## Table B -- Rhode Island Part C

# Previously Identified Issues 

+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------+
| **Issue**      | ## S            | **OSEP          | **Required     |
|                | tate Submission | Analysis**      | Action**       |
+================+=================+=================+================+
| **Indicator    | The State       | The State       | The State must |
| 1:** Whether   | reported, in    | provided data   | review and, if |
| eligible       | Indicator 1 on  | that            | necessary      |
| children       | page 8 of the   | demonstrate     | revise, its    |
| receive the    | SPP, data       | noncompliance   | improvement    |
| early          | indicating that | with the        | strategies to  |
| intervention   | 59.57% of       | requirement     | ensure they    |
| services       | infants and     | that eligible   | will enable    |
| listed on      | toddlers with   | children        | the State to   |
| their IFSPs.   | IFSPs receive   | receive the     | include data   |
|                | the early       | early           | in the APR due |
| Based on       | intervention    | intervention    | February 1,    |
| OSEP's review  | services listed | services listed | 2007, that     |
| of Rhode       | on their IFSP   | on their IFSPs  | demonstrate    |
| Island's       | in a timely     | (34 CFR         | full           |
| Se             | manner.         | §§303.340(c),   | compliance     |
| lf-Assessment, |                 | 303.342(e), and | with this      |
| the FFY 2002   | On pages 9 and  | 303.344(f)(1)). | requirement.   |
| APR, and       | 10 of the SPP,  | The level of    | Failure to     |
| OSEP's         | the State       | compliance      | demonstrate    |
| verification   | submitted       | reported was    | compliance at  |
| visit, OSEP    | improvement     | 59.57%.         | that time may  |
| identified     | activities,     |                 | affect OSEP's  |
| this as an     | timelines and   |                 | determination  |
| area of        | resources for   |                 | of the State's |
| potential      | ensuring that   |                 | status under   |
| noncompliance  | eligible        |                 | section 616(d) |
| (34 CFR        | children        |                 | of the IDEA.   |
| §§303.340(c),  | receive the     |                 |                |
| 303.342(e),    | early           |                 | See Table A    |
| and            | intervention    |                 | for issues     |
| 3              | services listed |                 | identified in  |
| 03.344(f)(1)). | on their IFSPs. |                 | the State      |
|                |                 |                 | Performance    |
| OSEP's October |                 |                 | Plan also      |
| 4, 2005 letter |                 |                 | relating to    |
| responding to  |                 |                 | this           |
| the FFY 2003   |                 |                 | indicator.     |
| APR required   |                 |                 |                |
| the State to   |                 |                 |                |
| submit updated |                 |                 |                |
| data, with     |                 |                 |                |
| respect to     |                 |                 |                |
| implementation |                 |                 |                |
| of IFSPs, and  |                 |                 |                |
| if the data    |                 |                 |                |
| indicated      |                 |                 |                |
| noncompliance  |                 |                 |                |
| then the State |                 |                 |                |
| was required   |                 |                 |                |
| to submit a    |                 |                 |                |
| plan, ensuring |                 |                 |                |
| correction of  |                 |                 |                |
| the            |                 |                 |                |
| noncompliance  |                 |                 |                |
| within one     |                 |                 |                |
| year from      |                 |                 |                |
| OSEP's         |                 |                 |                |
| acceptance of  |                 |                 |                |
| the plan.      |                 |                 |                |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------+
| **Indicator    | The State       | The State       | No further     |
| 2:** Whether   | reported under  | provided the    | action is      |
| the State has  | Indicator 2, on | information     | required.      |
| demonstrated   | page 12,        | required.       |                |
| that infants   | information     |                 |                |
| and toddlers   | from its        |                 |                |
| receive        | December 1,     |                 |                |
| services in    | 2004 child      |                 |                |
| the natural    | count data that |                 |                |
| environment.   | describe the    |                 |                |
|                | natural         |                 |                |
| OSEP's October | environment and |                 |                |
| 4, 2005 letter | other settings  |                 |                |
| required the   | where early     |                 |                |
| State to       | intervention    |                 |                |
| clarify the    | services were   |                 |                |
| section 618    | provided.       |                 |                |
| natural        |                 |                 |                |
| environment    |                 |                 |                |
| data that was  |                 |                 |                |
| submitted in   |                 |                 |                |
| the FFY 2003   |                 |                 |                |
| APR.           |                 |                 |                |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------+
| **Indicator    | 1\. The State   | 1\. The State's | 1 and 2. The   |
| 7:** Whether   | submitted a     | plan includes   | State must     |
| the State      | plan in the     | strategies that | review and, if |
| conducts an    | SPP, on pages   | appear to       | necessary      |
| evaluation,    | 38 through 39,  | ensure          | revise, its    |
