2020 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters PART C — Virginia
OSEP Response to SPP/APR
PDF2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — Virginia
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 Alison Land
Commis sioner
Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services
P.O. Box 1797
Richmond , Virginia 23218
Dear Commissioner Land :
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 Virginia 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, includi ng the Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2018 State Performance Plan/Annual
Performance Report (SPP/APR), other State - reported data, and other publicly available
information.
Your State’s 2020 determination is based on the data reflected in the State’s “ 2020 Part C
Results - Driven Accountability Matrix” (RDA Matrix). The RDA Matrix is individualized for
each State and consists of:
(1) a Compliance Matrix that includes scoring on Compliance Indicators and other
compliance factors;
(2) Results Components and Appendices that include scoring on Results Elements;
(3) a Compliance Score and a Results Score;
(4) an RDA Percentage based on both the Compli ance 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, 2016 , 2017 , 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 improving 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/commun ication);
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 S tate’s SPP/APR and other relevant data
by accessing the EMAPS SPP/APR reporting tool using your State - specific log - on information at
https://emaps.ed.gov/suite/ . When you access your State’s SPP/APR on the site, you will find, in
Indicators 1 through 10, the OSEP Response to the indicator and any actions that the State is
required to take. The actions that the State is required to take are in two places:
(1) actions related to the cor rection of findings of noncompliance are in the “OSEP
Response” section of the indicator; and
(2) any other actions that the State is required to take are in the “Required Actions” section of
the indicator.
It is important for you to review the Introduction to the SPP/APR, which may also include
language in the “OSEP Response” and/or “Required Actions” sections.
You will also find all of the following important documents saved as attachments:
(1) the State’s RDA Matrix;
(2) the HTDMD document;
(3) a spreadsheet entitle d “ 2020 Data Rubric Part C,” which shows how OSEP calculated the
State’s “Timely and Accurate State - Reported Data” score in the Compliance Matrix; and
(4) a document entitled “Dispute Resolution 201 8 - 20 1 9 ,” which includes the IDEA section
618 data that OSEP us ed 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 201 9 ), and those Specific Conditions are in effect at the
time of the 20 20 determination.
States were required to submit Phase III Year Four of the SSIP by April 1 , 20 20 . OSEP
appreciat es 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 .
Page 3 — Lead Agency Director
As a reminder, your State must report annually to the public, by posting on the State lead
agency’s website , on the performance of each early intervention service ( EIS ) program located in
the State on the targets in the SPP/APR as soon as practicable, but no later than 120 days after
the State’s submission of its FFY 2018 SPP/APR. In addition, your State must:
(1) review EIS program performance against targets in the State’s SPP/APR;
(2) determine if each EIS program “meets the requirements” of Part C, or “needs assistance,”
“needs intervention,” or “needs substantial intervention” in implementing Part C of the
IDEA ;
(3) take appropriate enforcement action; and
(4) inform each EIS program of its determination.
Further, your State must make its SPP/APR available to the public by posting it on the State lead
agency’s website. Within the upcoming weeks , OSEP will be finalizing a State Profile that:
(1) includes the State’s determination letter and SPP/APR, OSEP attachments , and all State
attachments that are accessible in accordance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973 ; and
(2) will be accessible to the public via the ed.gov website.
