2023 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters, Part B — Bureau of Indian Education
2023 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters, Part B — Bureau of Indian Education
PDF2023 SPP/APR Submission, Part B — Bureau of Indian Education
MS WORD (.docx)View PDF
2023 SPP/APR and State Determination Letters, Part B — Bureau of Indian Education
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
J une 2 3 , 20 2 3
Honorable Tony Dearman
Director
Bureau of Indian Education, U.S. Department of Interior
1849 C Street Northwest, MS - 3609 MIB
Washin gton , BIE 20240
Dear Director Dearman :
I am writing to advise you of the U.S. Department of Education ’ s (Department) 202 3
determination un der Section 616 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The
Department has determined that Bureau of Indian Education needs intervention in implementing
the requirements of Part B of the IDEA. This determination is based on the totality of Bureau of
Indian Education ’s data and information, including th e Federal fiscal year (FFY) 20 2 1 State
Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR), other State - reported data, and other
public ly available information.
The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) is continuing to use both results and
compliance data in making determinations for outlying areas, freely associated States , and the
Bureau of Indian Education (the Entities) in 202 3 , as it did for determinations in 20 2 2 . 1
Bureau
of Indian Education ’ s 202 3 determination is based on the dat a reflected in Bureau of Indian
Education ’s “ 202 3 Part B Results - Driven Accountability Matrix” (RDA Matrix). The RDA
Matrix is individualized for each Entity and consists of:
(1) a Compliance Matrix that includes scoring on Compliance Indicators and other
comp liance factors;
(2) a Results Matrix that includes 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
1
For the 2023 determinations, OSEP is using results data on the participation and performance of children with
disabilities on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) for the 50 States, the District of Columbia,
and Puerto Rico. Starting in 2 023, OSEP is using the NAEP data in making Puerto Rico’s determination (as indicated
in the 2022 determination letters to States and Entities). OSEP did not use NAEP data in making the BIE’s 2023
determination because the NAEP data available for the BIE we re not comparable to the NAEP data available for the 50
States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico; specifically, the most recently administered NAEP for the BIE is
2019, whereas the most recently administered NAEP for the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico is
2022.
Page 2— Chief State School Officer
(5) Bureau of Indian Education ’s Determination.
The RDA Matrix is further explained in a document, entitled “ How the Department Made
Determinations under Section 616(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 2023:
Freely Associated States, Outlying Areas, and the Bureau of Indian Educat ion -Part B ”
(HTDMD).
The specifics of the determin ation procedures and criteria are set forth in the HTDMD document
and reflected in the RDA Matrix for Bureau of Indian Education . In maki ng Part B
determina tions in 202 3, OSEP continued to use results data related to:
(1) the participation of children with disabilities (CWD) on Regular statewide assessments;
(2) the percentage of CWD who graduated with a regular high school diploma; and
(3) the percentage of CWD who drop ped out.
Prior to issuing the 2023 determinations, the Department asked stakeholders for input regarding
how the Department might prioritize equity and improve results for infants, tod dlers , children
and youth with disabilities. OSEP received input through a variety of sources. For its 2023
determinations, OSEP has factored only programmatic (not Department -wide) specific
conditions when scoring the Longstanding Noncompliance element of the Compliance Matrix.
Also, while Indicator 4B (significant discrepancy, by race or ethnicity, in rates of suspension and
expulsion for children with disabilities) continued to be a factor in each Entity’s 2023
Compliance Matrix, no Entity’s 2023 determi nation was negatively impacted due solely to its
Indicator 4B data.
For 2024 and beyond, the Department is considering the weight of existing as well as potential
additional factors in making its determinations as part of its continuing effort to prioriti ze equity
and improve results for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities. Potential
additional factors include how the Department considers assessment data, such as whether to
continue including data on the participation and proficiency o f CWD on the NAEP and/or
whether to include data on the proficiency of CWD on Statewide assessments. Other potential
factors include whether and how to consider child find under Indicators C -5 and C -6 and/or other
longstanding noncompliance (such as unreso lved findings issued by OSEP during and prior to
FFY 2020).
Starting with the 2022 -23 data submitted to EDFacts, States or Entities will submit the majority
of the IDEA Section 618 data collections (i.e., Part B Child Count and Educational
Environments, P art B Personnel, Part B Exiting, Part B Discipline, and Part B Assessment) via
the new EDPass system. The Part B Dispute Resolution and the Part B Maintenance of Effort
Reduction and Coordinated Early intervening Services data will continue to be submitted via
EMAPS.
