Table A -- Part B

+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **SPP Indicator**      | **Issue**            | **Required Action**  |
+========================+======================+======================+
| **Indicator 3:**       | Noncompliance: The   | See Table B.         |
|                        | Special Conditions   |                      |
| Participation and      | to the 2005 Part B   |                      |
| performance of         | grant award are      |                      |
| children with          | discussed in Table   |                      |
| disabilities on        | B.                   |                      |
| statewide assessments: |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| A. Percent of          |                      |                      |
| districts meeting the  |                      |                      |
| State's AYP objectives |                      |                      |
| for progress for       |                      |                      |
| disability subgroup.   |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| B.  Participation rate |                      |                      |
|     for children with  |                      |                      |
|     IEPs in a regular  |                      |                      |
|     assessment with no |                      |                      |
|     accommodations;    |                      |                      |
|     regular assessment |                      |                      |
|     with               |                      |                      |
|     accommodations;    |                      |                      |
|     alternate          |                      |                      |
|     assessment against |                      |                      |
|     grade level        |                      |                      |
|     standards;         |                      |                      |
|     alternate          |                      |                      |
|     assessment against |                      |                      |
|     alternate          |                      |                      |
|     achievement        |                      |                      |
|     standards.         |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| C. Proficiency rate    |                      |                      |
| for children with IEPs |                      |                      |
| against grade level    |                      |                      |
| standards and          |                      |                      |
| alternate achievement  |                      |                      |
| standards.             |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| (20 U.S.C. 1416        |                      |                      |
| (a)(3)(A))             |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 4:**       | Noncompliance: 4A.   | See Table B.         |
|                        | See Table B.         |                      |
| Rates of suspension    |                      | The State must       |
| and expulsion:         | Other: In the        | clarify whether the  |
|                        | December 2, 2005     | baseline data        |
| A. Percent of          | SPP, the State       | submitted was based  |
| districts identified   | reported data for    | upon the correct     |
| by the State as having | indicator 4A, on     | measurement to       |
| a significant          | significant          | include both         |
| discrepancy in the     | discrepancies among  | suspensions and      |
| rates of suspensions   | the LEAs in the rate | expulsions. If not,  |
| and expulsions of      | of suspensions of    | the FFY 2005 APR due |
| children with          | children with        | February 1, 2007     |
| disabilities for       | disabilities for     | must also include    |
| greater than 10 days   | more than 10 days.   | the revised baseline |
| in a school year; and  | OSEP could not       | and targets using    |
|                        | determine whether    | the correct          |
| B. Percent of          | the reported data    | measurement.         |
| districts identified   | included expulsions  |                      |
| by the State as having | of children with     |                      |
| a significant          | disabilities.        |                      |
| discrepancy in the     | Therefore, OSEP      |                      |
| rates of suspensions   | could not determine  |                      |
| and expulsions of      | whether the State    |                      |
| greater than 10 days   | used the required    |                      |
| in a school year of    | measurement that     |                      |
| children with          | includes both        |                      |
| disabilities by race   | suspensions and      |                      |
| and ethnicity.         | expulsions that are  |                      |
|                        | greater than 10      |                      |
| (20 U.S.C.             | days.                |                      |
| 1416(a)(3)(A);         |                      |                      |
| 1412(a)(22))           |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 7:**       | Other: An evaluation | As indicated in the  |
|                        | of the sampling plan | February 14, 2006    |
| Percent of preschool   | for Indicator 7      | OSEP memorandum, if  |
| children with IEPs who | indicated that it    | a revised sampling   |
| demonstrate improved   | was not technically  | plan has not been    |
|                        | sound (see OSEP's    | accepted by OSEP by  |
| A.  Positive           | February 14, 2006    | the time the State   |
|     social-emotional   | memorandum). Data    | submits its FFY 2005 |
|     skills (including  | will lack validity   | APR on February 1,   |
|     social             | if based on a        | 2007, the State must |
|     relationships);    | sampling plan that   | submit a revised     |
|                        | is not technically   | sampling methodology |
| B.  Acquisition and    | sound. OSEP is       | that describes how   |
|     use of knowledge   | concerned because    | data were collected  |
|     and skills         | your plan is to use  | with the State's FFY |
|     (including early   | these invalid data   | 2005 APR. In the FFY |
|     language/          | to establish         | 2005 APR, you also   |
|     communication and  | entry-level data for | need to explain how  |
|     early literacy);   | this Indicator. The  | your State addressed |
|     and                | submission of        | the deficiencies in  |
|                        | invalid data is      | the data collection  |
