+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| **Monitoring  | **Status of APR Data/SPP        | **OSEP            |
| Priorities    | Revision Issues**               | Analysis/Next     |
| and           |                                 | Steps**           |
| Indicators**  |                                 |                   |
+===============+=================================+===================+
| 1.  Percent   | The State submitted in its FFY  | The State must    |
|     of        | 2006 APR its FFY 2006 baseline  | revise its SPP to |
|     infants   | data and revised improvement    | reflect its FFY   |
|     and       | activities for this indicator   | 2006 baseline     |
|     toddlers  | to include in addition to its   | data and revised  |
|     with      | SPP activities those activities | improvement       |
|     IFSPs who | the State is required to        | activities, which |
|     receive   | implement under the Compliance  | now include the   |
|     the early | Agreement, and OSEP accepts     | State's           |
|               | these data and revised SPP      | activities        |
|  intervention | improvement activities.         | required under    |
|     services  |                                 | its Compliance    |
|     on their  | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | Agreement.        |
|     IFSPs in  | data for this indicator are     |                   |
|     a timely  | 72.37%.                         | In response to    |
|     manner.   |                                 | OSEP's June 15,   |
|               | The State did not meet its FFY  | 2007 FFY 2007 APR |
| \[Compliance  | 2006 target of 100%.            | response table    |
| Indicator\]   |                                 | and as required   |
|               | The timely service provision    | under the         |
|               | requirements of this indicator  | Compliance        |
|               | are the subject of the          | Agreement, the    |
|               | Department's three-year         | State reported in |
|               | November 8, 2006 Compliance     | its December 31,  |
|               | Agreement with the Ohio         | 2007 progress     |
|               | Department of Health (ODH). The | report,           |
|               | Compliance Agreement requires   | monitoring data   |
|               | ODH to ensure compliance with   | from its pilot    |
|               | specific Part C requirements,   | monitoring of     |
|               | including the requirements      | four counties.    |
|               | under Indicators 1, 7, 8A, 8C   |                   |
|               | and 9, by November 2009. Under  | The State must    |
|               | the Compliance Agreement, ODH   | submit, in the    |
|               | submitted progress reports most | State's December  |
|               | recently on October 30, 2007,   | 31, 2008 progress |
|               | December 31, 2007, and March    | report and with   |
|               | 21, 2008. OSEP will respond     | the FFY 2007 APR, |
|               | separately to these progress    | due February 1,   |
|               | reports. However, data from     | 2009, correction  |
|               | these progress reports are      | data for the 63   |
|               | referenced under the            | counties that the |
|               | appropriate relevant indicators | State identified  |
|               | in this FFY 2006 APR response   | as being in       |
|               | chart.                          | noncompliance in  |
|               |                                 | November 2007     |
|               | The State provided updated data | with the timely   |
|               | in the State's December 31,     | service provision |
|               | 2007 progress report indicating | requirements in   |
|               | that the State conducted its    | 34 CFR            |
|               | pilot monitoring of four        | §§303.340(c),     |
|               | counties and found two counties | 303.342(e) and    |
|               | in noncompliance with the       | 303.344(f)(1).    |
|               | requirements of this indicator. |                   |
|               | The State also reported in its  |                   |
|               | December 31, 2007 progress      |                   |
|               | report that it conducted a data |                   |
|               | review of all 88 counties and   |                   |
|               | found an additional 61 counties |                   |
|               | in noncompliance with the       |                   |
|               | requirements of this indicator. |                   |
|               | The State indicated it issued   |                   |
|               | findings to all 63 counties in  |                   |
|               | November 2007 and that          |                   |
|               | correction is due no later than |                   |
|               | November 2008.                  |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 2.  Percent   | The State revised the           | OSEP appreciates  |
|     of        | improvement activities for this | the State's       |
|     infants   | indicator and OSEP accepts      | efforts to        |
|     and       | those revisions.                | improve           |
|     toddlers  |                                 | performance.      |
|     with      | The State's FFY 2006 reported   |                   |
|     IFSPs who | data for this indicator are     |                   |
|     primarily | 86%. These data represent       |                   |
|     receive   | progress from the FFY 2005 data |                   |
|     early     | of 84%.                         |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
|  intervention | The State met its FFY 2006      |                   |
|     services  | target of 78%.                  |                   |
|     in the    |                                 |                   |
|     home or   |                                 |                   |
|     programs  |                                 |                   |
|     for       |                                 |                   |
