August 19, 2005

Honorable Marilyn Howard

Superintendent of Public Instruction

Idaho Department of Education

Len B. Jordan Office Building

650 West State Street

Boise, Idaho 83720

Dear Superintendent Howard:

The purpose of this letter is to respond to Idaho's April 6, 2005
submission of its Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2003 Annual Performance
Report (APR) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) Part B for the grant period July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004.
The APR reflects actual accomplishments that the State made during the
reporting period, compared to established objectives. The Office of
Special Education Programs (OSEP), within the U.S. Department of
Education, has designed the APR under the IDEA to provide uniform
reporting from States and result in high-quality information across
States. The APR is a significant data source for OSEP in the Continuous
Improvement and Focused Monitoring System (CIFMS).

The State's APR should reflect the collection, analysis, and reporting
of relevant data, and include specific data-based determinations
regarding performance and compliance in each of the cluster areas. This
letter responds to the State's FFY 2003 APR. OSEP has set out its
comments, analyses and determinations by cluster area.

*Background*

The conclusion of OSEP's May 27, 2004 FFY 2002 APR response letter
required the State to describe how it would achieve its goal of
increasing the number of children in less restrictive settings while
continuing to make the full continuum of alternative placements
(instruction in regular classes, special classes, special schools, home
instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions) available
and ensuring that each individual child is placed in a setting that
meets his or her identified needs consistent with Part B of IDEA.

# 

# *General Supervision*

OSEP identified no noncompliance in this area in the FFY 2002 APR.

[Identification and timely correction of noncompliance]{.underline}

On pages 1-5 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding the identification and timely correction of noncompliance. The
State reported that 100% of the identified compliance issues were
corrected within one year. OSEP appreciates the State's efforts in this
area and looks forward to reviewing data and information in the State
Performance Plan (SPP), due December 2, 2005.

######## Formal written complaints

On pages 6-7 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding formal written complaints. The State reported 18 complaints
were filed with 17 decisions reached within 60 calendar days. The State
provided an explanation for the delayed decision on page 7. No
complaints were pending as of June 30, 2004. OSEP appreciates the
State's efforts in this area and looks forward to reviewing data and
information in the SPP.

[Mediation]{.underline}

On pages 6-7 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding mediation. The State reported seven mediations and seven
mediation agreements. OSEP appreciates the State's efforts in this area
and looks forward to reviewing data and information in the SPP.

[Due process hearings and reviews]{.underline}

On pages 6-7 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding due process hearings and reviews. The State reported three
hearing requests and one fully adjudicated hearing and that the decision
was issued in 45 days. OSEP appreciates the State's efforts in this area
and looks forward to reviewing data and information in the SPP.

[Personnel]{.underline}

On pages 8-12 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding personnel. The State reported trend data that showed the
percentage of fully certified special education staff declined from 95%
to 87%. The State provided data showing that the number of degrees given
by Idaho colleges and universities increased from 39 in 2003 to 63 in
2004. OSEP appreciates the State's efforts in this area.

[Collection and timely reporting of accurate data]{.underline}

On pages 13-14 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding collection and timely reporting of accurate data. The State
reported that 100% of the data reports were available to the public in
September 2004 and that all reports to OSEP were submitted by due dates.
OSEP appreciates the State's efforts in this area and looks forward to
reviewing data and information in the SPP.

***Early Childhood Transition***

OSEP identified no noncompliance in this area in the FFY 2002 APR. On
pages 15-17 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding early childhood transition. In 1999, the number of children
exiting Part C whose eligibility was undetermined was 170. In 2003, the
number was 11. A total of 659 transitioned to Part B from Part C by age
3 with an IEP in 2003. OSEP appreciates the State's efforts in this area
and looks forward to reviewing data and information in the SPP.

***Parent Involvement***

OSEP identified no noncompliance in this area in the FFY 2002 APR. On
pages 18-20 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding parent involvement. Idaho described its efforts to increase
the involvement of parents in their children's education and described
the results of a parent survey that showed that 80% of the parents
reported being either actively involved or very actively involved in the
eligibility decision for their child. The State's monitoring process
found that some school districts did not involve parents in the
eligibility decisions and required corrective actions to address this
issue. Correction occurred within one year of the State's identification
of the finding. Districts were also required to address this issue in
the district's annual plan for improving results. OSEP appreciates the
State's efforts in this area and looks forward to reviewing data and
information in the SPP.

# 

***Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) in the Least Restrictive
Environment (LRE)***

OSEP identified no noncompliance in this area in the FFY 2002 APR.

[Disproportionality]{.underline}

On pages 21-23 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding disproportionality. The State analyzed the ethnicity of
students through both the risk ratio and the E-formula handed down by
the Ninth Circuit Court in the Larry P. case. The State reported that
100% of compliance issues, when identified through its monitoring
process regarding policies, procedures, and practices, were corrected
within one year of identification by the State. The State noted that in
2003, procedures used to identify Hispanics with disabilities were based
on appropriate assessments. The State also reported that there was
increased consideration of cultural impact and lack of opportunity when
determining whether culturally diverse students had a developmental
delay. OSEP appreciates the State's efforts in this area and looks
forward to reviewing data and information in the SPP.