OSEP appreciates t he 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 t heir
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 Coor dinator
View File
2020 SPP/APR Submission PART C — Virginia
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 (SSIP)The State's timeliness measure for this indicator must be either: (1) a time period that runs from when the parent consFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.02%96.35%98.60%97.24%96.94%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage61383696.94%100%96.77%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributableExceptional family circumstances that resulted in untimely services included child/family ill, family scheduling prefer2101FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancActions taken if noncompliance not correctedFor the one local system with noncompliance not yet corrected, noncomplianc1 - 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>=98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%Data99.76%99.80%98.71%99.92%99.96%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=98.00%98.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as theDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or co07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs10,766FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-ba2 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Rb. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparableHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12018Target>=69.50%69.50%69.50%64.10%64.10%A164.07%Data69.48%65.14%64.07%66.05%66.28%A22018Target>=66.40%66.40%66.40%63.30%63.30%A263.28%Data66.43%64.47%63.28%60.71%60.05%B12018Target>=74.70%74.70%74.7%68.30%68.30%B168.29%Data74.73%71.29%68.29%70.10%69.96%B22018Target>=55.30%55.30%55.30%51.51.50%B251.53%Data55.27%53.0%51.53%49.62%48.69%C12018Target>=78.70%78.70%78.70%70.70%70.70%C170.69%Data78.74%73.37%70.69%70.38%70.16%C22018Target>=56.40%56.40%56.40%55.20%55.20%C255.23%Data56.43%55.46%55.23%53.84%54.10TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=66.00%64.94%Target A2>=65.00%57.55%Target B1>=70.00%68.74%Target B2>=54.00%46.93%Target C1>=73.00%68.57%Target C2>=57.00%50.74% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,891Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.16%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 it1,18017.12%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,05329.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,91227.75%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 su57.54%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable Anecdotal data suggests that the most la. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning90.13%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 it1,77625.77%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,36134.26%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers87212.65%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Provide reasons for B1 slippage, if applicableAlthough Virginia's results declined from the previous year for Indicatora. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning80.12%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 it1,49421.69%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,65038.47%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers84512.27%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C,SlippageProvide reasons for C1 slippage, if applicable Please see A1.Provide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable PleThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State has revised the baseline for this indicator, using data from FFY 2018, and OSEP accepts thatProvide the actual numbers used in the calculation.Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to 76.40%76.40%76.40%A72.30%Data76.44%75.59%77.47%79.55%76.01%B2011Target>=73.20%74.40%74.40%74.40%74.40%B70.30%Data74.39%72.10%74.57%75.65%74.34%C2011Target>=84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%C81.90%Data83.87%85.44%85.70%88.66%85.74%TargeFFY20182019Target A>=80.00%76.12%Target B>=77.00%73.59%Target C>=88.00%85.44%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the primary stNumber of respondent families participating in Part C 1,844A1. 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? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Virginia's IndicatoIf 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 t The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required Actions4 - 20050.51%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.03%1.20%1.20%1.20%1.20%Data1.20%1.05%1.47%1.38%1.50%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.26%1.58%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 199,261FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,57099,2611.50%1.2 The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.88%2.76%2.76%2.76%2.89%Data2.76%2.87%2.97%3.18%3.29%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.89%3.54%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 3304,143FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage10,766304,1433.29%26 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Requir200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data91.83%98.99%99.56%99.91%97.51%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 DataStatusSlippage1,7332,37197.51%100%99.70%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber oProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances that resulted in delays 1100FFY 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 ResponseThe State reported that it used data from a State database to reportIndicator 8A: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision If the State reported less than 100% compliance for the previous reporting period (e.g., for the FFY 2018 SPP/APR, the FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.60%98.23%84.90%82.85%96.19%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 disabilitiProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances reasons for untimely tra1100FFY 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 each local system with a fi8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data89.27%91.34%92.48%93.16%96.39%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 priYESWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS p1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianIn order to verify correction of noncompliance on Indicators 8A, 8B and 8C, the State Lead Agency selected a random sam8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.60%97.90%88.62%79.01%97.43%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 tDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. Data