2020 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters PART C — New Jersey
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
PDF2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — New Jersey
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 Judith M. Persichi lli
Commissioner of Health
New Jersey Department of Health
P.O. Box 360
Trenton , New Jersey 08625
Dear Commissioner Persichilli :
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 New Jersey needs assistance in meeting the
requirements of Part C of the IDEA . This determination is based on the totality of the State’s data
and information, inclu ding the Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2018 State Performance Plan/Annual
Performance Report (SPP/APR), other State - reported data, and other publicly available
information.
Your State’s 2020 determination is based on the data reflected in the State’s “ 2020 Part C
Results - Driven Accountability Matrix” (RDA Matrix). The RDA Matrix is individualized for
each State and consists of:
(1) a Compliance Matrix that includes scoring on Compliance Indicato rs 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 2020 , as it did for the Part C
determinations in 2015, 201 6 , 201 7, 2018, and 2019 . (The specifics of the determination
procedures and criteria are set forth in the HTDMD and reflected in the RDA Matrix for your
State.) For 2020 , the Department’s IDEA Part C determinations 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 imp roving functioning in three outcome areas that are critical to school readiness:
• p ositive social - emotional skills;
• 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 S PP/APR reporting tool using your State - specific log - on information at
https://emaps.ed.gov/suite/ . When you access your State’s SPP/APR on the site, you will find, in
Indicators 1 through 10, the OSEP Response to the indicator and any actions that the State is
required to take. The actions that the State is required to take are in two places:
(1) actions related to the correction of findings of noncompliance are in the “OSEP
Response ” section of the indicator; and
(2) any other actions that the State is required to take are in the “Required Actions” section of
the indicator.
It is important for you to review the Introduction to the SPP/APR, which may also include
language in the “OSEP Re sponse” and/or “Required Actions” sections.
You will also find all of the following important documents saved as attachments to the Progress
Page:
(1) the State’s RDA Matrix;
(2) the HTDMD document;
(3) a spreadsheet entitled “ 2020 Data Rubric Part C,” which shows how OSEP calculated the
State’s “Timely and Accurate State - Reported Data” score in the Compliance Matrix; and
(4) a document 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 above, the State’s 2020 determination is Needs Assistance. A State’s 2020 RDA
Determination is Needs Assistance if the RDA Percentage is at least 60% but less than 80%. A
State would also be Needs Assistance if its RDA Determination percentage is 80% or above, but
the 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 Conditions on the State’s
IDEA Part C grant award.
Pursuant to these requirements, the Secretary is advising the State of available sources of
technical assistance, including OSEP - funded technical assistance centers and resources at the
following website: https://osep.grads360.org/#program/highlighted - resources , and requiring the
State to work with appropriate en tities. In addition, the State should consider accessing technical
assistance from other Department - funded centers such as the Comprehensive Centers with
resources at the following link: https://compcenternetwork.org/states . The Secretary directs the
State to determine the results elements and/or compliance indicators, and improvement
strategies, on which it will focus its use of available technical assistance, in order to impr ove its
performance. We strongly encourage the State to access technical assistance related to those
results elements and compliance indicators for which the State received a score of zero. Your
State must report with its FFY 2019 SPP/APR submission, due F ebruary 1 , 2 021 , on:
(1) the technical assistance sources from which the State received assistance; and
(2) the actions the State took as a result of that technical assistance.
As required by IDEA section 616(e)(7) and 34 C . F . R . § 303.706, your State must notify the
public that the Secretary of Education has taken the above enforcement action, including, at a
minimum, by posting a public notice on its website and distributing the notice to the media and
to early intervention service ( EIS ) programs.
States were required to submit Phase III Year Four of the SSIP by April 1 , 20 20 . OSEP
appreciates the State’s ongoing work on its SSIP and its efforts to improve results for infants and
toddlers with disabilities and their families. We hav e carefully reviewed and responded to your
submission and will provide additional feedback in the upcoming weeks. Additionally, OSEP
will continue to work with your State as it implements the fifth year of Phase III of the SSIP,
which is due on April 1, 20 21 .
