+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| **Monitoring   | **Status of APR Data/SPP        | **OSEP            |
| Priorities and | Revision Issues**               | Analysis/Next     |
| Indicators**   |                                 | Steps**           |
+================+=================================+===================+
| 1.  Percent of | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP's June 15,   |
|     youth with | data for this indicator are     | 2007 FFY 2005     |
|     IEPs       | 66.42%. These data represent    | SPP/APR response  |
|     graduating | slippage from the FFY 2005 data | table required    |
|     from high  | of 69.87% (also reported in the | the State to      |
|     school     | FFY 2006 APR).                  | report graduation |
|     with a     |                                 | rates for the     |
|     regular    | The State did not meet its FFY  | class of 2006     |
|     diploma    | 2006 target of 74%.             | (FFY 2005) in the |
|     compared   |                                 | FFY 2006 APR, due |
|     to percent |                                 | February 1,       |
|     of all     |                                 | 2008). The State  |
|     youth in   |                                 | provided the      |
|     the State  |                                 | required          |
|     graduating |                                 | information for   |
|     with a     |                                 | FFY 2005 and FFY  |
|     regular    |                                 | 2006.             |
|     diploma.   |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 | OSEP appreciates  |
| \[Results      |                                 | the State's       |
| Indicator\]    |                                 | efforts to        |
|                |                                 | improve           |
|                |                                 | performance and   |
|                |                                 | looks forward to  |
|                |                                 | the State's data  |
|                |                                 | demonstrating     |
|                |                                 | improvement in    |
|                |                                 | performance in    |
|                |                                 | the FFY 2007 APR, |
|                |                                 | due February 1,   |
|                |                                 | 2009.             |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 2.  Percent of | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP's June 15,   |
|     youth with | data for this indicator are     | 2007 FFY 2005     |
|     IEPs       | 5.51%. These data represent     | SPP/APR response  |
|     dropping   | slippage from the FFY 2005 data | table required    |
|     out of     | of 5.2% (also reported in the   | the State to      |
|     high       | FFY 2006 APR).                  | report dropout    |
|     school     |                                 | rates for FFY     |
|     compared   | The State met its FFY 2006      | 2005 in the FFY   |
|     to the     | target of 7.4%.                 | 2006 APR, due     |
|     percent of |                                 | February 1, 2008. |
|     all youth  |                                 | The State         |
|     in the     |                                 | provided the      |
|     State      |                                 | required          |
|     dropping   |                                 | information for   |
|     out of     |                                 | FFY 2005 and FFY  |
|     high       |                                 | 2006.             |
|     school.    |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 | OSEP appreciates  |
| \[Results      |                                 | the State's       |
| Indicator\]    |                                 | efforts to        |
|                |                                 | improve           |
|                |                                 | performance.      |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 3\.            | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| Participation  | data for this indicator are:    | the State's       |
| and            |                                 | efforts to        |
| performance of |   ---                           | improve           |
| children with  | --------- --------- -------- -- | performance and   |
| disabilities   | ------ ------- ------- -------- | looks forward to  |
| on statewide   |   Gra                           | the State's data  |
| assessments:   | de        FFY 2005  FFY 2006 FF | demonstrating     |
|                | Y 2006 FFY     FFY     FFY 2006 | improvement in    |
| A. Percent of  |                                 | performance in    |
| districts that |             Data      Data      | the FFY 2007 APR, |
| have a         | Target   2005    2006    Target | due February 1,   |
| disability     |                                 | 2009.             |
| subgroup that  |                Data    Data     |                   |
| meets the      |                                 |                   |
| State's        |                Reading          |                   |
| minimum "n"    |                Math             |                   |
| size meeting   |                                 |                   |
| the State's    |   Elementary   92.8%     53.3%  |                   |
| AYP objectives |    42%      100%    71.4%   33% |                   |
| for progress   |                                 |                   |
| for disability |   Middle       75%       31.25% |                   |
| subgroup.      |    42%      93.4%   25%     33% |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
| \[Results      |   High         55.5%     44.4%  |                   |
| Indicator\]    |    57%      66.7%   44.4%   43% |                   |
|                |   ---                           |                   |
|                | --------- --------- -------- -- |                   |
|                | ------ ------- ------- -------- |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                | These data represent slippage   |                   |
|                | from the FFY 2005 data.         |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                | The State met its FFY 2006      |                   |
|                | target for elementary reading   |                   |
|                | and math and high school math,  |                   |
|                | but did not meet its other      |                   |
|                | targets.                        |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 3\.            | The State revised the targets   | OSEP's June 15,   |
| Participation  | for this indicator to address   | 2007 FFY 2005     |
| and            | additional grades for FFY 2007  | SPP/APR response  |
| performance of | through 2010 as required in the | table required    |
| children with  | FFY 2005 response table.        | the State to      |
| disabilities   | Stakeholders were involved in   | include in the    |
| on statewide   | this process.                   | FFY 2006 APR, due |
| assessments:   |                                 | February 1, 2008, |
|                | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | targets           |
| B.             | data for this indicator are:    | addressing grades |
| Participation  |                                 | four, six and     |