|     typically |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
|    developing |                                 |                   |
|     children. |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
| \[Results     |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]   |                                 |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 3.  Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | The State         |
|     of        | progress data for this          | reported the      |
|     infants   | indicator are:                  | required progress |
|     and       |                                 | data and          |
|     toddlers  | <table>                         | improvement       |
|     with      | <colgroup>                      | activities. The   |
|     IFSPs who | <col style="width: 58%" />      | State must        |
|               | <col style="width: 13%" />      | provide progress  |
|   demonstrate | <col style="width: 13%" />      | data with the FFY |
|     improved: | <col style="width: 13%" />      | 2007 APR, due     |
|               | </colgroup>                     | February 1, 2009; |
| A. Positive   | <thead>                         | and baseline      |
| soc           | <tr class="header">             | data, and targets |
| ial-emotional | <th></th>                       | with the FFY 2008 |
| skills        | <th><blockquote>                | APR, due February |
| (including    | <p>Social</p>                   | 1, 2010.          |
| social        | <p>Emotional</p>                |                   |
| re            | </blockquote></th>              |                   |
| lationships); | <th><blockquote>                |                   |
|               | <p>Knowledge</p>                |                   |
| B.            | <p>&amp; Skills</p>             |                   |
| Acquisition   | </blockquote></th>              |                   |
| and use of    | <th><blockquote>                |                   |
| knowledge and | <p>Appropriate Behavior</p>     |                   |
| skills        | </blockquote></th>              |                   |
| (including    | </tr>                           |                   |
| early         | </thead>                        |                   |
| language/     | <tbody>                         |                   |
| co            | <tr class="odd">                |                   |
| mmunication); | <td>a. % of infant &amp;        |                   |
| and           | toddlers who did not improve    |                   |
|               | functioning.</td>               |                   |
| C. Use of     | <td>2%</td>                     |                   |
| appropriate   | <td>2%</td>                     |                   |
| behaviors to  | <td>2%</td>                     |                   |
| meet their    | </tr>                           |                   |
| needs.        | <tr class="even">               |                   |
|               | <td>b. % of infant &amp;        |                   |
| \[Results     | toddlers who improved but not   |                   |
| Indicator\]   | sufficient to move nearer to    |                   |
|               | functioning comparable to       |                   |
|               | same-aged peers.</td>           |                   |
|               | <td>22%</td>                    |                   |
|               | <td>28%</td>                    |                   |
|               | <td>24%</td>                    |                   |
|               | </tr>                           |                   |
|               | <tr class="odd">                |                   |
|               | <td>c. % of infant &amp;        |                   |
|               | toddlers who improved to a      |                   |
|               | level nearer to same-aged       |                   |
|               | peers but did not reach         |                   |
|               | it.</td>                        |                   |
|               | <td>14%</td>                    |                   |
|               | <td>17%</td>                    |                   |
|               | <td>17%</td>                    |                   |
|               | </tr>                           |                   |
|               | <tr class="even">               |                   |
|               | <td>d. % of infant &amp;        |                   |
|               | toddlers who improved           |                   |
|               | functioning to reach a level    |                   |
|               | comparable to same-aged         |                   |
|               | peers.</td>                     |                   |
|               | <td>17%</td>                    |                   |
|               | <td>17%</td>                    |                   |
|               | <td>23%</td>                    |                   |
|               | </tr>                           |                   |
|               | <tr class="odd">                |                   |
|               | <td>e. % of infant &amp;        |                   |
|               | toddlers who maintained         |                   |
|               | functioning at a level          |                   |
|               | comparable to same-aged         |                   |
|               | peers.</td>                     |                   |
|               | <td>45%</td>                    |                   |
|               | <td>36%</td>                    |                   |
|               | <td>35%</td>                    |                   |
|               | </tr>                           |                   |
|               | </tbody>                        |                   |
|               | </table>                        |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
|               | The State provided improvement  |                   |
|               | activities for this indicator   |                   |
|               | covering the remaining years of |                   |
|               | the SPP.                        |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 4\. Percent   | The State's reported data for   | OSEP appreciates  |