As a reminder, your State must report annually to the public, by posting on the State lead
agency’s website, on the performance of each EIS program located in the State on the targets in
the SPP/APR as soon as practicable, but no later than 120 days a fter the State’s submission of its
FFY 2018 SPP/APR. In addition, your State must:
(1) review EIS program performance against targets in the State’s SPP/APR;
(2) determine if each EIS program “meets the requirements” of Part C, or “needs assistance,”
“needs inte rvention,” or “needs substantial intervention” in implementing Part C of the
IDEA ;
(3) take appropriate enforcement action; and
(4) inform each EIS program of its determination.
Page 4 — Lead Agency Director
Further, your State must make its SPP/APR available to the public by posting it on the State lead
agency’s website. Within the upcoming weeks , OSEP will be finalizing a State Profile that:
(1) includes the State’s determination letter and SPP/APR, OSEP attachments , and all State
attachments that a re a ccessible in accordance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973 ; and
(2) will be accessible to the public via the ed.gov website.
OSEP appreciates the State’s efforts to improve results for infants and toddlers with disabilities
and their families and looks forward to working with your State over the next year as we
continue our important work of improving the lives of children with disabilities and their
families. Please contact your OSEP State Lead if you have any questions, would like to discuss
this further, or want to requ est technical assistance.
Sincerely,
Laurie VanderPloeg
Director
Office of Special Education Programs
cc: State Part C Coordinator
View File
2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — New Jersey
State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIPStates are not required to report in their calculation the number of children for whom the State has identified the causFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.58%95.12%93.13%94.61%97.56%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage16218297.56%100%94.51%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicable Include your State's criteria for timely receipt of early intervention services (i.e., the time period from parent con8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindin1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, th1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early FFY20132014201520162017Target>=99.81%99.81%99.84%99.87%99.89%Data99.92%99.82%99.79%99.87%99.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.92%99.92%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs14,21Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-basNone2 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Ra. Percent of infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning = [(# of infants and toddlers who did not improve funNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State Interagency Coordinating Council to advisA130.62%Data38.15%39.87%39.63%43.34%39.17%A22012Target>=77.29%77.29%77.97%78.65%79.33%A279.03%Data77.29%80.11%77.36%79.12%72.87%B12012Target>=82.59%82.59%83.20%83.80%84.40%B177.32%Data82.59%84.11%82.54%85.33%83.12%B22013Target>=45.87%45.87%46.90%47.90%49.02%B245.87%Data45.87%47.54%46.65%49.93%43.27%C12012Target>=92.85%92.85%92.85%92.88%92.88%C192.25%Data92.85%93.43%93.01%94.92%94.57%C22012Target>=78.75%78.75%79.81%80.87%81.93%C280.37%Data78.75%80.23%79.79%79.80%75.81%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=45.00%45.00%Target A2>=80.00%80.00%Target B1>=85.00%85.00%Target B2>=50.00%50.00%Target C1>=93.00%93.00%Target C2>=83.00%83.00% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed5,960Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning2644.43%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it4567.65%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers60410.13%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,02250.70%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 sub60.84%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable As part of the NJEIS SSIP focused on Chia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning580.97%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,62043.96%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,96933.04%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61310.29%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 functioning170.29%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it5419.08%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,58326.56%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,68261.78%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Did you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 -C. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2012Target>=71.18%71.18%72.14%73.09%74.05%A69.37%Data71.18%72.78%66.22%78.78%75.52%B2012Target>=66.67%66.67%67.50%68.34%B64.77%Data66.67%69.11%62.85%75.55%72.97%C2012Target>=83.09%83.09%83.57%84.05%84.52%C80.96%Data83.09%83.42%82.29%88.96%85.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=75.00%75.00%Target B>=70.00%70.00%Target C>=85.00%85.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State4,321Number of respondent families participating in Part C 731A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights7B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. The following busineIf 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 enIf not, describe the strategies that the State will use to ensure that in the future the response data are representativResponse to actions required in FFY 2017 SPP/APR The NJEIS works to ensure the response data are representative of NJEISBaseline20120.62%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.65%0.65%0.65%0.66%0.66%Data0.65%0.70%0.75%0.88%0.78%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.67%0.67%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1100,364FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFCompare your results to the national dataWhen compared with FFY 2017, the FFY 2018 New Jersey state percentage of childrPercent = [(# of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPs) divided by the (population of infants and toddlers birth toFFY20132014201520162017Target >=3.38%3.38%3.40%3.42%3.43%Data3.38%3.61%3.98%4.38%4.40%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.45%3.45%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3308,183FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TCompare