| rate for       |   ------- --------- ------- --  | seven. The State  |
| children with  | ------ ------- ------- -------- | provided the      |
| IEPs in a      |   Grade   FFY 2005  FFY     FF  | required          |
| regular        | Y 2006 FFY     FFY     FFY 2006 | information.      |
| assessment     |           Data      2006        |                   |
| with no        | Target   2005    2006    Target | OSEP appreciates  |
| a              |                     Da          | the State's       |
| ccommodations; | ta             Data    Data     | efforts to        |
| regular        |                                 | improve           |
| assessment     |           Reading               | performance and   |
| with           |                Math             | looks forward to  |
| a              |                                 | the State         |
| ccommodations; |   3       99.2%     98.8%       | demonstrating     |
| alternate      |  98.9%    99.5%   98.9%   98.9% | improvement in    |
| assessment     |                                 | performance in    |
| against grade  |   4       98.3%     98          | the FFY 2007 APR, |
| level          | .5%            98.6%   99%      | due February 1,   |
| standards;     |                                 | 2009.             |
| alternate      |   5       97.8%     99.2%       |                   |
| assessment     |  99.2%    99.2%   99.9%   99.2% |                   |
| against        |                                 |                   |
| alternate      |   6       98%       99          |                   |
| achievement    | .1%            98.1%   99.1%    |                   |
| standards.     |                                 |                   |
|                |   7       98.5%     97          |                   |
| \[Results      | .8%            97.9%   98.6%    |                   |
| Indicator\]    |                                 |                   |
|                |   8       96.2%     98.2%       |                   |
|                |  97.3%    96.3%   98.2%   97.3% |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                |   HS      95.6%     99.5%       |                   |
|                |  95.5%    95.5%   99.5%   95.5% |                   |
|                |   ------- --------- ------- --  |                   |
|                | ------ ------- ------- -------- |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                | The State met part of its FFY   |                   |
|                | 2006 targets.                   |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 3.             | The State revised the targets   | OSEP's June 15,   |
|  Participation | for this indicator to address   | 2007 FFY 2005     |
|     and        | additional grades for FFY 2007  | SPP/APR response  |
|                | through 2010 as required in the | table required    |
|    performance | FFY 2005 response table.        | the State to      |
|     of         | Stakeholders were involved in   | provide baseline  |
|     children   | this process.                   | data for grade    |
|     with       |                                 | seven for reading |
|                | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | and to provide    |
|   disabilities | data for this indicator are:    | targets           |
|     on         |                                 | addressing grades |
|     statewide  |                                 | four, six and     |
|                | ------- --------- -------- ---- | seven in the FFY  |
|   assessments: | ---- -------- -------- -------- | 2006 APR, due     |
|                |                                 | February 1, 2008. |
| C. Proficiency | Grade   FFY 2005  FFY 2006 FFY  | The State         |
| rate for       | 2006 FFY 2005 FFY 2006 FFY 2006 | provided the      |
| children with  |           Data      Data     Ta | required          |
| IEPs against   | rget   Data     Data     Target | information.      |
| grade level    |                                 |                   |
| standards and  |           Reading               | OSEP appreciates  |
| alternate      |              Math               | the State's       |
| achievement    |                                 | efforts to        |
| standards.     |   3       60.60%    56.75%      | improve           |
|                |  68%      49.50%   51.06%   57% | performance and   |
| \[Results      |                                 | looks forward to  |
| Indicator\]    |   4       50.60%    52.56       | the State         |
|                | %            45.90%   43.16%    | demonstrating     |
|                |                                 | improvement in    |
|                |   5       55.50%    55.13%      | performance in    |
|                |  60%      46.50%   42.8%    52% | the FFY 2007 APR, |
|                |                                 | due February 1,   |
|                |   6       39.70%    40.74       | 2009.             |
|                | %            32.10%   38.89%    |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                |   7       41.11%    41.41       |                   |
|                | %            26.90%   26.81%    |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                |   8       41.10%    42.12%      |                   |
|                |  42%      27.30%   26.46%   27% |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                |   HS      26%       29.80%      |                   |
|                |  30%      23.10%   24.08%   24% |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                | ------- --------- -------- ---- |                   |
|                | ---- -------- -------- -------- |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                | These data represent progress   |                   |
|                | in part and slippage in part    |                   |
|                | from the FFY 2005 data.         |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                | The State met part of its FFY   |                   |
|                | 2006 targets.                   |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 4\. Rates of   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP's June 15,   |
| suspension and | data for this indicator are     | 2007 FFY 2005     |
| expulsion:     | 31.6%. These data represent     | SPP/APR response  |
|                | slippage from the FFY 2005 data | table required    |
| A. Percent of  | of 21.1%.                       | the State to      |
| districts      |                                 | clarify in the    |
| identified by  | The State met its FFY 2006      | FFY 2006 APR, due |
| the State as   | target of 36.8%.                | February 1, 2008, |
| having a       |                                 | whether districts |
| significant    |                                 | identified in the |
| discrepancy in |                                 | FFY 2005 SPP/APR  |
| the rates of   |                                 | as having a       |
| suspensions    |                                 | significant       |
| and expulsions |                                 | discrepancy in    |
| of children    |                                 | the rate of       |
| with           |                                 | suspensions and   |
| disabilities   |                                 | expulsions of     |
| for greater    |                                 | children with     |
| than 10 days   |                                 | disabilities for  |