for FFY 2018 is based on monitoring data from all 2200FFY 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 each local system with a fiFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe initial reasons for noncompliance continued for this local system: misuIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repMeasurementPercent = ((2.1(a)(i) + 2.1(b)(i)) divided by 2.1) times 100.InstructionsSampling from the State's 618 data SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputVirginia has not reached the OSEP-identified threshold (10 mediations in a yeaFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%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 Taemic Improvement Plan The State did not submit 508 compliant attachments. Non-compliant attac04/22/20 3:29:15 PMED Attachment EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.DoPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with 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 (SSIP)The State's timeliness measure for this indicator must be either: (1) a time period that runs from when the parent consFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.02%96.35%98.60%97.24%96.94%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage61383696.94%100%96.77%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributableExceptional family circumstances that resulted in untimely services included child/family ill, family scheduling prefer2101FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancActions taken if noncompliance not correctedFor the one local system with noncompliance not yet corrected, noncomplianc1 - 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>=98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%Data99.76%99.80%98.71%99.92%99.96%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=98.00%98.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as theDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or co07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs10,766FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-ba2 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Rb. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparableHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12018Target>=69.50%69.50%69.50%64.10%64.10%A164.07%Data69.48%65.14%64.07%66.05%66.28%A22018Target>=66.40%66.40%66.40%63.30%63.30%A263.28%Data66.43%64.47%63.28%60.71%60.05%B12018Target>=74.70%74.70%74.7%68.30%68.30%B168.29%Data74.73%71.29%68.29%70.10%69.96%B22018Target>=55.30%55.30%55.30%51.51.50%B251.53%Data55.27%53.0%51.53%49.62%48.69%C12018Target>=78.70%78.70%78.70%70.70%70.70%C170.69%Data78.74%73.37%70.69%70.38%70.16%C22018Target>=56.40%56.40%56.40%55.20%55.20%C255.23%Data56.43%55.46%55.23%53.84%54.10TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=66.00%64.94%Target A2>=65.00%57.55%Target B1>=70.00%68.74%Target B2>=54.00%46.93%Target C1>=73.00%68.57%Target C2>=57.00%50.74% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,891Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.16%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 it1,18017.12%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,05329.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,91227.75%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 su57.54%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable Anecdotal data suggests that the most la. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning90.13%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 it1,77625.77%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,36134.26%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers87212.65%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Provide reasons for B1 slippage, if applicableAlthough Virginia's results declined from the previous year for Indicatora. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning80.12%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 it1,49421.69%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,65038.47%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers84512.27%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C,SlippageProvide reasons for C1 slippage, if applicable Please see A1.Provide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable PleThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State has revised the baseline for this indicator, using data from FFY 2018, and OSEP accepts thatProvide the actual numbers used in the calculation.Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to 76.40%76.40%76.40%A72.30%Data76.44%75.59%77.47%79.55%76.01%B2011Target>=73.20%74.40%74.40%74.40%74.40%B70.30%Data74.39%72.10%74.57%75.65%74.34%C2011Target>=84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%C81.90%Data83.87%85.44%85.70%88.66%85.74%TargeFFY20182019Target A>=80.00%76.12%Target B>=77.00%73.59%Target C>=88.00%85.44%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the primary stNumber of respondent families participating in Part C 1,844A1. 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? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Virginia's IndicatoIf 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 t The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required Actions4 - 20050.51%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.03%1.20%1.20%1.20%1.20%Data1.20%1.05%1.47%1.38%1.50%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.26%1.58%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 199,261FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,57099,2611.50%1.2 The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.88%2.76%2.76%2.76%2.89%Data2.76%2.87%2.97%3.18%3.29%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.89%3.54%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 3304,143FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage10,766304,1433.29%26 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Requir200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data91.83%98.99%99.56%99.91%97.51%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 DataStatusSlippage1,7332,37197.51%100%99.70%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber oProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances that resulted in delays 1100FFY 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 ResponseThe State reported that it used data from a State database to reportIndicator 8A: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision If the State reported less than 100% compliance for the previous reporting period (e.g., for the FFY 2018 SPP/APR, the FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.60%98.23%84.90%82.85%96.19%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 disabilitiProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances reasons for untimely tra1100FFY 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 each local system with a fi8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data89.27%91.34%92.48%93.16%96.39%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 priYESWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS p1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianIn order to verify correction of noncompliance on Indicators 8A, 8B and 8C, the State Lead Agency selected a random sam8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.60%97.90%88.62%79.01%97.43%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 tDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. Data for FFY 2018 is based on monitoring data from all 2200FFY 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 each local system with a fiFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe initial reasons for noncompliance continued for this local system: misuIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repMeasurementPercent = ((2.1(a)(i) + 2.1(b)(i)) divided by 2.1) times 100.InstructionsSampling from the State's 618 data SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputVirginia has not reached the OSEP-identified threshold (10 mediations in a yeaFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%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 Taemic Improvement Plan The State did not submit 508 compliant attachments. Non-compliant attac04/22/20 3:29:15 PMED Attachment EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.DoPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with 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 (SSIP)The State's timeliness measure for this indicator must be either: (1) a time period that runs from when the parent consFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.02%96.35%98.60%97.24%96.94%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage61383696.94%100%96.77%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributableExceptional family circumstances that resulted in untimely services included child/family ill, family scheduling prefer2101FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancActions taken if noncompliance not correctedFor the one local system with noncompliance not yet corrected, noncomplianc1 - 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>=98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%Data99.76%99.80%98.71%99.92%99.96%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=98.00%98.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as theDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or co07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs10,766FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-ba2 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Rb. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparableHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12018Target>=69.50%69.50%69.50%64.10%64.10%A164.07%Data69.48%65.14%64.07%66.05%66.28%A22018Target>=66.40%66.40%66.40%63.30%63.30%A263.28%Data66.43%64.47%63.28%60.71%60.05%B12018Target>=74.70%74.70%74.7%68.30%68.30%B168.29%Data74.73%71.29%68.29%70.10%69.96%B22018Target>=55.30%55.30%55.30%51.51.50%B251.53%Data55.27%53.0%51.53%49.62%48.69%C12018Target>=78.70%78.70%78.70%70.70%70.70%C170.69%Data78.74%73.37%70.69%70.38%70.16%C22018Target>=56.40%56.40%56.40%55.20%55.20%C255.23%Data56.43%55.46%55.23%53.84%54.10TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=66.00%64.94%Target A2>=65.00%57.55%Target B1>=70.00%68.74%Target B2>=54.00%46.93%Target C1>=73.00%68.57%Target C2>=57.00%50.74% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,891Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.16%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 it1,18017.12%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,05329.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,91227.75%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 su57.54%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable Anecdotal data suggests that the most la. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning90.13%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 it1,77625.77%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,36134.26%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers87212.65%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Provide reasons for B1 slippage, if applicableAlthough Virginia's results declined from the previous year for Indicatora. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning80.12%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 it1,49421.69%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,65038.47%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers84512.27%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C,SlippageProvide reasons for C1 slippage, if applicable Please see A1.Provide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable PleThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State has revised the baseline for this indicator, using data from FFY 2018, and OSEP accepts thatProvide the actual numbers used in the calculation.Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to 76.40%76.40%76.40%A72.30%Data76.44%75.59%77.47%79.55%76.01%B2011Target>=73.20%74.40%74.40%74.40%74.40%B70.30%Data74.39%72.10%74.57%75.65%74.34%C2011Target>=84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%C81.90%Data83.87%85.44%85.70%88.66%85.74%TargeFFY20182019Target A>=80.00%76.12%Target B>=77.00%73.59%Target C>=88.00%85.44%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the primary stNumber of respondent families participating in Part C 1,844A1. 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? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Virginia's IndicatoIf 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 t The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required Actions4 - 20050.51%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.03%1.20%1.20%1.20%1.20%Data1.20%1.05%1.47%1.38%1.50%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.26%1.58%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 199,261FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,57099,2611.50%1.2 The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.88%2.76%2.76%2.76%2.89%Data2.76%2.87%2.97%3.18%3.29%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.89%3.54%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 3304,143FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage10,766304,1433.29%26 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Requir200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data91.83%98.99%99.56%99.91%97.51%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 DataStatusSlippage1,7332,37197.51%100%99.70%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber oProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances that resulted in delays 1100FFY 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 ResponseThe State reported that it used data from a State database to reportIndicator 8A: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision If the State reported less than 100% compliance for the previous reporting period (e.g., for the FFY 2018 SPP/APR, the FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.60%98.23%84.90%82.85%96.19%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 disabilitiProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances reasons for untimely tra1100FFY 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 each local system with a fi8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data89.27%91.34%92.48%93.16%96.39%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 priYESWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS p1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianIn order to verify correction of noncompliance on Indicators 8A, 8B and 8C, the State Lead Agency selected a random sam8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.60%97.90%88.62%79.01%97.43%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 tDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. Data for FFY 2018 is based on monitoring data from all 2200FFY 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 each local system with a fiFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe initial reasons for noncompliance continued for this local system: misuIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repMeasurementPercent = ((2.1(a)(i) + 2.1(b)(i)) divided by 2.1) times 100.InstructionsSampling from the State's 618 data SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputVirginia has not reached the OSEP-identified threshold (10 mediations in a yeaFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%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 Taemic Improvement Plan The State did not submit 508 compliant attachments. Non-compliant attac04/22/20 3:29:15 PMED Attachment EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.DoPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with 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 (SSIP)The State's timeliness measure for this indicator must be either: (1) a time period that runs from when the parent consFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.02%96.35%98.60%97.24%96.94%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage61383696.94%100%96.77%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributableExceptional family circumstances that resulted in untimely services included child/family ill, family scheduling prefer2101FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancActions taken if noncompliance not correctedFor the one local system with noncompliance not yet corrected, noncomplianc1 - 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>=98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%Data99.76%99.80%98.71%99.92%99.96%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=98.00%98.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as theDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or co07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs10,766FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-ba2 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Rb. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparableHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12018Target>=69.50%69.50%69.50%64.10%64.10%A164.07%Data69.48%65.14%64.07%66.05%66.28%A22018Target>=66.40%66.40%66.40%63.30%63.30%A263.28%Data66.43%64.47%63.28%60.71%60.05%B12018Target>=74.70%74.70%74.7%68.30%68.30%B168.29%Data74.73%71.29%68.29%70.10%69.96%B22018Target>=55.30%55.30%55.30%51.51.50%B251.53%Data55.27%53.0%51.53%49.62%48.69%C12018Target>=78.70%78.70%78.70%70.70%70.70%C170.69%Data78.74%73.37%70.69%70.38%70.16%C22018Target>=56.40%56.40%56.40%55.20%55.20%C255.23%Data56.43%55.46%55.23%53.84%54.10TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=66.00%64.94%Target A2>=65.00%57.55%Target B1>=70.00%68.74%Target B2>=54.00%46.93%Target C1>=73.00%68.57%Target C2>=57.00%50.74% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,891Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.16%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 it1,18017.12%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,05329.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,91227.75%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 su57.54%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable Anecdotal data suggests that the most la. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning90.13%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 it1,77625.77%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,36134.26%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers87212.65%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Provide reasons for B1 slippage, if applicableAlthough Virginia's results declined from the previous year for Indicatora. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning80.12%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 it1,49421.69%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,65038.47%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers84512.27%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C,SlippageProvide reasons for C1 slippage, if applicable Please see A1.Provide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable PleThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State has revised the baseline for this indicator, using data from FFY 2018, and OSEP accepts thatProvide the actual numbers used in the calculation.Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to 76.40%76.40%76.40%A72.30%Data76.44%75.59%77.47%79.55%76.01%B2011Target>=73.20%74.40%74.40%74.40%74.40%B70.30%Data74.39%72.10%74.57%75.65%74.34%C2011Target>=84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%C81.90%Data83.87%85.44%85.70%88.66%85.74%TargeFFY20182019Target A>=80.00%76.12%Target B>=77.00%73.59%Target C>=88.00%85.44%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the primary stNumber of respondent families participating in Part C 1,844A1. 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? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Virginia's IndicatoIf 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 t The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required Actions4 - 20050.51%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.03%1.20%1.20%1.20%1.20%Data1.20%1.05%1.47%1.38%1.50%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.26%1.58%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 199,261FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,57099,2611.50%1.2 The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.88%2.76%2.76%2.76%2.89%Data2.76%2.87%2.97%3.18%3.29%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.89%3.54%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 3304,143FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage10,766304,1433.29%26 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Requir200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data91.83%98.99%99.56%99.91%97.51%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 DataStatusSlippage1,7332,37197.51%100%99.70%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber oProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances that resulted in delays 1100FFY 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 ResponseThe State reported that it used data from a State database to reportIndicator 8A: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision If the State reported less than 100% compliance for the previous reporting period (e.g., for the FFY 2018 SPP/APR, the FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.60%98.23%84.90%82.85%96.19%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 disabilitiProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances reasons for untimely tra1100FFY 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 each local system with a fi8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data89.27%91.34%92.48%93.16%96.39%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 priYESWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS p1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianIn order to verify correction of noncompliance on Indicators 8A, 8B and 8C, the State Lead Agency selected a random sam8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.60%97.90%88.62%79.01%97.43%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 tDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. Data for FFY 2018 is based on monitoring data from all 2200FFY 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 each local system with a fiFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe initial reasons for noncompliance continued for this local system: misuIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repMeasurementPercent = ((2.1(a)(i) + 2.1(b)(i)) divided by 2.1) times 100.InstructionsSampling from the State's 618 data SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputVirginia has not reached the OSEP-identified threshold (10 mediations in a yeaFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%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 Taemic Improvement Plan The State did not submit 508 compliant attachments. Non-compliant attac04/22/20 3:29:15 PMED Attachment EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.DoPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part CState Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report:Part CforSTATE FORMULA GRANT PROGRAMSunder theIndividuals with 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 (SSIP)The State's timeliness measure for this indicator must be either: (1) a time period that runs from when the parent consFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.02%96.35%98.60%97.24%96.94%TargetsFFY20182019Target100%100%FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on tFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage61383696.94%100%96.77%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber of documented delays attributableExceptional family circumstances that resulted in untimely services included child/family ill, family scheduling prefer2101FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncompliancActions taken if noncompliance not correctedFor the one local system with noncompliance not yet corrected, noncomplianc1 - 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>=98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%98.00%Data99.76%99.80%98.71%99.92%99.96%TargetsFFY20182019Target>=98.00%98.00%Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputThe Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as theDateDescriptionDataSY 2018-19 Child Count/Educational Environment Data Groups07/10/2019Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or co07/10/2019Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs10,766FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who primarily receive early intervention services in the home or community-ba2 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 2 - Rb. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparableHistorical DataBaselineFFY20132014201520162017A12018Target>=69.50%69.50%69.50%64.10%64.10%A164.07%Data69.48%65.14%64.07%66.05%66.28%A22018Target>=66.40%66.40%66.40%63.30%63.30%A263.28%Data66.43%64.47%63.28%60.71%60.05%B12018Target>=74.70%74.70%74.7%68.30%68.30%B168.29%Data74.73%71.29%68.29%70.10%69.96%B22018Target>=55.30%55.30%55.30%51.51.50%B251.53%Data55.27%53.0%51.53%49.62%48.69%C12018Target>=78.70%78.70%78.70%70.70%70.70%C170.69%Data78.74%73.37%70.69%70.38%70.16%C22018Target>=56.40%56.40%56.40%55.20%55.20%C255.23%Data56.43%55.46%55.23%53.84%54.10TargetsFFY20182019Target A1>=66.00%64.94%Target A2>=65.00%57.55%Target B1>=70.00%68.74%Target B2>=54.00%46.93%Target C1>=73.00%68.57%Target C2>=57.00%50.74% FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed6,891Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skillNumber of childrenPercentage of Totala. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning110.16%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 it1,18017.12%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,05329.79%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers1,91227.75%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 su57.54%Did Not Meet TargetSlippageProvide reasons for A1 slippage, if applicable Anecdotal data suggests that the most la. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning90.13%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 it1,77625.77%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,36134.26%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers87212.65%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageB1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B,Provide reasons for B1 slippage, if applicableAlthough Virginia's results declined from the previous year for Indicatora. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning80.12%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 it1,49421.69%d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers2,65038.47%e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers84512.27%NumeratorDenominatorFFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippageC1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C,SlippageProvide reasons for C1 slippage, if applicable Please see A1.Provide reasons for C2 slippage, if applicable PleThe number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months beforeWas sampling used? NODid you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? (yes/no)YESList the in3 - OSEP ResponseThe State has revised the baseline for this indicator, using data from FFY 2018, and OSEP accepts thatProvide the actual numbers used in the calculation.Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to 76.40%76.40%76.40%A72.30%Data76.44%75.59%77.47%79.55%76.01%B2011Target>=73.20%74.40%74.40%74.40%74.40%B70.30%Data74.39%72.10%74.57%75.65%74.34%C2011Target>=84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%84.90%C81.90%Data83.87%85.44%85.70%88.66%85.74%TargeFFY20182019Target A>=80.00%76.12%Target B>=77.00%73.59%Target C>=88.00%85.44%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the primary stNumber of respondent families participating in Part C 1,844A1. 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? YESIf yes, has your previously-approved sampling plan changed? NODescribe the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. Virginia's IndicatoIf 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 t The State provided targets for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts those targets. 4 - Required Actions4 - 20050.51%FFY20132014201520162017Target >=1.03%1.20%1.20%1.20%1.20%Data1.20%1.05%1.47%1.38%1.50%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=1.26%1.58%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 199,261FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 1 with Population of infants and toddlers birth to 1FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage1,57099,2611.50%1.2 The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 5 - Required ActionsIndicaFFY20132014201520162017Target >=2.88%2.76%2.76%2.76%2.89%Data2.76%2.87%2.97%3.18%3.29%TargetsFFY20182019Target >=2.89%3.54%Targets: Description of Stakeholder Input The Virginia Interagency Coordinating Council (VICC) served as the SourceDateDescriptionDataSY 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 3304,143FFY 2018 SPP/APR DataNumber of infants and toddlers birth to 3 withPopulation of infants and toddlers birth to 3FFY 2017 DataFFY 2018 TargetFFY 2018 DataStatusSlippage10,766304,1433.29%26 - OSEP Response The State provided a target for FFY 2019 for this indicator, and OSEP accepts that target. 6 - Requir200598.00%FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data91.83%98.99%99.56%99.91%97.51%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 DataStatusSlippage1,7332,37197.51%100%99.70%Did Not Meet TargetNo SlippageNumber oProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances that resulted in delays 1100FFY 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 ResponseThe State reported that it used data from a State database to reportIndicator 8A: Early Childhood TransitionInstructions and MeasurementMonitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision If the State reported less than 100% compliance for the previous reporting period (e.g., for the FFY 2018 SPP/APR, the FFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data99.60%98.23%84.90%82.85%96.19%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 disabilitiProvide additional information about this indicator (optional)Exceptional family circumstances reasons for untimely tra1100FFY 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 each local system with a fi8A - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8A - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data89.27%91.34%92.48%93.16%96.39%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 priYESWhat is the source of the data provided for this indicator? State monitoringDescribe the method used to select EIS p1100FFY 2017 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as CorrectedDescribe how the State verified that the source of noncomplianIn order to verify correction of noncompliance on Indicators 8A, 8B and 8C, the State Lead Agency selected a random sam8B - Prior FFY Required ActionsNone8B - OSEP ResponseBecause the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2018, the State must report on the sDescribe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect theFFY20132014201520162017Target 100%100%100%100%100%Data98.60%97.90%88.62%79.01%97.43%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 tDescribe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. Data for FFY 2018 is based on monitoring data from all 2200FFY 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 each local system with a fiFFY 2016101FFY 2016Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as CorrectedActions taken if noncompliance not correctedThe initial reasons for noncompliance continued for this local system: misuIf the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the State's 618 data, explain.States are not required to repMeasurementPercent = ((2.1(a)(i) + 2.1(b)(i)) divided by 2.1) times 100.InstructionsSampling from the State's 618 data SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1 Mediations held0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey; Section B: Mediation Requests11/11/20192.1.a.i Mediations agreements related to due process complaints0SY 2018-19 EMAPS IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey11/11/20192.1.b.i Mediations agreements not related to due process complaints0Targets: Description of Stakeholder InputVirginia has not reached the OSEP-identified threshold (10 mediations in a yeaFFY20132014201520162017Target>=Data100.00%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 Taemic Improvement Plan The State did not submit 508 compliant attachments. Non-compliant attac04/22/20 3:29:15 PMED Attachment EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.Document.DC EMBED AcroExch.DoPrepopulated data from other sourcesCalculatedExplanatory textOctober 2018 PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 1Instructions PAGE * MERGEFORMAT 5Part C
(Grant Year 2018–2019 — Issued June 23, 2020)
How the department made determinations
idea_file-template-default single single-idea_file postid-80866 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