your results to the national dataFor FFY 2018, New Jersey served 4.61% (14,216/308,183) of infants and toddlers,If data are from State monitoring, describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. If data are from a StFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.85%96.26%98.61%99.76%99.71%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage30532099.71%100%99.69%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of docThis number will be added to the "Number of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and 1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedThe NJEIS verified there was one7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsThe State did not report that it identified any findings of noncompliance in FFY 2016, although its FFY 2016 data reflecAccount for untimely transition planning under 8A, 8B, and 8C, including the reasons for delays.InstructionsIndicators 8FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transition planning fFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage254254100.00%100%100.00%Met TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable to exceData Analysis and Resultsdicator 8A Data ChildrenTotal of Children who turned 3 for Quarter of Data: February, March0000Correction 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 APR8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP Response8A - Required ActionsIndicator 8B: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EffectiveIndicator 8B: Under 34 CFR 303.401(e), the State may adopt a written policy that requires the lead agency to provide noFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.40%95.74%96.84%97.30%95.55%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting PaFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21225495.55%100%96.36%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of parents who opteWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancBased on FFY 2017 data, four (4) agencies were found to have noncompliance for 8B. The four agencies were each given a f8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the stDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data93.38%95.94%99.27%99.66%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transition conference hFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage174254100.00%100%99.47%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of toddlers for whom the parent dData were reported for all twenty-one counties. Transition Planning Conference (TPC) monitoring was0000Correction 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 APR8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Provide an explanation of why it is not applicable below. NJEIS uses the Part C Due Process Hearing procedures in accordIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repoSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreeSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State FFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Tar10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide taEmail: susan.evans@doh.nj.govPhone: 6097777734Submitted on: 04/28/20 8:25:48 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.DocumentPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIPStates are not required to report in their calculation the number of children for whom the State has identified the causFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.58%95.12%93.13%94.61%97.56%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage16218297.56%100%94.51%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicable Include your State's criteria for timely receipt of early intervention services (i.e., the time period from parent con8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindin1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, th1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early FFY20132014201520162017Target>=99.81%99.81%99.84%99.87%99.89%Data99.92%99.82%99.79%99.87%99.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.92%99.92%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs14,21Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-basNone2 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Ra. Percent of infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning = [(# of infants and toddlers who did not improve funNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State Interagency Coordinating Council to advisA130.62%Data38.15%39.87%39.63%43.34%39.17%A22012Target>=77.29%77.29%77.97%78.65%79.33%A279.03%Data77.29%80.11%77.36%79.12%72.87%B12012Target>=82.59%82.59%83.20%83.80%84.40%B177.32%Data82.59%84.11%82.54%85.33%83.12%B22013Target>=45.87%45.87%46.90%47.90%49.02%B245.87%Data45.87%47.54%46.65%49.93%43.27%C12012Target>=92.85%92.85%92.85%92.88%92.88%C192.25%Data92.85%93.43%93.01%94.92%94.57%C22012Target>=78.75%78.75%79.81%80.87%81.93%C280.37%Data78.75%80.23%79.79%79.80%75.81%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=45.00%45.00%Target A2>=80.00%80.00%Target B1>=85.00%85.00%Target B2>=50.00%50.00%Target C1>=93.00%93.00%Target C2>=83.00%83.00% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed5,960Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning2644.43%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it4567.65%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers60410.13%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,02250.70%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 sub60.84%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable As part of the NJEIS SSIP focused on Chia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning580.97%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,62043.96%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,96933.04%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61310.29%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 functioning170.29%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it5419.08%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,58326.56%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,68261.78%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Did you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 -C. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2012Target>=71.18%71.18%72.14%73.09%74.05%A69.37%Data71.18%72.78%66.22%78.78%75.52%B2012Target>=66.67%66.67%67.50%68.34%B64.77%Data66.67%69.11%62.85%75.55%72.97%C2012Target>=83.09%83.09%83.57%84.05%84.52%C80.96%Data83.09%83.42%82.29%88.96%85.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=75.00%75.00%Target B>=70.00%70.00%Target C>=85.00%85.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State4,321Number of respondent families participating in Part C 731A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights7B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. The following busineIf 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 enIf not, describe the strategies that the State will use to ensure that in the future the response data are representativResponse to actions required in FFY 2017 SPP/APR The NJEIS works to ensure the response data are representative of NJEISBaseline20120.62%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.65%0.65%0.65%0.66%0.66%Data0.65%0.70%0.75%0.88%0.78%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.67%0.67%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1100,364FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFCompare your results to the national dataWhen compared with FFY 2017, the FFY 2018 New Jersey state percentage of childrPercent = [(# of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPs) divided by the (population of infants and toddlers birth toFFY20132014201520162017Target >=3.38%3.38%3.40%3.42%3.43%Data3.38%3.61%3.98%4.38%4.40%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.45%3.45%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3308,183FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TCompare your results to the national dataFor FFY 2018, New Jersey served 4.61% (14,216/308,183) of infants and toddlers,If data are from State monitoring, describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. If data are from a StFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.85%96.26%98.61%99.76%99.71%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage30532099.71%100%99.69%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of docThis number will be added to the "Number of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and 1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedThe NJEIS verified there was one7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsThe State did not report that it identified any findings of noncompliance in FFY 2016, although its FFY 2016 data reflecAccount for untimely transition planning under 8A, 8B, and 8C, including the reasons for delays.InstructionsIndicators 8FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transition planning fFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage254254100.00%100%100.00%Met TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable to exceData Analysis and Resultsdicator 8A Data ChildrenTotal of Children who turned 3 for Quarter of Data: February, March0000Correction 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 APR8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP Response8A - Required ActionsIndicator 8B: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EffectiveIndicator 8B: Under 34 CFR 303.401(e), the State may adopt a written policy that requires the lead agency to provide noFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.40%95.74%96.84%97.30%95.55%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting PaFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21225495.55%100%96.36%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of parents who opteWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancBased on FFY 2017 data, four (4) agencies were found to have noncompliance for 8B. The four agencies were each given a f8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the stDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data93.38%95.94%99.27%99.66%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transition conference hFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage174254100.00%100%99.47%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of toddlers for whom the parent dData were reported for all twenty-one counties. Transition Planning Conference (TPC) monitoring was0000Correction 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 APR8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Provide an explanation of why it is not applicable below. NJEIS uses the Part C Due Process Hearing procedures in accordIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repoSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreeSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State FFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Tar10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide taEmail: susan.evans@doh.nj.govPhone: 6097777734Submitted on: 04/28/20 8:25:48 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.DocumentPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIPStates are not required to report in their calculation the number of children for whom the State has identified the causFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.58%95.12%93.13%94.61%97.56%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage16218297.56%100%94.51%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicable Include your State's criteria for timely receipt of early intervention services (i.e., the time period from parent con8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindin1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, th1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early FFY20132014201520162017Target>=99.81%99.81%99.84%99.87%99.89%Data99.92%99.82%99.79%99.87%99.