| C.  Use of appropriate | inconsistent with    | noted in the         |
|     behaviors to meet  | Federal statute and  | attachment to the    |
|     their needs.       | regulations,         | OSEP memorandum. If  |
|                        | including section    | you decide not to    |
| (20 U.S.C. 1416        | 616(b)(2)(B) of the  | sample, but rather   |
| (a)(3)(A))             | IDEA, and will       | gather census data,  |
|                        | affect OSEP's        | please inform OSEP   |
|                        | determination of the | and revise your SPP  |
|                        | State's status under | accordingly.         |
|                        | section 616(d) of    |                      |
|                        | the IDEA.            |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 9:**       | Noncompliance: See   | See Table B.         |
|                        | Table B.             |                      |
| Percent of districts   |                      |                      |
| with disproportionate  |                      |                      |
| representation of      |                      |                      |
| racial and ethnic      |                      |                      |
| groups in special      |                      |                      |
| education and related  |                      |                      |
| services that is the   |                      |                      |
| result of              |                      |                      |
| inappropriate          |                      |                      |
| identification.        |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| (20 U.S.C.             |                      |                      |
| 1416(a)(3)(C))         |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 10**       | Noncompliance: See   | See Table B.         |
|                        | Table B.             |                      |
| Percent of districts   |                      |                      |
| with disproportionate  |                      |                      |
| representation of      |                      |                      |
| racial and ethnic      |                      |                      |
| groups in specific     |                      |                      |
| disability categories  |                      |                      |
| that is the result of  |                      |                      |
| inappropriate          |                      |                      |
| identification.        |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| (20 U.S.C.             |                      |                      |
| 1416(a)(3)(C))         |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 11:**      | Other: OSEP is       | The State must       |
|                        | unable to determine  | ensure that any      |
| Percent of children    | whether the plan     | activities or        |
| with parental consent  | included for new     | strategies regarding |
| to evaluate, who were  | Indicator 11 will    | this indicator       |
| evaluated and          | result in the        | result in the        |
| eligibility determined | collection of the    | collection of the    |
| within 60 days (or     | required data by the | required baseline    |
| State established      | submission of the    | data, for the        |
| timeline).             | APR, due February 1, | required time        |
|                        | 2007.                | period, and that the |
| (20 U.S.C.             |                      | baseline data and    |
| 1416(a)(3)(B))         |                      | any other required   |
|                        |                      | data are reported in |
|                        |                      | the APR. Failure to  |
|                        |                      | report the required  |
|                        |                      | data in the APR may  |
|                        |                      | affect OSEP's        |
|                        |                      | determination of the |
|                        |                      | State's status under |
|                        |                      | section 616(d) of    |
|                        |                      | the IDEA.            |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 12:**      | Noncompliance: See   | See Table B.         |
|                        | Table B.             |                      |
| Percent of children    |                      | The State must       |
| referred by Part C     | Other: In the SPP,   | include this         |
| prior to age 3, who    | under Indicator 12,  | information, in the  |
| are found eligible for | the State reported   | APR, due February 1, |
| Part B, and who have   | that it does not     | 2007. Failure to     |
| an IEP developed and   | collect the data     | include this         |
| implemented by their   | required under this  | information may      |
| third birthdays.       | Indicator, including | affect OSEP's        |
|                        | the number of        | determination of the |
| (20 U.S.C.             | children referred    | State's status under |
| 1416(a)(3)(B))         | from Part C to Part  | section 616(d) of    |
|                        | B who were           | the IDEA.            |
|                        | determined to be NOT |                      |
|                        | eligible and whose   |                      |
|                        | eligibility          |                      |
|                        | determinations were  |                      |
|                        | made prior to their  |                      |
|                        | third birthdays and  |                      |
|                        | reported that the    |                      |
|                        | baseline data is not |                      |
|                        | Statewide data, but  |                      |
|                        | comes from its       |                      |
|                        | compliance           |                      |
|                        | monitoring.          |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 14:**      | Other: An evaluation | As indicated in the  |
|                        | of the sampling plan | February 14, 2006    |
| Percent of youth who   | for Indicator 14     | OSEP memorandum, if  |
| had IEPs, are no       | indicated that it    | a revised sampling   |
| longer in secondary    | was not technically  | plan has not been    |
| school and who have    | sound (see OSEP's    | accepted by OSEP by  |
| been competitively     | February 14, 2006    | the time the State   |
| employed, enrolled in  | memorandum). Data    | submits its FFY 2005 |