| of families   | this indicator are:             | the State's       |
| participating |                                 | efforts to        |
| in Part C who |   ---------                     | improve           |
| report that   | ------- ------- ------ -------- | performance.      |
| early         |                                 |                   |
| intervention  |         FFY     FFY    FFY 2006 |                   |
| services have |                                 |                   |
| helped the    |           2005    2006   Target |                   |
| family:       |                                 |                   |
|               |                 Data    Data    |                   |
| A. Know their |                                 |                   |
| rights;       |   A. K                          |                   |
|               | now their    90.5%   95%    91% |                   |
| B.            |   r                             |                   |
| Effectively   | ights.                          |                   |
| communicate   |                                 |                   |
| their         |    B.                           |                   |
| children\'s   | Effectively  91.4%   95%    91% |                   |
| needs; and    |   c                             |                   |
|               | ommunicate                      |                   |
| C. Help their |   t                             |                   |
| children      | heir children's                 |                   |
| develop and   |   n                             |                   |
| learn.        | eeds.                           |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
| \[Results     |    C.                           |                   |
| Indicator\]   | Help their   90.5%   93%    91% |                   |
|               |   c                             |                   |
|               | hildren develop                 |                   |
|               |   a                             |                   |
|               | nd learn.                       |                   |
|               |   ---------                     |                   |
|               | ------- ------- ------ -------- |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
|               | These data represent progress   |                   |
|               | from the FFY 2005 data for 4A,  |                   |
|               | 4B and 4C.                      |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
|               | The State met its FFY 2006      |                   |
|               | targets for 4A, 4B and 4C.      |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 5\. Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| of infants    | data for this indicator are     | the State's       |
| and toddlers  | 1.43%. These data represent     | efforts to        |
| birth to 1    | progress from the FFY 2005 data | improve           |
| with IFSPs    | of 1.38%.                       | performance.      |
| compared to:  |                                 |                   |
|               | The State met its FFY 2006      |                   |
| A. Other      | target of 1.1%.                 |                   |
| States with   |                                 |                   |
| similar       |                                 |                   |
| eligibility   |                                 |                   |
| definitions;  |                                 |                   |
| and           |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
| B. National   |                                 |                   |
| data.         |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
| \[Results     |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]   |                                 |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 6\. Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| of infants    | data for this indicator are     | the State's       |
| and toddlers  | 2.64 %. These data represent    | efforts to        |
| birth to 3    | progress from the FFY 2005 data | improve           |
| with IFSPs    | of 2.5%.                        | performance.      |
| compared to:  |                                 |                   |
|               | The State met its FFY 2006      |                   |
| A. Other      | target of 2.4 %.                |                   |
| States with   |                                 |                   |
| similar       |                                 |                   |
| eligibility   |                                 |                   |
| definitions;  |                                 |                   |
| and           |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
| B. National   |                                 |                   |
| data.         |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
| \[Results     |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]   |                                 |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 7\. Percent   | The State submitted in its FFY  | The State must    |
| of eligible   | 2006 APR its FFY 2006 baseline  | revise its SPP to |
| infants and   | data and revised improvement    | reflect its FFY   |
| toddlers with | activities for this indicator   | 2006 baseline     |
| IFSPs for     | to include in addition to its   | data and revised  |
| whom an       | SPP activities those activities | improvement       |
| evaluation    | the State is required to        | activities, which |
| and           | implement under the Compliance  | now include the   |
| assessment    | Agreement, and OSEP accepts     | State's           |
| and an        | these data and revised SPP      | activities        |
| initial IFSP  | improvement activities.         | required under    |
| meeting were  |                                 | its Compliance    |
| conducted     | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | Agreement.        |
| within Part   | data for this indicator are     |                   |
| C's 45-day    | 74%.                            | In response to    |