| in a school    |                                 | greater than 10   |
| year; and      |                                 | days in a school  |
|                |                                 | year were the     |
| \[Results      |                                 | same or different |
| Indicator\]    |                                 | from those        |
|                |                                 | districts         |
|                |                                 | identified from   |
|                |                                 | the previous      |
|                |                                 | year. The State   |
|                |                                 | provided the      |
|                |                                 | required          |
|                |                                 | clarification.    |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 | In the FFY 2007   |
|                |                                 | APR, due February |
|                |                                 | 1, 2009, the      |
|                |                                 | State must        |
|                |                                 | describe the      |
|                |                                 | review, and if    |
|                |                                 | appropriate       |
|                |                                 | revision, of      |
|                |                                 | policies,         |
|                |                                 | procedures and    |
|                |                                 | practices related |
|                |                                 | to the            |
|                |                                 | development and   |
|                |                                 | implementation of |
|                |                                 | IEPs, the use of  |
|                |                                 | positive          |
|                |                                 | behavioral        |
|                |                                 | interventions and |
|                |                                 | supports, and     |
|                |                                 | procedural        |
|                |                                 | safeguards, as    |
|                |                                 | required by 34    |
|                |                                 | CFR §300.170(b)   |
|                |                                 | for the districts |
|                |                                 | identified based  |
|                |                                 | on FFY 2006 data. |
|                |                                 | For districts     |
|                |                                 | identified with   |
|                |                                 | significant       |
|                |                                 | discrepancies     |
|                |                                 | based on FFY 2005 |
|                |                                 | data whose        |
|                |                                 | policies and      |
|                |                                 | procedures were   |
|                |                                 | reviewed          |
|                |                                 | consistent with   |
|                |                                 | 34 CFR            |
|                |                                 | §300.170(b) and   |
|                |                                 | that were also    |
|                |                                 | identified with   |
|                |                                 | significant       |
|                |                                 | discrepancies     |
|                |                                 | based on FFY 2006 |
|                |                                 | data, the review, |
|                |                                 | at a minimum,     |
|                |                                 | must include      |
|                |                                 | whether there     |
|                |                                 | have been changes |
|                |                                 | to the policies   |
|                |                                 | and procedures    |
|                |                                 | since the last    |
|                |                                 | review; if so,    |
|                |                                 | whether those     |
|                |                                 | changes comply    |
|                |                                 | with requirements |
|                |                                 | regarding the     |
|                |                                 | development and   |
|                |                                 | implementation of |
|                |                                 | IEPs, the use of  |
|                |                                 | positive          |
|                |                                 | behavioral        |
|                |                                 | interventions and |
|                |                                 | supports, and     |
|                |                                 | procedural        |
|                |                                 | safeguards; and   |
|                |                                 | whether practices |
|                |                                 | in these areas    |
|                |                                 | continue to       |
|                |                                 | comply with       |
|                |                                 | applicable        |
|                |                                 | requirements.     |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 | In reporting on   |
|                |                                 | this indicator in |
|                |                                 | the FFY 2007 APR, |
|                |                                 | due February 1,   |
|                |                                 | 2009, the State   |
|                |                                 | must describe the |
|                |                                 | results of the    |
|                |                                 | State\'s          |
|                |                                 | examination of    |
|                |                                 | data from FFY     |
|                |                                 | 2007 (2007-2008). |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 | OSEP appreciate   |
|                |                                 | the State's       |
|                |                                 | efforts to        |
|                |                                 | improve           |
|                |                                 | performance.      |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 4\. Rates of   | Reporting on Indicator 4B was   |                   |
| suspension and | not required for the FFY 2006   |                   |
| expulsion:     | APR.                            |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
| B. Percent of  |                                 |                   |
| districts      |                                 |                   |
| identified by  |                                 |                   |