| assessment and | with            | compliance with | improvement    |
| an initial     | improvement     | the             | strategies to  |
| IFSP meeting   | activities,     | requirements of | ensure they    |
| within the     | timelines and   | 34 CFR          | will enable    |
| 45-day         | resources to    | §               | the State to   |
| timeline       | ensure that the | §303.321(e)(2), | include data   |
| required by 34 | requirements of | 303.322(e)(1)   | in the APR,    |
| CFR            | the 45-day      | and 303.342(a). | due February   |
| §§             | timeline,       |                 | 1, 2007, that  |
| 303.321(e)(2), | including the   | 2\. The State   | demonstrate    |
| 303.322(e)(1), | completion of   | provided data   | full           |
| and            | an evaluation   | that            | compliance     |
| 303.342(a).    | and initial     | demonstrated    | with the       |
|                | IFSP meeting,   | noncompliance   | requirements   |
| In its January | are met.        | with the        | at 34 CFR      |
| 2005           |                 | requirement     | §§             |
| verification   | 2\. In          | that an initial | 303.321(e)(2), |
| visit letter,  | Indicator 7,    | IFSP meeting    | 303.322(e)(1)  |
| OSEP required  | pages 37        | must be         | and            |
| the State to   | through 38, the | convened within | 303.342(a),    |
| demonstrate in | State submitted | the 45-day      | especially     |
| the FFY 2003   | data indicating | timeline        | with the       |
| APR that the   | that 26.49% of  | required by 34  | requirement    |
| initial        | eligible        | CFR             | that eligible  |
| evaluation was | infants and     | §               | infants and    |
| completed      | toddlers have   | §303.321(e)(2); | toddlers with  |
| within the     | an evaluation,  | 303.321(e)(1);  | IFSPs have an  |
| 45-day         | assessment and  | and 303.342(a). | evaluation and |
| timeline 34    | an initial IFSP | The level of    | initial IFSP   |
| CFR            | meeting within  | compliance      | meeting        |
| §303           | the 45-day      | reported is     | conducted      |
| .321(e)(2)(i). | timeline.       | 26.49%.         | within Part    |
| The data,      |                 |                 | C's 45-day     |
| submitted in   |                 |                 | timeline.      |
| the 2003 APR,  |                 |                 | Failure to     |
| continued to   |                 |                 | demonstrate    |
| show           |                 |                 | compliance at  |
| noncompliance. |                 |                 | that time may  |
|                |                 |                 | affect OSEP's  |
| In its         |                 |                 | determination  |
| September 2004 |                 |                 | of the State's |
| letter, OSEP   |                 |                 | status under   |
| identified     |                 |                 | section 616(d) |
| potential      |                 |                 | of the IDEA.   |
| noncompliance  |                 |                 |                |
| with the       |                 |                 | See Table A    |
| requirement    |                 |                 | for issues     |
| that the State |                 |                 | identified in  |
| convene the    |                 |                 | the State      |
| initial IFSP   |                 |                 | Performance    |
| meeting within |                 |                 | Plan also      |
| the 45-day     |                 |                 | relating to    |
| timeline       |                 |                 | this           |
| required by 34 |                 |                 | indicator.     |
| CFR            |                 |                 |                |
| §§303          |                 |                 |                |
| .321(e)(2)(ii) |                 |                 |                |
| and            |                 |                 |                |
| 303.342(a).    |                 |                 |                |
| OSEP was       |                 |                 |                |
| unable to      |                 |                 |                |
| determine from |                 |                 |                |
| the data       |                 |                 |                |
| submitted in   |                 |                 |                |
| the FFY 2003   |                 |                 |                |
| APR whether    |                 |                 |                |
| the IFSP       |                 |                 |                |
| meeting was    |                 |                 |                |
| held in the    |                 |                 |                |
| required       |                 |                 |                |
| timeline.      |                 |                 |                |
|                |                 |                 |                |
| In its October |                 |                 |                |
| 4, 2005        |                 |                 |                |
| letter, OSEP   |                 |                 |                |
| required the   |                 |                 |                |
| State to       |                 |                 |                |
| submit 1) a    |                 |                 |                |
| plan that      |                 |                 |                |
| ensures        |                 |                 |                |
| correction of  |                 |                 |                |
| noncompliance  |                 |                 |                |
| with the       |                 |                 |                |
| timely         |                 |                 |                |
| evaluation     |                 |                 |                |
| requirement;   |                 |                 |                |
| and 2) data on |                 |                 |                |
| the number and |                 |                 |                |
| percentages of |                 |                 |                |
| initial IFSP   |                 |                 |                |
| meetings       |                 |                 |                |
| convened       |                 |                 |                |
| within the     |                 |                 |                |
| 45-day         |                 |                 |                |
| timeline and a |                 |                 |                |