| timeline.     |                                 | OSEP's June 15,   |
|               | The State did not meet its FFY  | 2007 FFY 2007 APR |
| \[Compliance  | 2006 target of 100%.            | response table    |
| Indicator\]   |                                 | and as required   |
|               | The 45-day timeline             | under the         |
|               | requirements of this indicator  | Compliance        |
|               | are the subject of the          | Agreement, the    |
|               | Department's Compliance         | State reported in |
|               | Agreement with ODH, which       | its December 31,  |
|               | requires the State to           | 2007 progress     |
|               | demonstrate compliance by       | report,           |
|               | November 2009. OSEP will        | monitoring data   |
|               | respond separately to the       | from its pilot    |
|               | State's progress reports under  | monitoring of     |
|               | the Compliance Agreement, but   | four counties.    |
|               | includes in this indicator      |                   |
|               | relevant updated data from the  | The State must    |
|               | progress reports.               | submit, in the    |
|               |                                 | State's December  |
|               | The State provided updated data | 31, 2008 progress |
|               | in the State's December 31,     | report and with   |
|               | 2007 progress report indicating | the FFY 2007 APR, |
|               | that the State conducted its    | due February 1,   |
|               | pilot monitoring of four        | 2009, correction  |
|               | counties and found one county   | data for the 63   |
|               | in noncompliance with the       | counties that the |
|               | requirements of this indicator. | State identified  |
|               | The State also reported in its  | as being in       |
|               | December 31, 2007 progress      | noncompliance in  |
|               | report that it conducted a data | November 2007     |
|               | review of all 88 counties and   | with the 45-day   |
|               | found an additional 63 counties | timeline          |
|               | in noncompliance with the       | requirements in   |
|               | requirements of this indicator. | 34 CFR            |
|               | The State indicated it issued   | §§303.321(e)(2),  |
|               | findings to all 64 counties in  | 303.322(e)(1),    |
|               | November 2007 and that          | and 303.342(a).   |
|               | correction is due no later than |                   |
|               | November 2008.                  |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 8\. Percent   | The State submitted in its FFY  | The State must    |
| of all        | 2006 APR its FFY 2006 baseline  | revise its SPP to |
| children      | data for this indicator and     | reflect its FFY   |
| exiting Part  | revised improvement activities  | 2006 baseline     |
| C who         | to expressly include activities | data and revised  |
| received      | that are required under the     | improvement       |
| timely        | Compliance Agreement and OSEP   | activities.       |
| transition    | accepts these baseline data and |                   |
| planning to   | revised SPP activities.         | In response to    |
| support the   |                                 | OSEP's June 15,   |
| child's       | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | 2007 FFY 2007 APR |
| transition to | data for this indicator are     | response table    |
| preschool and | 94%.                            | and as required   |
| other         |                                 | under the         |
| appropriate   | The State did not meet its FFY  | Compliance        |
| community     | 2006 target of 100%.            | Agreement, the    |
| services by   |                                 | State reported in |
| their third   | The IFSP transition content     | its December 31,  |
| birthday      | requirements of this indicator  | 2007 progress     |
| including:    | are the subject of the          | report,           |
|               | Department's November 2006      | monitoring data   |
| A. IFSPs with | Compliance Agreement with ODH.  | from its pilot    |
| transition    | OSEP will respond separately to | monitoring of     |
| steps and     | the State's progress reports    | four counties.    |
| services;     | under the Compliance Agreement, |                   |
|               | but includes in this indicator  | The State must    |
| \[Compliance  | relevant updated data from the  | submit, in the    |
| Indicator\]   | progress reports.               | State's December  |
|               |                                 | 31, 2008 progress |
|               | The State provided updated data | report and with   |
|               | in the State's December 31,     | the FFY 2007 APR, |
|               | 2007 progress report indicating | due February 1,   |
|               | that the State conducted its    | 2009, correction  |
|               | pilot monitoring of four        | data for the one  |
|               | counties and found one county   | county that the   |
|               | in noncompliance with the IFSP  | State identified  |
|               | transition content requirements | as being in       |
|               | of this indicator.              | noncompliance in  |
|               |                                 | November 2007     |
|               |                                 | with the IFSP     |
|               |                                 | transition        |
|               |                                 | content           |
|               |                                 | requirements in   |
|               |                                 | 34 CFR            |
|               |                                 | §§303.148(b)(4)   |
|               |                                 | and 303.344(h).   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 8\. Percent   | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP's June 15,   |
| of all        | data for this indicator are     | 2007 FFY 2005     |