| the State as   |                                 |                   |
| having a       |                                 |                   |
| significant    |                                 |                   |
| discrepancy in |                                 |                   |
| the rates of   |                                 |                   |
| suspensions    |                                 |                   |
| and expulsions |                                 |                   |
| of greater     |                                 |                   |
| than 10 days   |                                 |                   |
| in a school    |                                 |                   |
| year of        |                                 |                   |
| children with  |                                 |                   |
| disabilities   |                                 |                   |
| by race and    |                                 |                   |
| ethnicity.     |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
| \[Results      |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]    |                                 |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 5\. Percent of | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP's February   |
| children with  | data for this indicator are:    | 27, 2006 FFY 2004 |
| IEPs aged 6    |                                 | SPP response      |
| through 21:    |   ------------                  | letter indicated  |
|                | ---- -------- -------- -------- | that the State's  |
| A. Removed     |                                 | funding formula   |
| from regular   |      FFY 2005 FFY 2006 FFY 2006 | continues to be a |
| class less     |                                 | barrier toward    |
| than 21% of    |        Data     Data     Target | ensuring the      |
| the day;       |                                 | appropriate       |
|                |   A. Remove                     | placement of      |
| B. Removed     | d from  49.75%   51.33%   53.0% | children in the   |
| from regular   |   regu                          | least restrictive |
| class greater  | lar class                       | environment. On   |
| than 60% of    |   less                          | June 1, 2006, the |
| the day; or    |  than 21% of                    | State submitted   |
|                |   the                           | an assurance that |
| C. Served in   | day.                            | the funding       |
| public or      |                                 | mechanism will be |
| private        |   B. Remove                     | revised as of     |
| separate       | d from  20.16%   19.03%   19.7% | June 30, 2006     |
| schools,       |   regu                          | through the       |
| residential    | lar class                       | inclusion, in     |
| placements, or |   grea                          | Delaware's 2006   |
| homebound or   | ter than 60%                    | Budget Epilogue   |
| hospital       |   of t                          | (which in         |
| placements.    | he day.                         | Delaware holds    |
|                |                                 | the force of law) |
| \[Results      |   C. Serve                      | of language that  |
| Indicator\]    | d in     4.92%    6.19%    4.5% | authorizes the    |
|                |   publ                          | development of a  |
|                | ic or                           | plan to expand    |
|                |   priv                          | the needs based   |
|                | ate separate                    | funding structure |
|                |   scho                          | to include all    |
|                | ols,                            | districts and     |
|                |   resi                          | charter schools   |
|                | dential                         | by September      |
|                |   plac                          | 2008. As          |
|                | ements, or                      | indicated in      |
|                |   home                          | Delaware's FFY    |
|                | bound or                        | 2006 grant award  |
|                |   hosp                          | letter, OSEP      |
|                | ital                            | expects that the  |
|                |   plac                          | State will fully  |
|                | ements.                         | implement the     |
|                |   ------------                  | needs based       |
|                | ---- -------- -------- -------- | funding structure |
|                |                                 | by September      |
|                | However, the State's FFY 2006   | 2008.             |
|                | data under IDEA section 618 for |                   |
|                | 5C are 5.39%.                   | OSEP appreciates  |
|                |                                 | the State's       |
|                | These data represent progress   | efforts to        |
|                | in 5A and 5B and slippage in 5C | improve           |
|                | from the FFY 2005 data.         | performance and   |
|                |                                 | looks forward to  |
|                | The State met its FFY 2006      | the State         |
|                | targets for 5A and 5B and did   | demonstrating     |
|                | not meet its target for 5C.     | improvement in    |
|                |                                 | performance in    |
|                |                                 | the FFY 2007 APR, |
|                |                                 | due February 1,   |
|                |                                 | 2009.             |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 6\. Percent of | Reporting on Indicator 6 was    |                   |
| preschool      | not required for the FFY 2006   |                   |
| children with  | APR.                            |                   |
| IEPs who       |                                 |                   |
| received       |                                 |                   |
| special        |                                 |                   |
| education and  |                                 |                   |
| related        |                                 |                   |
| services in    |                                 |                   |
| settings with  |                                 |                   |
| typically      |                                 |                   |
| developing     |                                 |                   |
| peers (i.e.,   |                                 |                   |
| early          |                                 |                   |
| childhood      |                                 |                   |
| settings,      |                                 |                   |
| home, and      |                                 |                   |
| part-time      |                                 |                   |
| early          |                                 |                   |
| child          |                                 |                   |
| hood/part-time |                                 |                   |
| early          |                                 |                   |
| childhood      |                                 |                   |
| special        |                                 |                   |