[Graduation and drop-out rates]{.underline}

On pages 24-25 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding graduation and drop-out rates. The State's drop-out rate was
the same as the general education drop-out rate. The overall trend for
the State's graduation rate remained flat (73.3%) for both students with
and without disabilities. The State included future activities to
increase the graduation rate and

decrease the drop-out rate. OSEP appreciates the State's efforts in this
area and looks forward to reviewing data and information in the SPP.

[Suspension and expulsion]{.underline}

On pages 26-27 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding suspension and expulsion rates. Less than 0.29% of Idaho's
students with disabilities were suspended or expelled for more than ten
days in the 2003-2004 school year (national average was 1.12%). OSEP
appreciates the State's efforts in this area and looks forward to
reviewing data and information in the SPP.

[Statewide and districtwide assessment]{.underline}

On pages 28-29 and in Attachment 3 on pages 1-18 of the FFY 2003 APR,
the State included information regarding Statewide and districtwide
assessment. The participation rates for both the reading and math
assessments were 99% for the 2003-2004 school year, up from 96% in the
previous year. Scores improved for all grade levels with an overall
increase of 8 percentage points from 31% to 39% at or above in reading
proficiency and 10 points from 28% to 38% at or above in math
proficiency (Table 8 on page 28). OSEP appreciates the State's efforts
in this area and looks forward to reviewing data and information in the
SPP.

[Least restrictive environment (LRE)]{.underline}

On pages 30-32 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding least restrictive environment (LRE). The conclusion of OSEP's
May 2004 letter required the State to describe how Idaho would achieve
its goal of increasing the number of children in less restrictive
settings while continuing to make the full continuum of alternative
placements (instruction in regular classes, special classes, special
schools, home instruction, and instruction in hospitals and
institutions) available and ensuring that each individual child is
placed in a setting that meets his or her identified needs consistent
with the Part B regulations. Information in the State's APR addressed
this issue by comparing Idaho's placement data with national averages
for each placement setting. An analysis of Idaho's data showed that 59%
of children with disabilities were in the general education classroom
80-100% of the school day (national average was 47%); 31% were in the
general education classroom 42-79% of the school day (national average
was 28%); and 10% were in the general education classroom less than 42%
of the school day (national average is 24%).[^1] For children aged 3-5,
the percentage of children with disabilities served in natural settings
(early childhood, early childhood centers, kindergarten and the home)
increased from 18% in 2000-2001 to 37% in 2003-2004. Page 30 of the FFY
2003 APR contained a numerical goal for measuring the State's
achievement of its indicators for this area of the APR. While it is not
inconsistent with Part B of the IDEA to include a numerical goal to
increase the percentage of children with disabilities placed in the
least restrictive settings, the State must continue to monitor to ensure
that eligibility decisions for all children are made in conformity with
the requirements of Part B of IDEA at 34 CFR §§ 300.550-300.556 and not
based upon a numerical goal. OSEP appreciates the State's efforts in
this area and looks forward to reviewing data and information in the
SPP.

[Preschool performance outcomes]{.underline}

# On pages 33-34 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information regarding preschool performance outcomes. The State had baseline and trend data in the area of pre-reading skill assessment. The State planned to convene stakeholder groups to develop outcome measures for preschoolers in the areas of early language/communication and social-emotional skills. In preparation for submission of the SPP on December 2, 2005, the State should carefully consider data and information collected for the APRs, along with OSEP's responses, against the requirements related to this indicator in the SPP packet, due out to States in July 2005. The State must make a determination whether plans currently in place to collect data related to this area will be responsive to those requirements. OSEP looks forward to reviewing the information in the SPP.

## Secondary Transition

OSEP identified no noncompliance in this area in the FFY 2002 APR.

On pages 35-40 of the FFY 2003 APR, the State included information
regarding secondary transition. The participation in postsecondary
education for both students with disabilities and nondisabled students
declined in 2003. The gap between the two groups narrowed by 3%. OSEP
appreciates the State's efforts in this area and looks forward to
reviewing data and information in the SPP.

## Conclusion

## 

IDEA 2004, §616, requires each State to submit a SPP that measures
performance on monitoring priorities and indicators established by the
Department. These priorities and indicators will be, for the most part,
similar to clusters and probes in the APR. OSEP encourages the State to
carefully consider the comments in this letter as it prepares its SPP,
due December 2, 2005.

OSEP recognizes that the APR and its related activities represent only a
portion of the work in your State and looks forward to collaborating
with you as you continue to improve results for children and youth with
disabilities and their families. If you have questions, please contact
Marie Mayor at (202) 245-7433.

Sincerely,

Troy R. Justesen

Acting Director

Office of Special Education Programs

cc: Mary Beth Flachbart

[^1]: Idaho reported in the FFY 2003 APR the following LRE categories:
    (a) In the General Education Classroom 80-100% of the school day;
    (b) In the General Education Classroom 42-79% of the school day; and
    (c) In General Education Classroom less than 42% of the school day.