| some type of           | will lack validity   | APR on February 1,   |
| postsecondary school,  | if based on a        | 2007, the State must |
| or both, within one    | sampling plan that   | submit a revised     |
| year of leaving high   | is not technically   | sampling methodology |
| school.                | sound. OSEP is       | that describes how   |
|                        | concerned because    | data were collected  |
| (20 U.S.C.             | your plan is to use  | with the State's FFY |
| 1416(a)(3)(B))         | these invalid data   | 2005 APR. In the FFY |
|                        | to establish         | 2005 APR, you also   |
|                        | baseline data for    | need to explain how  |
|                        | this Indicator. The  | your State addressed |
|                        | submission of        | the deficiencies in  |
|                        | invalid data is      | the data collection  |
|                        | inconsistent with    | noted in the         |
|                        | Federal statute and  | attachment to the    |
|                        | regulations,         | OSEP memorandum. If  |
|                        | including section    | you decide not to    |
|                        | 616(b)(2)(B) of the  | sample, but rather   |
|                        | IDEA, and will       | gather census data,  |
|                        | affect OSEP's        | please inform OSEP   |
|                        | determination of the | and revise your SPP  |
|                        | State's status under | accordingly.         |
|                        | section 616(d) of    |                      |
|                        | the IDEA.            |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 15:**      | Noncompliance: See   | See Table B.         |
|                        | Table B              |                      |
| General supervision    |                      |                      |
| system (including      |                      |                      |
| monitoring,            |                      |                      |
| complaints, hearings,  |                      |                      |
| etc.) identifies and   |                      |                      |
| corrects noncompliance |                      |                      |
| as soon as possible    |                      |                      |
| but in no case later   |                      |                      |
| than one year from     |                      |                      |
| identification.        |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| (20 U.S.C. 1416        |                      |                      |
| (a)(3)(B))             |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 16:**      | Noncompliance: See   | See Table B.         |
|                        | Table B              |                      |
| Percent of signed      |                      |                      |
| written complaints     |                      |                      |
| with reports issued    |                      |                      |
| that were resolved     |                      |                      |
| within 60-day timeline |                      |                      |
| or a timeline extended |                      |                      |
| for exceptional        |                      |                      |
| circumstances with     |                      |                      |
| respect to a           |                      |                      |
| particular complaint.  |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| (20 U.S.C.             |                      |                      |
| 1416(a)(3)(B))         |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 17:**      | Noncompliance:       | See Table B.         |
|                        | Previously           |                      |
| Percent of fully       | identified           |                      |
| adjudicated due        | noncompliance        |                      |
| process hearing        | corrected. See Table |                      |
| requests that were     | B                    |                      |
| fully adjudicated      |                      |                      |
| within the 45-day      |                      |                      |
| timeline or a timeline |                      |                      |
| that is properly       |                      |                      |
| extended by the        |                      |                      |
| hearing officer at the |                      |                      |
| request of either      |                      |                      |
| party.                 |                      |                      |
|                        |                      |                      |
| (20 U.S.C.             |                      |                      |
| 1416(a)(3)(B))         |                      |                      |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| **Indicator 20:**      | Noncompliance: Under | The State should     |
|                        | Indicator 20 in the  | review and, if       |
| State reported data    | SPP, the State       | necessary revise,    |
| (618 and State         | reported that for    | its improvement      |
| Performance Plan and   | the past two years,  | strategies included  |
| Annual Performance     | section 618 "data    | in the SPP to ensure |
| Report) are timely and | for child count,     | they will enable the |
| accurate.              | race/ethnicity and   | State to include     |
|                        | placement have been  | data in the APR,     |
| (20 U.S.C.             | submitted several    | that demonstrate     |
| 1416(a)(3)(B))         | weeks late." The     | full compliance with |
|                        | State has reported   | this requirement.    |
|                        | noncompliance with   | The State must       |
|                        | the requirement at   | ensure that this     |
|                        | 34 CFR §300.750.     | noncompliance is     |
|                        |                      | corrected within one |
|                        |                      | year of its          |
|                        |                      | identification and   |
|                        |                      | include data in the  |
|                        |                      | APR, due February 1, |
|                        |                      | 2007, that           |
|                        |                      | demonstrate          |
|                        |                      | compliance with this |
|                        |                      | requirement.         |
+------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+