| education      |                                 |                   |
| settings).     |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
| \[Results      |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]    |                                 |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 7\. Percent of | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP's June 15,   |
| preschool      | progress data for this          | 2007 FFY 2005     |
| children with  | indicator are:                  | SPP/APR response  |
| IEPs who       |                                 | table required    |
| demonstrate    | <table>                         | the State to      |
| improved:      | <colgroup>                      | submit progress   |
|                | <col style="width: 58%" />      | data and          |
| A.  Positive   | <col style="width: 13%" />      | improvement       |
|     so         | <col style="width: 13%" />      | activities in the |
| cial-emotional | <col style="width: 13%" />      | FFY 2006 APR, due |
|     skills     | </colgroup>                     | February 1, 2008. |
|     (including | <thead>                         | The State         |
|     social     | <tr class="header">             | reported the      |
|     r          | <th><p>06-07 Preschool          | required progress |
| elationships); | Outcome</p>                     | data and          |
|                | <p>Progress Data</p></th>       | improvement       |
| B              | <th><blockquote>                | activities. The   |
| .  Acquisition | <p>Social</p>                   | State must        |
|     and use of | <p>Emotional</p>                | provide progress  |
|     knowledge  | </blockquote></th>              | data with the FFY |
|     and skills | <th><blockquote>                | 2007 APR, due     |
|     (including | <p>Knowledge</p>                | February 1, 2009, |
|     early      | <p>&amp; Skills</p>             | and baseline data |
|     language/  | </blockquote></th>              | and targets with  |
|                | <th><blockquote>                | the FFY 2008 APR, |
|  communication | <p>Appropriate Behavior</p>     | due February 1,   |
|     and early  | </blockquote></th>              | 2010.             |
|     literacy); | </tr>                           |                   |
|     and        | </thead>                        |                   |
|                | <tbody>                         |                   |
| C.  Use of     | <tr class="odd">                |                   |
|                | <td>a. % of preschoolers who    |                   |
|    appropriate | did not improve                 |                   |
|     behaviors  | functioning.</td>               |                   |
|     to meet    | <td>30%</td>                    |                   |
|     their      | <td>4%</td>                     |                   |
|     needs.     | <td>4%</td>                     |                   |
|                | </tr>                           |                   |
| \[Results      | <tr class="even">               |                   |
| Indicator;     | <td>b. % of preschoolers who    |                   |
| New\]          | improved but not sufficient     |                   |
|                | to move nearer to functioning   |                   |
|                | comparable to same-age          |                   |
|                | peers.</td>                     |                   |
|                | <td>6%</td>                     |                   |
|                | <td>7%</td>                     |                   |
|                | <td>6%</td>                     |                   |
|                | </tr>                           |                   |
|                | <tr class="odd">                |                   |
|                | <td>c. % of preschoolers who    |                   |
|                | improved to a level nearer to   |                   |
|                | same-aged peers but did not     |                   |
|                | reach it.</td>                  |                   |
|                | <td>43%</td>                    |                   |
|                | <td>49%</td>                    |                   |
|                | <td>28%</td>                    |                   |
|                | </tr>                           |                   |
|                | <tr class="even">               |                   |
|                | <td>d. % of preschoolers who    |                   |
|                | improved functioning to reach   |                   |
|                | a level comparable to           |                   |
|                | same-aged peers.</td>           |                   |
|                | <td>30%</td>                    |                   |
|                | <td>29%</td>                    |                   |
|                | <td>37%</td>                    |                   |
|                | </tr>                           |                   |
|                | <tr class="odd">                |                   |
|                | <td>e. % of preschoolers who    |                   |
|                | maintained functioning at a     |                   |
|                | level comparable to same-aged   |                   |
|                | peers.</td>                     |                   |
|                | <td>18%</td>                    |                   |
|                | <td>10%</td>                    |                   |
|                | <td>24%</td>                    |                   |
|                | </tr>                           |                   |
|                | </tbody>                        |                   |
|                | </table>                        |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                | The State provided improvement  |                   |
|                | activities for this indicator   |                   |
|                | covering the remaining years of |                   |
|                | the SPP.                        |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 8\. Percent of | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP's June 15,   |
| parents with a | baseline data for this          | 2007 FFY 2005     |
| child          | indicator are 83%.              | SPP/APR response  |
| receiving      |                                 | table required    |
| special        | The State did not meet its FFY  | the State to      |
| education      | 2006 target of 88%.             | submit FFY 2005   |
| services who   |                                 | baseline data.    |
| report that    |                                 | The State         |
| schools        |                                 | reported that it  |
| facilitated    |                                 | did not collect   |
| parent         |                                 | the data for FFY  |
| involvement as |                                 | 2005 and provided |
| a means of     |                                 | FFY 2006          |
| improving      |                                 | baseline.         |
| services and   |                                 |                   |
| results for    |                                 | OSEP appreciates  |
| children with  |                                 | the State's       |
| disabilities.  |                                 | effort to improve |
|                |                                 | performance and   |
| \[Results      |                                 | looks forward to  |
