### March 20, 2006

### 

### 

### 

### 

### Honorable Nancy Grasmick

### State Superintendent of Schools

Maryland State Department of Education

200 West Baltimore Street

Baltimore, Maryland 21201

Dear Superintendent Grasmick:

Thank you for your timely submission of Maryland's State Performance
Plan (SPP) for review under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA). Section 616(b) of the Act requires States to
submit, within one year after the date of enactment of the reauthorized
IDEA, an SPP that evaluates the State's efforts to implement the
requirements and purposes of IDEA and describes how the State will
improve implementation. We appreciate the State's efforts in preparing
the SPP under a short timeline and in the face of many other competing
priorities. In the SPPs, due by December 2, 2005, States were to
include: (1) baseline data that reflect the State's efforts to implement
Part B of the IDEA; (2) measurable and rigorous targets for the next six
years for each of the indicators established by the Secretary in the
priority areas under section 616(a) of the IDEA; and (3) activities the
State will undertake to improve implementation of Part B.

## The SPP included a description of the broad stakeholder input that went into its development and clearly delineated both how the State solicited that involvement and how the State used the responses received through that process. The State provided data and information about potential issues related to policies, procedures and practices that may influence or explain the data for each SPP indicator to a broad array of stakeholder groups including advisory committees, local special education directors, coordinating council members. The State also utilized the National Association of State Directors of Special Education IDEA Partnership model to facilitate sharing the work with stakeholders in meaningful ways, promote collaboration, build State and local capacity, and develop mutual trust among decision-makers and those affected by decisions. 

The State included a variety of detailed activities with timelines and
resources designed to improve performance and, where applicable,
compliance, with each of the indicators. The activities appeared to be
designed to impact performance and compliance and assist the State in
meeting the established targets.

The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) is pleased to inform you
that your State's SPP under Part B meets the requirements of section
616(b) to include measurable and rigorous targets and improvement
activities. The State must make its SPP available through public means,
including posting on the State educational agency's (SEA's) website,
distribution to the media, and distribution through public agencies.
(Section 616(b)(2)(C)(ii)(I)).

The State\'s longstanding noncompliance, reported under indicator 15A in
Table B and related to the requirements under 34 CFR §300.600 and 20
U.S.C. 1232d(b)(3), is the subject of Special Conditions on the State's
Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2005 grant award. The State must provide data
demonstrating compliance with these requirements or the information
requested in Table B by the date of its final Progress Report under the
Special Conditions. Failure to provide data demonstrating compliance at
that time may result in the State\'s continued designation as a
\"high-risk\" grantee or may otherwise affect its FFY 2006 grant award.

## Under section 616(b)(2)(C)(ii)(II) of the Act, the State must annually report to OSEP on its performance under the SPP. The State's first Annual Performance Report (APR) on its progress in meeting its targets is due to OSEP by February 1, 2007. Attached to this letter you will find Table A addressing issues identified during our review of the SPP that -- while not requiring disapproval of your plan -- will affect our annual determination of State performance and compliance based on data presented in the State's APR. As a result, your State needs to provide additional information as part of its February 2007 APR submission. Table B includes OSEP's analysis of your submission related to previously-identified noncompliance or other issues included in our September 22, 2005 letter that responded to your State's FFY 2003 APR and our July 22, 2005 FFY Part B grant award letter, that also may require additional reporting. 

## In addition to reporting to OSEP, the State must report annually to the public on the performance of each local educational agency (LEA) located in the State on the targets in the State's performance plan. (Section 616(b)(2)(C)(ii)(I)) The requirement for public reporting on LEA performance is a critical provision related to ensuring accountability and focusing on improved results for children with disabilities. OSEP will be providing technical assistance regarding the reporting on LEA performance, at the National Accountability Conference, September 18 and 19, 2006 in Denver and through periodic technical assistance conference calls.

We hope that your State found the August 5, 2005 guidance on submission
of the SPPs and the technical assistance that we provided through the
August 11-12, 2005 Summer Institute, periodic conference calls, and the
[SPP Resources]{.underline} website helpful in this endeavor. 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.

Thank you for your continued work to improve results for children and
youth with disabilities and their families. We encourage you to work
closely with your State Contact as you proceed in implementing
improvement activities and developing your APR. If you have any
questions regarding the SPP or the APR, please contact Michael F. Slade
at 202-245-7527.

> Sincerely,
>
> /s/Troy R. Justesen
>
> Troy R. Justesen
>
> Acting Director
>
> Office of Special Education Programs

Enclosures

> Table A
>
> Table B

cc: Dr. Carol Ann Baglin

State Director of Special Education