| plan ensuring  |                 |                 |                |
| correction of  |                 |                 |                |
| any            |                 |                 |                |
| noncompliance. |                 |                 |                |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------+
| **Indicator    | 1\. In          | 1\. The State   | 1\. No further |
| 9:** Whether   | Indicator 9,    | reported data   | action         |
| the State's    | pages 49        | demonstrating   | required.      |
| general        | through 51, the | that it has a   |                |
| supervision    | State reported  | system          | 2\. The        |
| system         | data indicating | reasonably      | State's final  |
| identifies and | identification  | designed to     | progress       |
| corrects       | of              | identify        | report         |
| noncompliance  | noncompliance   | noncompliance   | demonstrating  |
| within the     | in monitoring   | as required by  | compliance     |
| timeframe      | priorities and  | 34 CFR          | with this      |
| required by 34 | indicators and  | §303.501.       | requirement,   |
| CFR §303.501.  | in other areas. |                 | which was due  |
|                |                 | 2\. Since there | November 3,    |
| 1\. OSEP's     | 2\. On pages 47 | was a change in | 2006, may be   |
| January 2005   | and 48, the     | the lead agency | submitted with |
| verification   | State reported  | on July 1, 2004 | the APR, due   |
| visit letter   | data that       | and the data    | February 1,    |
| indicated that | showed 24       | were not yet    | 2007. In that  |
| OSEP could not | findings of     | available, the  | APR, the State |
| determine if   | noncompliance   | State did not   | must ensure    |
| the new lead   | related to      | provide data    | that it is     |
| agency had a   | monitoring      | that            | implementing   |
| monitoring     | priority areas  | demonstrate     | its            |
| system         | and indicators. | compliance with | improvement    |
| reasonably     | However, the    | the requirement | strategies to  |
| designed to    | State did not   | regarding       | enable the     |
| identify       | report evidence | correction of   | State to       |
| noncompliance. | of correction   | identified      | include data   |
| OSEP noted     | of the          | noncompliance   | in the APR     |
| that the       | identified      | in a timely     | that           |
| previous lead  | noncompliance,  | manner as       | demonstrate    |
| agency had a   | as the year to  | required by 34  | full           |
| system         | correct the     | CFR §303.501.   | compliance     |
| reasonably     | noncompliance   |                 | with this      |
| designed to    | had not yet     |                 | requirement.   |
| identify       | lapsed.         |                 | Failure to     |
| noncompliance  |                 |                 | demonstrate    |
| (with an       |                 |                 | compliance at  |
| exception in   |                 |                 | that time will |
| the area of    |                 |                 | affect OSEP's  |
| timely         |                 |                 | determination  |
| evaluations).  |                 |                 | of the State's |
| In its October |                 |                 | status under   |
| 4, 2005        |                 |                 | section 616(d) |
| letter, OSEP   |                 |                 | of the IDEA.   |
| directed the   |                 |                 |                |
| State to       |                 |                 |                |
| submit: 1)     |                 |                 |                |
| data           |                 |                 |                |
| identifying    |                 |                 |                |
| any            |                 |                 |                |
| noncompliance  |                 |                 |                |
| with Part C    |                 |                 |                |
| requirements;  |                 |                 |                |
| and 2) a plan  |                 |                 |                |
| ensuring       |                 |                 |                |
| identification |                 |                 |                |
| of             |                 |                 |                |
| noncompliance. |                 |                 |                |
|                |                 |                 |                |
| 2\. The        |                 |                 |                |
| January 2005   |                 |                 |                |
| verification   |                 |                 |                |
| visit letter   |                 |                 |                |
| also found     |                 |                 |                |
| that the State |                 |                 |                |
| appeared not   |                 |                 |                |
| to have a      |                 |                 |                |
| system that    |                 |                 |                |
| ensured timely |                 |                 |                |
| correction of  |                 |                 |                |
| identified     |                 |                 |                |
| noncompliance, |                 |                 |                |
| and directed   |                 |                 |                |
| the State to   |                 |                 |                |
| provide a plan |                 |                 |                |
| in its FFY     |                 |                 |                |
| 2003 APR.      |                 |                 |                |
| OSEP's October |                 |                 |                |
| 4, 2005 letter |                 |                 |                |
| accepted the   |                 |                 |                |
| State's plan   |                 |                 |                |
| and directed   |                 |                 |                |
| the State to   |                 |                 |                |
| submit, in the |                 |                 |                |
| SPP, data and  |                 |                 |                |
| the status of  |                 |                 |                |
| any            |                 |                 |                |