| Indicator\]    |                                 | the State's data  |
|                |                                 | demonstrating     |
|                |                                 | improvement in    |
|                |                                 | performance in    |
|                |                                 | the FFY 2007 APR, |
|                |                                 | due February 1,   |
|                |                                 | 2009.             |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 9\. Percent of | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| districts with | data for this indicator are 0%. | the State's       |
| di             | These data remain unchanged     | efforts regarding |
| sproportionate | from the FFY 2005 data of 0%.   | this indicator.   |
| representation |                                 |                   |
| of racial and  | The State met its FFY 2006      |                   |
| ethnic groups  | target of 0%.                   |                   |
| in special     |                                 |                   |
| education and  | The State reported the actual   |                   |
| related        | number of districts determined  |                   |
| services that  | in FFY 2006 to have             |                   |
| is the result  | disproportionate representation |                   |
| of             | of racial and ethnic groups in  |                   |
| inappropriate  | special education and related   |                   |
| i              | services that was the result of |                   |
| dentification. | inappropriate identification.   |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
| \[Compliance   |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]    |                                 |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 10\. Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| of districts   | data for this indicator are 0%. | the State's       |
| with           | These data remain unchanged     | efforts regarding |
| di             | from the FFY 2005 data of 0%.   | this indicator.   |
| sproportionate |                                 |                   |
| representation | The State met its FFY 2006      |                   |
| of racial and  | target of 0%.                   |                   |
| ethnic groups  |                                 |                   |
| in specific    | The State reported the actual   |                   |
| disability     | number of districts determined  |                   |
| categories     | in FFY 2006 to have             |                   |
| that is the    | disproportionate representation |                   |
| result of      | of racial and ethnic groups in  |                   |
| inappropriate  | specific disability categories  |                   |
| i              | that was the result of          |                   |
| dentification. | inappropriate identification.   |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
| \[Compliance   |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]    |                                 |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 11\. Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | The State must    |
| of children    | baseline data for this          | ensure that its   |
| with parental  | indicator are 91%. OSEP could   | reporting in the  |
| consent to     | not determine whether these     | FFY 2007 APR, due |
| evaluate, who  | data represent progress or      | February 1, 2009, |
| were evaluated | slippage because the State did  | includes          |
| within 60 days | not submit FFY 2005 data.       | information about |
| (or State      |                                 | the reasons for   |
| established    | The State did not meet its FFY  | delays in         |
| timeline).     | 2006 target of 100%.            | evaluations.      |
|                |                                 |                   |
| \[Compliance   |                                 | The State must    |
| Indicator\]    |                                 | review its        |
|                |                                 | improvement       |
|                |                                 | activities and    |
|                |                                 | revise, if        |
|                |                                 | appropriate, to   |
|                |                                 | ensure they will  |
|                |                                 | enable the State  |
|                |                                 | to provide data   |
|                |                                 | in the FFY 2007   |
|                |                                 | APR, due February |
|                |                                 | 1, 2009,          |
|                |                                 | demonstrating     |
|                |                                 | that the State is |
|                |                                 | in compliance     |
|                |                                 | with the timely   |
|                |                                 | evaluations       |
|                |                                 | requirements in   |
|                |                                 | §300.301(c)(1),   |
|                |                                 | including         |
|                |                                 | correction of the |
|                |                                 | noncompliance     |
|                |                                 | identified in the |
|                |                                 | FFY 2006 APR.     |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 12. Percent of | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP's June 15,   |
|     children   | data for this indicator are     | 2007 SPP/APR      |
|     referred   | 97.7%. These data represent     | response table    |
|     by Part C  | progress from the FFY 2005 data | required the      |
|     prior to   | of 81.6%.                       | State to provide, |
|     age 3, who |                                 | in the FFY 2006   |
|     are found  | The State did not meet its FFY  | APR, due February |
|     eligible   | 2006 target of 100%.            | 1, 2008, the      |
|     for Part   |                                 | range of days     |
|     B, and who | In Indicator 15, the State      | beyond the third  |
|     have an    | reported that all findings of   | birthday when     |
|     IEP        | noncompliance identified in FFY | eligibility was   |
|     developed  | 2005 related to this indicator  | determined and    |
|     and        | were corrected in a timely      | the IEP developed |
|                | manner.                         | as required in    |
|    implemented |                                 | the instructions  |
|     by their   |                                 | for this          |
|     third      |                                 | indicator. The    |
|     birthdays. |                                 | State provided    |
|                |                                 | the required      |
| \[Compliance   |                                 | information.      |
| Indicator\]    |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 | The State         |
|                |                                 | reported that     |
|                |                                 | noncompliance     |