| children      | 97%. These data represents      | SPP/APR response  |
| exiting Part  | slippage from the FFY 2005 data | table required    |
| C who         | of 100%.                        | the State to      |
| received      |                                 | include in the    |
| timely        | The State did not meet its FFY  | February 1, 2008  |
| transition    | 2006 target of 100%.            | APR clarification |
| planning to   |                                 | whether it has    |
| support the   |                                 | adopted an        |
| child's       |                                 | opt-out policy    |
| transition to |                                 | and exclude from  |
| preschool and |                                 | its calculations  |
| other         |                                 | (in both the      |
| appropriate   |                                 | numerator and     |
| community     |                                 | denominator) for  |
| services by   |                                 | this Indicator    |
| their third   |                                 | 8B, but provide a |
| birthday      |                                 | numerical count   |
| including:    |                                 | of those children |
|               |                                 | whose families    |
| B.            |                                 | elected to opt    |
| Notification  |                                 | out.              |
| to LEA, if    |                                 |                   |
| child         |                                 | The State         |
| potentially   |                                 | reported that it  |
| eligible for  |                                 | has adopted an    |
| Part B; and   |                                 | opt-out policy    |
|               |                                 | under IDEA        |
| \[Compliance  |                                 | section           |
| Indicator\]   |                                 | 637(a)(9), 34 CFR |
|               |                                 | §303.148(b)(1)    |
|               |                                 | and OSEP's 2004   |
|               |                                 | *Letter to Elder* |
|               |                                 | and reference to  |
|               |                                 | this policy is    |
|               |                                 | included in the   |
|               |                                 | ODH's interagency |
|               |                                 | agreement with    |
|               |                                 | ODE. OSEP will    |
|               |                                 | review and        |
|               |                                 | respond           |
|               |                                 | separately to the |
|               |                                 | interagency       |
|               |                                 | agreement. The    |
|               |                                 | State must submit |
|               |                                 | its opt-out       |
|               |                                 | policy as part of |
|               |                                 | Section II of the |
|               |                                 | State's FFY 2008  |
|               |                                 | Part C            |
|               |                                 | Application.      |
|               |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 | OSEP appreciates  |
|               |                                 | the State's       |
|               |                                 | efforts and looks |
|               |                                 | forward to        |
|               |                                 | reviewing in the  |
|               |                                 | FFY 2007 APR, due |
|               |                                 | February 1, 2009, |
|               |                                 | the State's data  |
|               |                                 | demonstrating     |
|               |                                 | that it is in     |
|               |                                 | compliance with   |
|               |                                 | the requirements  |
|               |                                 | in 34 CFR         |
|               |                                 | §3                |
|               |                                 | 03.148(b)(1)**,** |
|               |                                 | including         |
|               |                                 | reporting         |
|               |                                 | correction of the |
|               |                                 | noncompliance     |
|               |                                 | identified in the |
|               |                                 | FFY 2006 APR.     |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 8\. Percent   | The State submitted in its FFY  | The State must    |
| of all        | 2006 APR revised improvement    | revise its SPP to |
| children      | activities to expressly include | reflect its       |
| exiting Part  | activities that are required    | revised           |
| C who         | under the Compliance Agreement  | improvement       |
| received      | and OSEP accepts these revised  | activities, which |
| timely        | SPP activities.                 | now include the   |
| transition    |                                 | State's           |
| planning to   | The timely transition           | activities        |
| support the   | conference requirements of this | required under    |
| child's       | indicator are the subject of    | its Compliance    |
| transition to | the Department's November 8,    | Agreement.        |
| preschool and | 2006 Compliance Agreement with  |                   |
| other         | ODH. Under the Compliance       | Under the         |
| appropriate   | Agreement, ODH is not required  | Compliance        |
| community     | to provide data on the          | Agreement Work    |
