June 15, 2007

Honorable Karen L. Beye

Executive Director

Colorado Department of Human Services

1575 Sherman Street

Denver, Colorado 80203

Dear Director Beye:

Thank you for the timely submission of Colorado's Annual Performance
Report (APR) and revised State Performance Plan (SPP) under Part C of
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as amended in
2004. We also appreciate the revisions to Colorado's SPP received on
April 5, 2007.

As you know, under IDEA sections 616 and 642, each State has an SPP that
evaluates the State's efforts to implement the requirements and purposes
of Part C of the IDEA and describes how the State will improve its
implementation of Part C. In the revised SPP due by February 1, 2007,
States were required to provide information on: (1) specific new
indicators; and (2) correction of any deficiencies identified in the
Office of Special Education Programs' (OSEP's) SPP response letter sent
to your State last year. States were also required to submit by February
1, 2007, an APR for Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2005 that describes the
State's: (1) progress or slippage in meeting the measurable and rigorous
targets established in the SPP; and (2) any revisions to the State's
targets, improvement activities, timelines or resources in the SPP and
justifications for the revisions. We appreciate the State's efforts in
preparing the FFY 2005 APR and revised SPP.

The Department has reviewed the information provided in the State's FFY
2005 APR and revised SPP, other State-reported data, information
obtained through monitoring visits, and other public information and has
determined that, under IDEA section 616(d) and 642, Colorado needs
intervention in meeting the requirements of Part C of the IDEA. The
State should review IDEA section 616(e) regarding the potential future
impact of the Department's determination.

The Department's determination is based on the totality of the State's
data in its SPP/APR and other publicly available information, including
any compliance issues. The factors in States' FFY 2005 APR and February
1, 2007 SPP submissions that affected the Department's determinations
were whether the State: (1) provided valid and reliable FFY 2005 data
that reflect the measurement for each indicator, and if not, whether the
State provided a plan to collect the missing or deficient data; and (2)
for each compliance indicator that was not new (a) demonstrated
compliance or timely corrected noncompliance, and (b) in instances where
it did not demonstrate compliance, had nonetheless made progress in
ensuring compliance over prior performance in that area. We also
considered whether the State had other IDEA compliance issues that were
identified previously through the Department's monitoring, audit or
other activities, and the State's progress in resolving those problems.
See the enclosure entitled "How the Department Made Determinations under
Section 616(d) of the IDEA in 2007" for further details.

Specific factors affecting OSEP's determination of needs intervention
for Colorado include: (1) for Indicator 9, the information that the
State provided did not allow us to assess the effectiveness of the
State's general supervision system in correcting identified
noncompliance, as soon as possible but in no case later than one year
from identification (because the State reported limited data that did
not enable us to determine the level of compliance); and (2) for
Indicator 8B, the State did not provide FFY 2005 data that would enable
us, and the public, to assess whether the State ensured that the
required notification was provided to local educational agencies for
infants and toddlers with disabilities who are potentially eligible for
Part B. We hope that Colorado will be able to demonstrate that it meets
requirements of Part C in its FFY 2006 APR.

The table enclosed with this letter provides OSEP's analysis of the
State's FFY 2005 APR and revised SPP and identifies, by indicator,
OSEP's review and acceptance of any revisions made by the State to its
targets, improvement activities (timelines and resources) and baseline
data in the State's SPP. It also identifies, by indicator, the State's
status in meeting its targets, and whether the State's data reflect
progress or slippage, and whether the State corrected noncompliance and
provided valid and reliable data. The table also lists, by indicator,
any additional information the State must include in the FFY 2006 APR
or, as needed, the SPP due February 1, 2008, to address the problems
OSEP identified in the revised SPP or FFY 2005 APR. The State must
provide this required information. We plan to factor into our
determinations next year whether or not States provided the additional
information requested in this table in their FFY 2006 APR, due February
1, 2008, and may take other actions as well, if the State's data, or
lack of data, regarding these issues indicates continuing noncompliance.

As you know, your State must report annually to the public on the
performance of each early intervention services (EIS) program located in
the State on the targets in the SPP under IDEA section
616(b)(2)(C)(ii)(l) and 642. The requirement for public reporting on EIS
programs' performance is a critical provision in ensuring accountability
and focusing on improved results for infants and toddlers with
disabilities. Please have your staff notify your OSEP State Contact when
and where your State makes available its public report on EIS program
performance. In addition, States must review EIS program performance
against targets in the State's SPP, especially the compliance
indicators, determine if each EIS program meets the requirements of the
IDEA and inform each EIS program of its determination. For further
information regarding these requirements, see the SPP/APR Guidance
Materials at <http://www.rrfcnetwork.org/>.

We hope that the State found helpful, and was able to benefit from, the
monthly technical assistance conference calls conducted by this Office,
ongoing consultation with OSEP State Contacts and OSEP-funded Technical
Assistance Center staff, materials found on the IDEA 2004 website, and
attendance at OSEP-sponsored conferences. OSEP will continue to provide
technical assistance opportunities to assist your State as it works to
improve performance under Part C of the IDEA. If you have any feedback
on our past technical assistance efforts or the needs of States for
guidance, we would be happy to hear from you as we work to develop
further mechanisms to support State improvement activities.

As noted above, your State has been determined to Need Intervention*.*
Pursuant to section 616(d)(2)(B) and 642 of the IDEA, a State that is
determined to Need Intervention or Need Substantial Intervention, and
does not agree with this determination, may request an opportunity to
meet with the Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services to demonstrate why the Department should change
its determination. To file an appeal, submit a letter to John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5107, Potomac Center Plaza,
Washington, DC 20202-2600 within 30 days of the date of this letter and
provide in the letter the basis for your request.

OSEP is committed to supporting Colorado'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. If you have any
questions, would like to discuss this further, or want to request
technical assistance, please do not hesitate to call Jacquelyn
Twining-Martin, your OSEP State Contact, at 202-245-7558.

> Sincerely,
>
> /s/ Patricia J. Guard
>
> Patricia J. Guard
>
> Acting Director
>
> Office of Special Education Programs

Enclosures

cc: Part C Coordinator