|                |                                 | identified in FFY |
|                |                                 | 2005 with the     |
|                |                                 | early childhood   |
|                |                                 | transition        |
|                |                                 | requirements in   |
|                |                                 | 34 CFR            |
|                |                                 | §300.124(b) was   |
|                |                                 | corrected in a    |
|                |                                 | timely manner.    |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 | The State must    |
|                |                                 | review its        |
|                |                                 | improvement       |
|                |                                 | activities and    |
|                |                                 | revise, if        |
|                |                                 | appropriate, to   |
|                |                                 | ensure they will  |
|                |                                 | enable the State  |
|                |                                 | to provide data   |
|                |                                 | in the FFY 2007   |
|                |                                 | APR, due February |
|                |                                 | 1, 2009,          |
|                |                                 | demonstrating     |
|                |                                 | that the State is |
|                |                                 | in compliance     |
|                |                                 | with the          |
|                |                                 | requirements in   |
|                |                                 | 34 CFR            |
|                |                                 | §300.124(b),      |
|                |                                 | including         |
|                |                                 | correction of the |
|                |                                 | noncompliance     |
|                |                                 | identified in the |
|                |                                 | FFY 2006 APR.     |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 13\. Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | The State         |
| of youth aged  | data for this indicator are     | reported that     |
| 16 and above   | 95.6%. These data represent     | noncompliance     |
| with an IEP    | progress from the FFY 2005 data | identified in FFY |
| that includes  | of 74.3%.                       | 2005 with the     |
| coordinated,   |                                 | secondary         |
| measurable,    | The State did not meet its FFY  | transition        |
| annual IEP     | 2006 target of 100%.            | requirements in   |
| goals and      |                                 | 34 CFR            |
| transition     | In Indicator 15, the State      | §300.320(b) was   |
| services that  | reported that all findings of   | corrected in a    |
| will           | noncompliance identified in FFY | timely manner.    |
| reasonably     | 2005 related to this indicator  |                   |
| enable the     | were corrected in a timely      | OSEP appreciates  |
| student to     | manner.                         | the State's       |
| meet the       |                                 | efforts and looks |
| post-secondary |                                 | forward to        |
| goals.         |                                 | reviewing in the  |
|                |                                 | FFY 2007 APR, due |
| \[Compliance   |                                 | February 1, 2009, |
| Indicator\]    |                                 | the State's data  |
|                |                                 | demonstrating     |
|                |                                 | that it is in     |
|                |                                 | compliance with   |
|                |                                 | the requirements  |
|                |                                 | in 34 CFR         |
|                |                                 | §300.320(b),      |
|                |                                 | including         |
|                |                                 | reporting         |
|                |                                 | correction of the |
|                |                                 | noncompliance     |
|                |                                 | identified in the |
|                |                                 | FFY 2006 APR.     |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 14\. Percent   | The State provided baseline     | OSEP looks        |
| of youth who   | data, targets and improvement   | forward to        |
| had IEPs, are  | activities for this indicator   | reviewing the     |
| no longer in   | in its SPP and OSEP accepts the | State's data in   |
| secondary      | SPP for this indicator.         | the FFY 2007 APR, |
| school and who |                                 | due February 1,   |
| have been      | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | 2009.             |
| competitively  | baseline data for this          |                   |
| employed,      | indicator are:                  |                   |
| enrolled in    |                                 |                   |
| some type of   |                                 |                   |
| postsecondary  | ------------------------ ------ |                   |
| school, or     |   Percent of youth who are  38% |                   |
| both, within   |   competitively employed.       |                   |
| one year of    |                                 |                   |
| leaving high   |   Percent of youth who are  10% |                   |
| school.        |   in some type of               |                   |
|                |   postsecondary school.         |                   |
| \[Results      |                                 |                   |
| Indicator;     |   Percent of youth who are 41%  |                   |
| New\]          |   both competitively            |                   |
|                |   employed and in some          |                   |
|                |   type of postsecondary         |                   |
|                |   school.                       |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
|                | ------------------------ ------ |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 15\. General   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| supervision    | data for this indicator are     | the State's       |
| system         | 100%. These data remain         | efforts in timely |
| (including     | unchanged from the FFY 2005     | correcting        |
| monitoring,    | data of 100%.                   | noncompliance     |
| complaints,    |                                 | identified under  |
| hearings,      | The State met its target of     | this indicator in |
| etc.)          | 100%.                           | accordance with   |
| identifies and |                                 | 20 U.S.C.         |
| corrects       |                                 | 1232d(b)(3)(E)    |
| noncompliance  |                                 | and 34 CFR        |
| as soon as     |                                 | §§300.149 and     |
| possible but   |                                 | 300.600 and looks |