| services by   | requirements of this indicator  | plan, the State   |
| their third   | until June 30, 2008.            | is required to    |
| birthday      |                                 | submit in its     |
| including:    | The State provided updated      | June 30, 2008     |
|               | preliminary data in its March   | progress report   |
| C. Transition | 21, 2008 progress report under  | revised statewide |
| conference,   | the Compliance Agreement,       | compliance        |
| if child      | indicating statewide compliance | percentage and a  |
| potentially   | for this Indicator at 94%,      | list of counties  |
| eligible for  | based on its preliminary data   | for which ODH has |
| Part B.       | collection from all 88          | issued findings   |
|               | counties.                       | and corrective    |
| \[Compliance  |                                 | action plans.     |
| Indicator\]   |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 | The State must    |
|               |                                 | submit data       |
|               |                                 | required in its   |
|               |                                 | progress reports  |
|               |                                 | under the         |
|               |                                 | Compliance        |
|               |                                 | Agreement, and    |
|               |                                 | with the FFY 2007 |
|               |                                 | APR, due February |
|               |                                 | 1, 2009,          |
|               |                                 | compliance data   |
|               |                                 | and updated       |
|               |                                 | correction data   |
|               |                                 | for any counties  |
|               |                                 | that the State    |
|               |                                 | identified as     |
|               |                                 | being in          |
|               |                                 | noncompliance     |
|               |                                 | with the timely   |
|               |                                 | transition        |
|               |                                 | conference        |
|               |                                 | requirements in   |
|               |                                 | 34 CFR            |
|               |                                 | §303.148(b)(2)(i) |
|               |                                 | (as modified by   |
|               |                                 | IDEA section      |
|               |                                 | 637(a)(9)).       |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 9\. General   | The State submitted in its FFY  | The State must    |
| supervision   | 2006 APR revised improvement    | revise its SPP to |
| system        | activities and expressly        | reflect its       |
| (including    | included activities that are    | revised           |
| monitoring,   | required under the Compliance   | improvement       |
| complaints,   | Agreement and OSEP accepts      | activities, which |
| hearings,     | these revised SPP activities.   | include the       |
| etc.)         |                                 | State's           |
| identifies    | The requirements of this        | activities        |
| and corrects  | Indicator as well as Indicators | required under    |
| noncompliance | 1, 7, 8A and 8C are the subject | its Compliance    |
| as soon as    | of the Department's November    | Agreement.        |
| possible but  | 2006 Compliance Agreement with  |                   |
| in no case    | ODH. Under this Compliance      | In response to    |
| later than    | Agreement, ODH was required to  | OSEP's June 15,   |
| one year from | conduct its initial monitoring  | 2007 FFY 2007 APR |
| id            | of four pilot counties and      | response table    |
| entification. | issue reports by November 2007. | and as required   |
|               |                                 | under the         |
| \[Compliance  | The State's December 31, 2007   | Compliance        |
| Indicator\]   | progress report confirmed that  | Agreement, the    |
|               | ODH conducted its initial       | State reported in |
|               | monitoring of four pilot        | its December 31,  |
|               | counties. It also indicated     | 2007 progress     |
|               | that, based on this pilot       | report,           |
|               | monitoring, ODH identified      | monitoring data   |
|               | findings of noncompliance in    | from its pilot    |
|               | two counties related to         | monitoring of     |
|               | Indicator 1 (timely service     | four counties.    |
|               | provision), in one county       |                   |
|               | related to Indicator 8A (IFSP   | The State must    |
|               | transition content), and in one | submit the data   |
|               | county related to Indicator 7   | and information   |
|               | (45-day timeline). ODH reported | required in its   |
|               | that it notified each of these  | progress reports  |
|               | counties of the findings of     | under the         |
|               | noncompliance in writing in     | Compliance        |
|               | November 2007 and that          | Agreement, and    |
|               | correction is due no later than | with the FFY 2007 |
|               | November 2008**.**              | APR, due February |
|               |                                 | 1, 2009, updated  |
|               | The State's December 31, 2007   | correction data   |
|               | progress report further         | for all counties  |
|               | indicated that the ODH made     | that the State    |
|               | additional findings of          | identified as     |
|               | noncompliance based on its      | being in          |
|               | review of all 88 counties       | noncompliance in  |