The 2022 -23 IDEA Section 618 Part B data will continue to prepopulate the Part B SPP/APR
Indicators 3, 5, and 6 as they have in the past. However, please note that there will be changes to
the data submission and data quality processes associat ed with the 2022 -23 IDEA Section 618
Part B data under EDFacts Modernization. Under EDFacts Modernization, States or Entities are
expected to submit high -quality IDEA Section 618 Part B data that can be published and used by
the Department as of the due da te for the applicable IDEA Section 618 data submission. Starting
with the 2022 -23 IDEA Section 618 Part B data, States or Entities will be expected to conduct
data quality reviews prior to the applicable due date. OSEP will expect States or Entities to tak e
Page 3— Chief State School Officer
one of the following two actions for all business rules that are triggered in the EDPass or
EMAPS system prior to the applicable due date: 1) revise the uploaded data to address the edit;
or 2) provide a data note addressing why the data submission trigg ered the business rule. Please
note that States or Entities will be unable to submit the IDEA Section 618 Part B data to the
Department without taking one of these two actions. There will not be a resubmission period for
the IDEA Section 618 Part B data. T he 2022 -23 IDEA Section 618 Part B data submitted as of
the applicable due date will be used for the FFY 2022 SPP/APR and the 2024 IDEA Part B
Results Matrix.
You may access the results of OSEP’s review of Bureau of Indian Education ’s SPP/AP R and
other relevant data by accessing the EMAP S SPP/APR reporting t ool using your Entity -specific
log -on information at https://emaps.ed.gov/suite/ . When you access your Entity ’s SPP/APR on
the site, you will find , in applicable Indicators 1 through 1 7, the OSEP Response to the indicator
and any actions that the Entity is required to take. The actions that the Entit y 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) Bureau of Indian Education ’s RDA Matrix;
(2) the HTDMD document;
(3) a spreadsheet entitled “ 202 3 Data Rubric Part B,” which shows how OSEP calculated
Bureau of Indian Education “Timely and Accurate State -Reported Data” score in the
Compliance Matrix; and
(4) a document e ntitled “Dispute Resolution 20 21-20 22,” which includes the IDEA Secti on
618 data that OSEP used to calcula te Bureau of Indian Education ’s “Timely State
Complaint Decisions” and “Timely Due Process Hearing Decisions” scores in the
Compliance Matrix .
As noted above, the Department has determined that Bureau of Indian Education needs
intervention in implementing the requirements of Part B of IDEA. The Department identifies a
State or Entity as needing intervention under IDEA Part B if its RDA Percentage is l ess than
60%. Bureau of Indian Education ’s R DA Percentage is 50%.
As noted above, the Department has determined that the BIE needs intervention in implementing
the requirements of Part B of IDEA. The Department identifies a State or Entity as needing
intervention under IDEA Part B if its RDA Percentage is less than 60%. The BIE ’s RDA
Percentage is 50%. As explained below , the major factors contributing to the BIE ’s 2023 Needs
Intervention determination are: (1) the BIE ’s low performance under Indicator 13 (secondary
transition requirements); (2) the BIE ’s RDA score of zero for the exiting data elements; and (3)
the BIE ’s longstanding noncompliance.
I. Major Factors Contributing to the BIE ’s 2023 RDA Needs Intervention Determination
A. Low Performance under Indicator 13
Page 4— Chief State School Officer
The data that the BIE provided in its FFY 2021 SPP/APR demonstrate continued noncompliance
with the secondary transition requirements in IDEA section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII) and 34
C.F.R.§§ 300.320(b) and 300.321(b). Under Indicator 13, the Bureau of Indian Education was
required to provide data on the percent of youth with individualized education programs (IEPs)
aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes appropriate measurable postsecondary goals that are
annually updated and based upon an age appropriate transition assessment, transition services,
including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those postsecondary
goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student’s transition services needs. There also must be
evide nce that the student was invited to the IEP Team meeting where transition services were to
be discussed and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency was
invited to the IEP Team meeting with the prior consent of the parent or student who has reached
the age of majority. In its FFY 2021 SPP/APR, the BIE ’s reported FFY 2021 data for Indicator
13 were 46.75 percent. The BIE ’s low level of compliance with the secondary transition
requirements has been a needs intervention factor and/or a Special or Specific Condition 2 since
June 2016. Because the BIE did not ensure compliance with the secondary transition
requirements, the Department continued to impose Special or Specific Conditions on the Bureau
of Ind ian Education’s FFY 2017 through FFY 2022, IDEA Part B grant awards in this area. In
OSEP’s 2017 through 2022 determination letters to the BIE , pursuant to IDEA section
616(e)(2)(B)(i), the Secretary required the BIE to submit a corrective action plan (CAP ) that
addressed the actions the BIE would take to demonstrate compliance with the secondary
transition requirements.
B. RDA Score of Zero for Certain Results Elements
The BIE ’s 2023 RDA Percentage is 50 percent, which consists of 60 percent of the BIE’s
Compliance Score and 40 percent of the BIE ’s Results Score. In the 2023 Part B Results Matrix,
the BIE received a score of zero for both exiting data elements (i.e., the percentage of children
with disabilities who dropped out over the previous three reporting years, and the percentage of
children with disabilities who graduated with a regular high school diploma over the previous
thr ee reporting years). As demonstrated by the IDEA Section 618 exiting data reported by the
BIE , a high percentage of students with disabilities drop out of BIE -funded schools, and a low
percentage of students with disabilities graduate from BIE -funded schoo ls with a regular high
school diploma (See Results Matrix). This means that many of the BIE ’s students with
disabilities leaving school are not adequately prepared for further education, employment, and
independent living.
