1 / 16

The New Oregon Trail

The New Oregon Trail. Focus on Results in Correcting Noncompliance. Rethinking Corrections. Determinations - Which standards? Reasons for Corrections Types of Corrections Avoiding Overkill Aligning Errors and Corrections File review criteria ≠ Corrections

ebony
Télécharger la présentation

The New Oregon Trail

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The New Oregon Trail Focus on Results in Correcting Noncompliance

  2. Rethinking Corrections • Determinations - Which standards? • Reasons for Corrections • Types of Corrections • Avoiding Overkill • Aligning Errors and Corrections • File review criteria ≠ Corrections • Corrected? How do you know?

  3. School Year 2007-2008 CORRECTION REQUIRED • Repeated noncompliance from previous years • Noncompliance in standards related to: • Extended School Year (ESY) • Nonparticipation justification • Secondary transition IEP Content • Statewide assessment • Any new instances of noncompliance

  4. Targeted Standards • Selected for alignment with IDEA monitoring priorities and outcomes (SPP) • Stateactions that must occur on behalf of children and families • Linked to other actions and processes: such as referral, evaluation, eligibility determination, IEP development, placement that lead to the provision of FAPE

  5. Reasons for Correction • To ensure a free appropriate public education is provided the child in accordance with IDEA • To prevent future instances of the noncompliance

  6. Rethinking Corrections • Systemic and individual corrections • Identifying underlying and related causes • Assurances vs. evidence • Efforts vs. outcomes and results • Correction impossible (timelines) - now what? • Verifying sustained corrections

  7. Standard– Procedural safeguards are made available to parents upon initial referral.....(Not Met – 3rd Year) • No documentation was in the file that the parents had received Procedural Safeguards. Our district forms and notifications contain check-off boxes to document that the safeguards are sent to parents. In addition, the safeguards are offered to parents at every meeting and documented in the notes.

  8. Assurances Efforts The District reviewed the standard and now provides Procedural Safeguards as required. The District provided training to staff on the requirements. Standard – Procedural safeguards are made available to parents upon initial referral.

  9. Description of process Evidence of results Adds details to the “assurance;” useful in problem solving Identify the date of the correction efforts such as training. Review documents completed after that time. In measurable terms, what are the results? Trend data? Standard – Procedural safeguards are made available to parents upon initial referral

  10. Missed Timeline Think out of the box - check the SPR&I file review guidance document: which year’s document must you review? Cannot “correct” individual timeline error, but might be able to address content What is the context? Is the most recent evaluation an initial evaluation? Is this a transfer student? Procedural safeguards are made available to parents upon initial referral

  11. What is your evidence?

  12. Corrected – How do you know? Consider – A check-box is not evidence. Are you sure everyone knows when procedural safeguards must be provided? Are you sure everyone (including new staff) knows the process in your district? As the director, what data do you receive that lets you know the process is working?

  13. Written parental consent is obtained before evaluation or reevaluation (3rd Year – Not Met) District has provided training to all staff and directed case managers to obtain consent. What next?

  14. Parents receive progress reports at the time indicated on the IEP....(Not Met – 3rd Year) • Progress reporting was not happening systematically in the district. We have reviewed the requirement with staff and shared examples of performance reporting. We have also implemented an accountability system to assure that progress reporting is happening in a timely manner. In December (2006) we provided additional training on progress reporting and data collection to document progress toward meeting IEP goals. Additional training has been provided on progress reporting using the Special EdVantage system. Administration has monitored that progress reports are systematically being sent to parents.

  15. A copy of the evaluation/eligibility report is given to parents....Is this a correction? • Our district procedures were reviewed with staff. Our preference is to have copies of all reports available to parents at the IEP or eligibility meeting. Since we rely on ESD specialists to provide some reports, they are not always available. District-wide the procedure is to mail reports to parents within 10 days of the meeting. This includes reports that must be translated for parents. WE have reviewed these procedures with district staff and requested that ESD staff follow our procedures. Our meeting notes now contain check boxes to document that reports were provided to parents.

  16. Rethinking Corrections • Determinations - Which standards? • Reasons for Corrections • Types of Corrections • Avoiding Overkill • Aligning Errors and Corrections • File review criteria ≠ Corrections • Corrected? YES!!!

More Related