|               | through ODH's data              | November 2007 as  |
|               | validation/verification system  | well as the       |
|               | related to Indicator 1 (the     | status of         |
|               | timely provision of services)   | correction for    |
|               | and Indicator 7 (45-day         | any other         |
|               | timeline). ODH notified these   | findings made     |
|               | counties in writing in November | through December  |
|               | 2007 and that correction is due | 31, 2008.         |
|               | no later than November, 2008.   |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 10\. Percent  | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| of signed     | data for this indicator are     | the State's       |
| written       | 100%. These data are based on   | efforts in        |
| complaints    | three complaints. These data    | achieving         |
| with reports  | remain unchanged from the FFY   | compliance with   |
| issued that   | 2005 data of 100%.              | the timely        |
| were resolved |                                 | complaint         |
| within 60-day | The State met its FFY 2006      | resolution        |
| timeline or a | target of 100%.                 | requirements in   |
| timeline      |                                 | 34 CFR §§303.510  |
| extended for  |                                 | through 303.512.  |
| exceptional   |                                 |                   |
| circumstances |                                 |                   |
| with respect  |                                 |                   |
| to a          |                                 |                   |
| particular    |                                 |                   |
| complaint.    |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
| \[Compliance  |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]   |                                 |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 11\. Percent  | The State reported that it did  | OSEP looks        |
| of fully      | not receive any due process     | forward to        |
| adjudicated   | hearing requests during the FFY | reviewing the     |
| due process   | 2006 reporting period.          | State's data in   |
| hearing       |                                 | the FFY 2007 APR, |
| requests that |                                 | due February 1,   |
| were fully    |                                 | 2009.             |
| adjudicated   |                                 |                   |
| within the    |                                 |                   |
| applicable    |                                 |                   |
| timeline.     |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
| \[Compliance  |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]   |                                 |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 12\. Percent  | Not applicable.                 | This indicator    |
| of hearing    |                                 | does not apply to |
| requests that |                                 | the State because |
| went to       |                                 | the State has not |
| resolution    |                                 | adopted the Part  |
| sessions that |                                 | B due process     |
| were resolved |                                 | procedures.       |
| through       |                                 |                   |
| resolution    |                                 |                   |
| session       |                                 |                   |
| settlement    |                                 |                   |
| agreements    |                                 |                   |
| (applicable   |                                 |                   |
| if Part B due |                                 |                   |
| process       |                                 |                   |
| procedures    |                                 |                   |
| are adopted). |                                 |                   |
|               |                                 |                   |
| \[Results     |                                 |                   |
| Indicator\]   |                                 |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 13\. Percent  | The Sate reported that three    | OSEP looks        |
| of mediations | out of three mediations held    | forward to        |
| held that     | resulted in mediation           | reviewing the     |
| resulted in   | agreements. The State reported  | State's data in   |
| mediation     | fewer than 10 mediation         | the FFY 2007 APR, |
| agreements.   | requests in FFY 2006. The State | due February 1,   |
|               | is not required to provide      | 2009.             |
| \[Results     | targets or improvement          |                   |
| Indicator\]   | activities until any FFY in     |                   |
|               | which 10 or more mediations are |                   |
|               | conducted.                      |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+
| 14\. State    | The State's FFY 2006 reported   | OSEP appreciates  |
| reported data | data for this indicator are     | the State's       |
| (618 and      | 100%.                           | efforts in        |
| State         |                                 | achieving         |
| Performance   | The State met its FFY 2006      | compliance with   |
| Plan and      | target of 100%.                 | the Part C's data |
| Annual        |                                 | reporting         |
| Performance   |                                 | requirements in   |
| Report) are   |                                 | IDEA sections     |
| timely and    |                                 | 616, 618, and 642 |
| accurate.     |                                 | and 34 CFR        |
|               |                                 | §§76.720 and      |
| \[Compliance  |                                 | 303.540.          |
| Indicator\]   |                                 |                   |
+---------------+---------------------------------+-------------------+