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.92%99.92%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs14,21Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-basNone2 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Ra. Percent of infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning = [(# of infants and toddlers who did not improve funNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State Interagency Coordinating Council to advisA130.62%Data38.15%39.87%39.63%43.34%39.17%A22012Target>=77.29%77.29%77.97%78.65%79.33%A279.03%Data77.29%80.11%77.36%79.12%72.87%B12012Target>=82.59%82.59%83.20%83.80%84.40%B177.32%Data82.59%84.11%82.54%85.33%83.12%B22013Target>=45.87%45.87%46.90%47.90%49.02%B245.87%Data45.87%47.54%46.65%49.93%43.27%C12012Target>=92.85%92.85%92.85%92.88%92.88%C192.25%Data92.85%93.43%93.01%94.92%94.57%C22012Target>=78.75%78.75%79.81%80.87%81.93%C280.37%Data78.75%80.23%79.79%79.80%75.81%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=45.00%45.00%Target A2>=80.00%80.00%Target B1>=85.00%85.00%Target B2>=50.00%50.00%Target C1>=93.00%93.00%Target C2>=83.00%83.00% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed5,960Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning2644.43%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it4567.65%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers60410.13%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,02250.70%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 sub60.84%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable As part of the NJEIS SSIP focused on Chia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning580.97%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,62043.96%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,96933.04%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61310.29%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 functioning170.29%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it5419.08%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,58326.56%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,68261.78%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Did you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 -C. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2012Target>=71.18%71.18%72.14%73.09%74.05%A69.37%Data71.18%72.78%66.22%78.78%75.52%B2012Target>=66.67%66.67%67.50%68.34%B64.77%Data66.67%69.11%62.85%75.55%72.97%C2012Target>=83.09%83.09%83.57%84.05%84.52%C80.96%Data83.09%83.42%82.29%88.96%85.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=75.00%75.00%Target B>=70.00%70.00%Target C>=85.00%85.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State4,321Number of respondent families participating in Part C 731A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights7B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. The following busineIf 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 enIf not, describe the strategies that the State will use to ensure that in the future the response data are representativResponse to actions required in FFY 2017 SPP/APR The NJEIS works to ensure the response data are representative of NJEISBaseline20120.62%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.65%0.65%0.65%0.66%0.66%Data0.65%0.70%0.75%0.88%0.78%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.67%0.67%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1100,364FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFCompare your results to the national dataWhen compared with FFY 2017, the FFY 2018 New Jersey state percentage of childrPercent = [(# of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPs) divided by the (population of infants and toddlers birth toFFY20132014201520162017Target >=3.38%3.38%3.40%3.42%3.43%Data3.38%3.61%3.98%4.38%4.40%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.45%3.45%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3308,183FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TCompare your results to the national dataFor FFY 2018, New Jersey served 4.61% (14,216/308,183) of infants and toddlers,If data are from State monitoring, describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. If data are from a StFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.85%96.26%98.61%99.76%99.71%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage30532099.71%100%99.69%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of docThis number will be added to the "Number of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and 1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedThe NJEIS verified there was one7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsThe State did not report that it identified any findings of noncompliance in FFY 2016, although its FFY 2016 data reflecAccount for untimely transition planning under 8A, 8B, and 8C, including the reasons for delays.InstructionsIndicators 8FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transition planning fFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage254254100.00%100%100.00%Met TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable to exceData Analysis and Resultsdicator 8A Data ChildrenTotal of Children who turned 3 for Quarter of Data: February, March0000Correction 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 APR8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP Response8A - Required ActionsIndicator 8B: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EffectiveIndicator 8B: Under 34 CFR 303.401(e), the State may adopt a written policy that requires the lead agency to provide noFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.40%95.74%96.84%97.30%95.55%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting PaFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21225495.55%100%96.36%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of parents who opteWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancBased on FFY 2017 data, four (4) agencies were found to have noncompliance for 8B. The four agencies were each given a f8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the stDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data93.38%95.94%99.27%99.66%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transition conference hFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage174254100.00%100%99.47%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of toddlers for whom the parent dData were reported for all twenty-one counties. Transition Planning Conference (TPC) monitoring was0000Correction 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 APR8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Provide an explanation of why it is not applicable below. NJEIS uses the Part C Due Process Hearing procedures in accordIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repoSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreeSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State FFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Tar10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide taEmail: susan.evans@doh.nj.govPhone: 6097777734Submitted on: 04/28/20 8:25:48 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.DocumentPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIPStates are not required to report in their calculation the number of children for whom the State has identified the causFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.58%95.12%93.13%94.61%97.56%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage16218297.56%100%94.51%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicable Include your State's criteria for timely receipt of early intervention services (i.e., the time period from parent con8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindin1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, th1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early FFY20132014201520162017Target>=99.81%99.81%99.84%99.87%99.89%Data99.92%99.82%99.79%99.87%99.