C. Longstanding Noncompliance
The Department has imposed Special or Specific Conditions on the BIE ’s last 16 (FFY 2007
through FFY 2022) IDEA Part B grant awards, and the BIE has failed to meet the Specific
Conditions imposed on its FFY 2022 IDEA Part B grant award. OSEP determined that the BIE
2 Pursuant to the requirements in 2 C.F.R. § 200.20 8, the term “Specific Condition” is used, rather than “Special
Condition,” beginning with FFY 2018 IDEA Part B grant awards that are issued subject to additional requirements.
In this letter, the term “Special Conditions” is used when referencing the BIE’s IDEA Part B grant awa rds and
required reporting associated with the receipt of those funds for years prior to FFY 2018.
Page 5— Chief State School Officer
failed to complete all of the corrective actions contained in Section C of its 2022 -2023 CAP.
Those corrective actions, which the BIE was required to complete under the Specific Conditions
imposed on its FFY 2022 IDEA Part B grant award, required the BIE to: (1) adopt final policies
and procedures related to implementation of IDE A Part B consistent with IDEA Sections
611(h)(2)(A) and 612(a) and 34 C.F.R. § 300.708(a); (2) ensure timely correction of findings of
noncompliance identified in monitoring reports; (3) issue annual determinations on the
performance of all BIE -funded scho ols, consistent with IDEA Sections 611(h)(2)(A) and 616(a)
and (e) and 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.600(a)(2), 300.708(d), and 300.716; (4) demonstrate that the BIE
has revised and implemented its dispute resolution procedures and practices to be consistent with
IDEA Section 615(f)(1)(B) and (k)(3) and 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.510(a), (b), and (c), 300.515(a),
300.532(a) and (c)(2), and 300.716; (5) update and implement the corrective action plan that
addresses the actions the BIE will take to address the noncompliance with se condary transition
requirements in IDEA Section 614(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII) and 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.320(b) and
300.321(b) and improve the accuracy of the secondary transition data; and (6) ensure that all
students with disabilities enrolled in San Felipe Pueblo Ele mentary School and other BIE -funded
schools received related services in accordance with their IEPs and any compensatory services
determined necessary by the IEP Teams, as required by IDEA Section 612(a)(1) and 34 C.F.R.
§§ 300.320 and 300.323(c)(2), and t hat all initial evaluations are conducted within 60 days of
receiving parental consent for the evaluation in accordance with 34 C.F.R. § 300.301(c)(1).
Pursuant to Section 616(d)(2)(B) of the IDEA and 34 C .F.R. § 300.603(b)(2), a n Entity that is
determined to be “need intervention” or “need substantial intervention” and does not agree with
this determination, may request an opportunity to meet with the Assistant Secretary to
demonstrate why the Department should ch ange the Entity ’s determination. To request a hearing,
submit a letter to : Glenna Wright -Gallo , the Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20202 withi n 15 days of the date of this letter. The letter must include the basis
for your request for a change in your Entity’s determination.
As a reminder, Bureau of Indian Education must report annually to the public, by posting on
your agency’s website , the performance of each local educational agency (LEA) located in the
State on the targets in t he SPP/APR as soon as practicable, but no later than 120 days after the
Bureau of Indian Education submission of its FFY 20 21 SPP/APR. In addition, Bureau of Indian
Education must:
(1) review LEA performance against targets in the Bureau of Indian Education ’s SPP/APR;
(2) determine if each LEA “meets the requirements” of Part B, or “needs assistance,” “needs
intervention,” or “needs substantial intervention” in implementing Part B of the IDEA ;
(3) take appropriate enforcement action; and
(4) inform each LEA of its determination.
Further , Bureau of Indian Education must make its SPP/APR available to the public by posting it
on your agency’s web site. Within the next upcoming weeks , OSEP will be finalizing an Entity
Profile that:
Page 6— Chief State School Officer
(1) includes the Entity ’s determination letter and SPP/APR, OSEP attachments, and all Entity
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 Bureau of Indian Education ’s efforts to improve results for children and youth
with disabilities and looks forward to working with Bureau of Indian Education over the next
year as we continue our important work of improving the lives o f children with disabilities and
their f amilies. Please contact your OSEP State Lead i f you have any questions, would like to
discuss this further, or want to request technical assistance.
Sincerely,
/s/
Valerie Williams
Director
Office of Special Education Programs
cc: Bureau of Indian Education Director o f Special Education
(Grant Year 2021–2022 — Issued June 23, 2023)
How the department made determinations (Entities)
idea_file-template-default single single-idea_file postid-88801 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 August 17, 2023