establish baseline or targets if the number of resolution sessions is less than 10. In a repSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1 Number of resoluSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section C: Due Process Complaints11/11/20193.1(a) Number resoluTargets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointedFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data3.1(a) Number resolutions sessions resolved through settlement agreements3.1 Number of resolutions sessionsFFY 2017 DatThe State reported fewer than ten resolution sessions held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide targets unPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held2SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agre1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints1Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputMichigan Part C collaborates extensively with the MICC, the Governor-appointed advisory council. The MICC includes multFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data0.00%0.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not relNone10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to proviDepartmental ManagerEmail: waltersk5@michigan.govPhone: 517-335-0543Submitted on: 04/24/20 1:31:42 PMED Attachments Preloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 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-80797 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