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.92%99.92%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs14,21Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-basNone2 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Ra. Percent of infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning = [(# of infants and toddlers who did not improve funNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State Interagency Coordinating Council to advisA130.62%Data38.15%39.87%39.63%43.34%39.17%A22012Target>=77.29%77.29%77.97%78.65%79.33%A279.03%Data77.29%80.11%77.36%79.12%72.87%B12012Target>=82.59%82.59%83.20%83.80%84.40%B177.32%Data82.59%84.11%82.54%85.33%83.12%B22013Target>=45.87%45.87%46.90%47.90%49.02%B245.87%Data45.87%47.54%46.65%49.93%43.27%C12012Target>=92.85%92.85%92.85%92.88%92.88%C192.25%Data92.85%93.43%93.01%94.92%94.57%C22012Target>=78.75%78.75%79.81%80.87%81.93%C280.37%Data78.75%80.23%79.79%79.80%75.81%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=45.00%45.00%Target A2>=80.00%80.00%Target B1>=85.00%85.00%Target B2>=50.00%50.00%Target C1>=93.00%93.00%Target C2>=83.00%83.00% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed5,960Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning2644.43%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it4567.65%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers60410.13%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,02250.70%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 sub60.84%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable As part of the NJEIS SSIP focused on Chia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning580.97%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,62043.96%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,96933.04%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61310.29%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 functioning170.29%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it5419.08%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,58326.56%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,68261.78%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Did you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 -C. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2012Target>=71.18%71.18%72.14%73.09%74.05%A69.37%Data71.18%72.78%66.22%78.78%75.52%B2012Target>=66.67%66.67%67.50%68.34%B64.77%Data66.67%69.11%62.85%75.55%72.97%C2012Target>=83.09%83.09%83.57%84.05%84.52%C80.96%Data83.09%83.42%82.29%88.96%85.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=75.00%75.00%Target B>=70.00%70.00%Target C>=85.00%85.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State4,321Number of respondent families participating in Part C 731A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights7B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. The following busineIf 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 enIf not, describe the strategies that the State will use to ensure that in the future the response data are representativResponse to actions required in FFY 2017 SPP/APR The NJEIS works to ensure the response data are representative of NJEISBaseline20120.62%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.65%0.65%0.65%0.66%0.66%Data0.65%0.70%0.75%0.88%0.78%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.67%0.67%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1100,364FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFCompare your results to the national dataWhen compared with FFY 2017, the FFY 2018 New Jersey state percentage of childrPercent = [(# of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPs) divided by the (population of infants and toddlers birth toFFY20132014201520162017Target >=3.38%3.38%3.40%3.42%3.43%Data3.38%3.61%3.98%4.38%4.40%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.45%3.45%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3308,183FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TCompare your results to the national dataFor FFY 2018, New Jersey served 4.61% (14,216/308,183) of infants and toddlers,If data are from State monitoring, describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. If data are from a StFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.85%96.26%98.61%99.76%99.71%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage30532099.71%100%99.69%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of docThis number will be added to the "Number of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and 1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedThe NJEIS verified there was one7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsThe State did not report that it identified any findings of noncompliance in FFY 2016, although its FFY 2016 data reflecAccount for untimely transition planning under 8A, 8B, and 8C, including the reasons for delays.InstructionsIndicators 8FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transition planning fFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage254254100.00%100%100.00%Met TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable to exceData Analysis and Resultsdicator 8A Data ChildrenTotal of Children who turned 3 for Quarter of Data: February, March0000Correction 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 APR8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP Response8A - Required ActionsIndicator 8B: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EffectiveIndicator 8B: Under 34 CFR 303.401(e), the State may adopt a written policy that requires the lead agency to provide noFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.40%95.74%96.84%97.30%95.55%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting PaFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21225495.55%100%96.36%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of parents who opteWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancBased on FFY 2017 data, four (4) agencies were found to have noncompliance for 8B. The four agencies were each given a f8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the stDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data93.38%95.94%99.27%99.66%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transition conference hFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage174254100.00%100%99.47%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of toddlers for whom the parent dData were reported for all twenty-one counties. Transition Planning Conference (TPC) monitoring was0000Correction 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 APR8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Provide an explanation of why it is not applicable below. NJEIS uses the Part C Due Process Hearing procedures in accordIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repoSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreeSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State FFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Tar10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide taEmail: susan.evans@doh.nj.govPhone: 6097777734Submitted on: 04/28/20 8:25:48 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.DocumentPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with DisabiInstructionsProvide sufficient detail to ensure that the Secretary and the public are informed of and understand the StaIntro - OSEP ResponseStates were instructed to submit Phase III, Year Four, of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIPStates are not required to report in their calculation the number of children for whom the State has identified the causFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data94.58%95.12%93.13%94.61%97.56%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on thFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage16218297.56%100%94.51%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for slippage, if applicable Include your State's criteria for timely receipt of early intervention services (i.e., the time period from parent con8800FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceCorrection of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2017Year Findings of Noncompliance Were IdentifiedFindin1 - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone1 - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, th1 - Required ActionsIndicator 2: Services in Natural EnvironmentsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Early FFY20132014201520162017Target>=99.81%99.81%99.84%99.87%99.89%Data99.92%99.82%99.79%99.87%99.87%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=99.92%99.92%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs14,21Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-basNone2 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Ra. Percent of infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning = [(# of infants and toddlers who did not improve funNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State Interagency Coordinating Council to advisA130.62%Data38.15%39.87%39.63%43.34%39.17%A22012Target>=77.29%77.29%77.97%78.65%79.33%A279.03%Data77.29%80.11%77.36%79.12%72.87%B12012Target>=82.59%82.59%83.20%83.80%84.40%B177.32%Data82.59%84.11%82.54%85.33%83.12%B22013Target>=45.87%45.87%46.90%47.90%49.02%B245.87%Data45.87%47.54%46.65%49.93%43.27%C12012Target>=92.85%92.85%92.85%92.88%92.88%C192.25%Data92.85%93.43%93.01%94.92%94.57%C22012Target>=78.75%78.75%79.81%80.87%81.93%C280.37%Data78.75%80.23%79.79%79.80%75.81%TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=45.00%45.00%Target A2>=80.00%80.00%Target B1>=85.00%85.00%Target B2>=50.00%50.00%Target C1>=93.00%93.00%Target C2>=83.00%83.00% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed5,960Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillsa. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning2644.43%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it4567.65%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers60410.13%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,02250.70%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 sub60.84%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable As part of the NJEIS SSIP focused on Chia. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning580.97%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-agec. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it2,62043.96%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,96933.04%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers61310.29%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 functioning170.29%b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sc. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it5419.08%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers1,58326.56%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers3,68261.78%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, No SlippageThe number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before Did you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)NOProvide the cNone3 - OSEP ResponseThe State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 3 -C. Percent= [(# of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped 2012Target>=71.18%71.18%72.14%73.09%74.05%A69.37%Data71.18%72.78%66.22%78.78%75.52%B2012Target>=66.67%66.67%67.50%68.34%B64.77%Data66.67%69.11%62.85%75.55%72.97%C2012Target>=83.09%83.09%83.57%84.05%84.52%C80.96%Data83.09%83.42%82.29%88.96%85.06%TargetsFFY20182019Target A>=75.00%75.00%Target B>=70.00%70.00%Target C>=85.00%85.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State4,321Number of respondent families participating in Part C 731A1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faA2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family know their rights7B1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faB2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family effectively communC1. Number of respondent families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the faC2. Number of responses to the question of whether early intervention services have helped the family help their childreFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageA. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family know tB. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family effectC. Percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family help tWas sampling used? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. The following busineIf 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 enIf not, describe the strategies that the State will use to ensure that in the future the response data are representativResponse to actions required in FFY 2017 SPP/APR The NJEIS works to ensure the response data are representative of NJEISBaseline20120.62%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=0.65%0.65%0.65%0.66%0.66%Data0.65%0.70%0.75%0.88%0.78%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=0.67%0.67%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1100,364FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFCompare your results to the national dataWhen compared with FFY 2017, the FFY 2018 New Jersey state percentage of childrPercent = [(# of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPs) divided by the (population of infants and toddlers birth toFFY20132014201520162017Target >=3.38%3.38%3.40%3.42%3.43%Data3.38%3.61%3.98%4.38%4.40%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=3.45%3.45%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input NJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includesPrepopulated DataSourceDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3308,183FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 with IFSPsPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TCompare your results to the national dataFor FFY 2018, New Jersey served 4.61% (14,216/308,183) of infants and toddlers,If data are from State monitoring, describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. If data are from a StFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.85%96.26%98.61%99.76%99.71%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and assesFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage30532099.71%100%99.69%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of docThis number will be added to the "Number of eligible infants and toddlers with IFSPs for whom an initial evaluation and 1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianceDescribe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was correctedThe NJEIS verified there was one7 - Prior FFY Required ActionsThe State did not report that it identified any findings of noncompliance in FFY 2016, although its FFY 2016 data reflecAccount for untimely transition planning under 8A, 8B, and 8C, including the reasons for delays.InstructionsIndicators 8FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transition planning fFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage254254100.00%100%100.00%Met TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributable to exceData Analysis and Resultsdicator 8A Data ChildrenTotal of Children who turned 3 for Quarter of Data: February, March0000Correction 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 APR8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP Response8A - Required ActionsIndicator 8B: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: EffectiveIndicator 8B: Under 34 CFR 303.401(e), the State may adopt a written policy that requires the lead agency to provide noFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data92.40%95.74%96.84%97.30%95.55%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData include notification to both the SEA and LEAYESNumber of toddlers with disabilities exiting PaFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage21225495.55%100%96.36%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of parents who opteWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS progr4400FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancBased on FFY 2017 data, four (4) agencies were found to have noncompliance for 8B. The four agencies were each given a f8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the stDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect thesFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data93.38%95.94%99.27%99.66%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataData reflect only those toddlers for whom the Lead Agency has conducted the transition conference hFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage174254100.00%100%99.47%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of toddlers for whom the parent dData were reported for all twenty-one counties. Transition Planning Conference (TPC) monitoring was0000Correction 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 APR8C - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8C - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, 8C - Required ActionsIndicator 9: Resolution SessionsInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Provide an explanation of why it is not applicable below. NJEIS uses the Part C Due Process Hearing procedures in accordIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repoSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held1SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreeSY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputNJEIS relies each year on a Part C Steering Committee which includes the State FFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%100.00%100.00%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=FFY 2018 SPP/APR Data2.1.a.i Mediation agreements related to due process complaints2.1.b.i Mediation agreements not related to due process complaints2.1 Number of mediations heldFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 Tar10 - OSEP ResponseThe State reported fewer than ten mediations held in FFY 2018. The State is not required to provide taEmail: susan.evans@doh.nj.govPhone: 6097777734Submitted on: 04/28/20 8:25:48 PMED Attachments EMBED AcroExch.DocumentPreloaded historical dataPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018RGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5
(Grant Year 2018–2019 — Issued June 23, 2020)
How the department made determinations
idea_file-template-default single single-idea_file postid-80823 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