| noncompliance  |                 |                 |                |
| identified,    |                 |                 |                |
| with a final   |                 |                 |                |
| report         |                 |                 |                |
| demonstrating  |                 |                 |                |
| compliance, no |                 |                 |                |
| later than 30  |                 |                 |                |
| days following |                 |                 |                |
| one year from  |                 |                 |                |
| the date of    |                 |                 |                |
| the letter,    |                 |                 |                |
| which would be |                 |                 |                |
| November 3,    |                 |                 |                |
| 2006.          |                 |                 |                |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------+
| **Indicator    | On pages 54 and | The State       | No further     |
| 9B:** Whether  | 55 of the SPP,  | reported data   | action is      |
| the State is   | the State       | showing full    | required.      |
| in compliance  | reported that   | compliance with |                |
| with the prior | it had revised  | the prior       |                |
| written notice | the prior       | notice          |                |
| requirements   | written notice  | requirements at |                |
| of 34 CFR      | documents, and  | 34 CFR          |                |
| §303.403(a).   | assured that    | §303.403(a).    |                |
| In its October | all certified   | OSEP            |                |
| 4, 2005        | providers must  | appreciates the |                |
| letter, OSEP   | provide these   | State's efforts |                |
| asked the      | documents to    | in ensuring     |                |
| State to       | parents.        | compliance with |                |
| confirm that   |                 | this            |                |
| it had revised |                 | requirement.    |                |
| the prior      |                 |                 |                |
| written notice |                 |                 |                |
| documents and  |                 |                 |                |
| provided the   |                 |                 |                |
| notice to      |                 |                 |                |
| parents as     |                 |                 |                |
| required under |                 |                 |                |
| Part C of the  |                 |                 |                |
| IDEA.          |                 |                 |                |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------+
| **Indicator    | In Indicator    | The State       | The State's    |
| 14:** Whether  | 14, pages 62    | submitted       | final progress |
| State reported | through 65, the | information     | report         |
| data are       | State generally | regarding the   | demonstrating  |
| timely and     | addressed its   | requirements of | compliance     |
| accurate as    | requirements    | timely and      | with this      |
| required by 34 | for ensuring    | accurate data   | requirement,   |
| CFR §303.540.  | the collection  | as required by  | which was due  |
|                | of accurate     | 34 CFR §303.540 | November 3,    |
| OSEP's January | data.           | and section 618 | 2006, may be   |
| 2005           |                 | of IDEA.        | submitted with |
| verification   |                 |                 | the APR, due   |
| visit letter   |                 |                 | February 1,    |
| expressed      |                 |                 | 2007. In that  |
| concern that   |                 |                 | APR, the State |
| Rhode Island's |                 |                 | must           |
| data system    |                 |                 | specifically   |
| did not        |                 |                 | confirm that   |
| collect all of |                 |                 | its 618 data   |
| the required   |                 |                 | and the data   |
| section 618    |                 |                 | in the APR are |
| data. In its   |                 |                 | accurate.      |
| October 4,     |                 |                 | Failure to     |
| 2005 letter,   |                 |                 | demonstrate    |
| OSEP accepted  |                 |                 | compliance at  |
| the State's    |                 |                 | that time will |
| plan ensuring  |                 |                 | affect OSEP's  |
| that its       |                 |                 | determination  |
| reported data  |                 |                 | of the State's |
| are timely and |                 |                 | status under   |
| accurate. The  |                 |                 | section 616(d) |
| letter also    |                 |                 | of the IDEA.   |
| directed the   |                 |                 |                |
| State to       |                 |                 | See Table A    |
| include in the |                 |                 | for issues     |
| SPP, data and  |                 |                 | identified in  |
| analysis       |                 |                 | the State      |
| demonstrating  |                 |                 | Performance    |
| progress       |                 |                 | Plan also      |
| toward         |                 |                 | relating to    |
| compliance,    |                 |                 | this           |
| with a final   |                 |                 | indicator.     |
| report         |                 |                 |                |
| demonstrating  |                 |                 |                |
| compliance, no |                 |                 |                |
| later than 30  |                 |                 |                |
| days following |                 |                 |                |
| one year from  |                 |                 |                |
| the date of    |                 |                 |                |
| the letter,    |                 |                 |                |
| which would be |                 |                 |                |
| November 3,    |                 |                 |                |
| 2006.          |                 |                 |                |
+----------------+-----------------+-----------------+----------------+