| in no case     |                                 | forward to        |
| later than one |                                 | reviewing data in |
| year from      |                                 | the FFY 2007 APR, |
| i              |                                 | due February 1,   |
| dentification. |                                 | 2009, that        |
|                |                                 | continue to       |
| \[Compliance   |                                 | demonstrate       |
| Indicator\]    |                                 | compliance with   |
|                |                                 | these             |
|                |                                 | requirements. In  |
|                |                                 | addition, in      |
|                |                                 | responding to     |
|                |                                 | Indicators 11,    |
|                |                                 | 12, and 13, the   |
|                |                                 | State must        |
|                |                                 | specifically      |
|                |                                 | identify and      |
|                |                                 | address the       |
|                |                                 | noncompliance     |
|                |                                 | identified in     |
|                |                                 | this table under  |
|                |                                 | those indicators. |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 16\. Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| of signed      | data for this indicator are     | the State's       |
| written        | 100%. These data represent      | efforts in        |
| complaints     | progress from OSEP's FFY 2005   | achieving         |
| with reports   | calculation of 20%.             | compliance with   |
| issued that    |                                 | the timely        |
| were resolved  | The State met its FFY 2006      | complaint         |
| within 60-day  | target of 100%.                 | resolution        |
| timeline or a  |                                 | requirements in   |
| timeline       |                                 | 34 CFR §300.152.  |
| extended for   |                                 |                   |
| exceptional    |                                 |                   |
| circumstances  |                                 |                   |
| with respect   |                                 |                   |
| to a           |                                 |                   |
| particular     |                                 |                   |
| complaint.     |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
| \[Compliance   |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]    |                                 |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 17\. Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| of fully       | data for this indicator are     | the State's       |
| adjudicated    | 100%. These data are based on   | efforts in        |
| due process    | four due process hearings and   | achieving         |
| hearing        | represent progress from the FFY | compliance with   |
| requests that  | 2005 data of 33%.               | the timely due    |
| were fully     |                                 | process hearing   |
| adjudicated    | The State met its FFY 2006      | resolution        |
| within the     | target of 100%.                 | requirements in   |
| 45-day         |                                 | 34 CFR §300.515.  |
| timeline or a  |                                 |                   |
| timeline that  |                                 |                   |
| is properly    |                                 |                   |
| extended by    |                                 |                   |
| the hearing    |                                 |                   |
| officer at the |                                 |                   |
| request of     |                                 |                   |
| either party.  |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
| \[Compliance   |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]    |                                 |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 18\. Percent   | The State reported that no      | OSEP looks        |
| of hearing     | resolution sessions were held   | forward to        |
| requests that  | during the reporting period.    | reviewing the     |
| went to        |                                 | State's data in   |
| resolution     |                                 | the FFY 2007 APR, |
| sessions that  |                                 | due February 1,   |
| were resolved  |                                 | 2009.             |
| through        |                                 |                   |
| resolution     |                                 |                   |
| session        |                                 |                   |
| settlement     |                                 |                   |
| agreements.    |                                 |                   |
|                |                                 |                   |
| \[Results      |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]    |                                 |                   |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 19\. Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP looks        |
| of mediations  | data for this indicator are     | forward to the    |
| held that      | 86%. These data represent       | State's data      |
| resulted in    | progress from the FFY 2005 data | demonstrating     |
| mediation      | of 64%.                         | improvement in    |
| agreements.    |                                 | performance in    |
|                | The State did not meet its FFY  | the FFY 2007 APR, |
| \[Results      | 2006 target of 88%.             | due February 1,   |
| Indicator\]    |                                 | 2009.             |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 20\. State     | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| reported data  | data for this indicator are     | the State's       |
| (618 and State | 98.3%.                          | efforts and looks |
| Performance    |                                 | forward to        |
| Plan and       |                                 | reviewing in the  |
| Annual         |                                 | FFY 2007 APR, due |
| Performance    |                                 | February 1, 2009, |
| Report) are    |                                 | the State's data  |
| timely and     |                                 | demonstrating     |
| accurate.      |                                 | that it is in     |
|                |                                 | compliance with   |
| \[Compliance   |                                 | the timely and    |
| Indicator\]    |                                 | accurate data     |
|                |                                 | requirements in   |
|                |                                 | IDEA sections 616 |
|                |                                 | and 618 and 34    |
|                |                                 | CFR §§76.720 and  |
|                |                                 | 300.601(b).       |
+----------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+