Did the State identify any general data quality concerns, unrelated to COVID-19, that affected progress toward the SiMR during the reporting period? (yes/no) NO

########## Did the State identify any data quality concerns directly related to the COVID-19 pandemic during the reporting period? (yes/no)

YES If data for this reporting period were impacted specifically by COVID-19, the State must include in the narrative for the indicator: (1) the impact on data completeness, validity and reliability for the indicator; (2) an explanation of how COVID-19 specifi cally impacted the State's ability to collect the data for the indicator; and (3) any steps the State took to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on the data collection. The UBSE Special Education team collaborated with the USBE Data and Statistics team to conduct an in-depth review of our participation and proficiency data for students with disabilities compared to previous test administration years and compared to students without disabilities. Utah has a broad parental opt- out law, which has decreased Utah's statewide assessment participation rates for almost a decade. Utah's participation rates for students with disabilities in the 2021 testing window did decrease comp ared to previous years, but Utah's participation rate for all students also decreased, suggesting there is likely incomplete data available to determine valid and reliable impact of SSIP implementation on Utah's SiMR outcome. Utah believes the participation rate was impacted by the COVID- 19 pandemic. Even though Utah's schools were open for in -person learning, some families chose to keep their students at home for the majority of the 2020-2021 school year and chose to opt their students out of taking the assessment. Similarly, as students were exposed or tested positive for the virus, they were required to quarantine for at least seven days. When that occurred during the testing window, some students' parents chose not to arrange to have their students atten d the assessment make-up sessions. To increase assessment participation and ensure LEA staff understood the assessment and accountability Rules and procedures, the USBE provided professional learning (PL) and technical assistance (TA) to district and charter administrators, educators, and policy makers. The majority of Utah stakeholders were invested in ensuring that Utah students participated in the assessments and the Utah educators could access the data in a timely manner to support student learning and proficiency. Utah's proficiency on the 2021 statewide assessment decreased in almost every grade and content area. The USBE Assessment and Accountability team worked with the Center for Assessment to do an in-depth review of the proficiency data as well as 'opportunity to learn (OTL)' data that was collected along with the assessment. The assessment results have been shared with Utah stakeholders including policy makers and community members (educators, parents) and all stakeholders agree the COVID-19 pa ndemic significantly negatively impacted the proficiency of Utah's students. All Utah students received virtual-only instruction from mid-March 2020 to the end of school year (SY) 2019 - 2020, then some students received in- person instruction while others received virtual instruction and others received hybrid instruction during SY 2020 - 2021. Most students spent at least a few weeks quarantined during the school year because they had been exposed to or had tested positive for the virus. Thus, instruction was sometimes inconsistent or disjointed. Students with disabilities experienced the same negative effects as all students, and in some grades and content areas, their proficiency was impacted even more than students without disabilities. The summary report of the 2020 - 2021 assessment results can be found on the USBE's website (https://www.schools.utah.gov/file/45c7eabe -05a3-45d3-99e1-d2e8d700d503). Utah believes the SiMR results were negatively impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic as they are a subset of the over all assessment results of Utah's students with disabilities. Though Utah did not meet the annual target for the SSIP and instead regressed from the 2018 - 2019 baseline reset data, Utah is pleased that the 2020 - 2021 SIMR results still exceed the initial SSIP data from 2013 - 2014 (7.1%). In summary, Utah believes the data collected was as complete as Utah law allows and the COVID-19 pandemic did negatively impact the participation and proficiency data. At the same time, Utah believes the steps we took to mitigate these issues were appropriate and beneficial.

########## Section B: Implementation, Analysis and Evaluation Please provide a link to the State's current evaluation plan.

Utah's SSIP Evaluation Plan can be found on the USBE website (https://www.schools.utah.gov/file/bc455737-7763-4724-8dda-b6dd97531005). Utah's evaluation plan for the SSIP has two major parts. The first is the SiMR target calculation, which is calculated from t he RISE statewide end-of-level assessment and is reported in the EMAPS tool. The second part of the evaluation is the periodic evaluation of the components within each of the three Coherent Improvement Strategies including High Expectations, Content and Instruction, and Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS). Utah evaluated the outcomes of the improvement strategies by 1) evaluating and adding to the infrastructure improvements needed to better support the implementation of the SSIP (included in Section B), 2) comparing the outputs from previous SSIP implementa tion years with the current year's outputs (included in Section B), 3) reviewing the output/outcome data of LEAs that have been implementing SSIP-implementation initiatives (see below), and 4) reviewing activities and progress with stakeholders (see Section C). Most of Utah's data is related to outputs, as opposed to outcomes, but the fact that educators and administrators continu ed to collaborate with us to review and improve practices, supports Utah's decision to continue implementing these strategies.

########## Is the State's evaluation plan new or revised since the previous submission? (yes/no)

NO

########## Provide a summary of each infrastructure improvement strategy implemented in the reporting period:

Utah's SSIP Theory of Action began with the identification of the three root cause concerns for poor achievement in the area of mathematics of students with disabilities in grades six through eight who were identified during Phase I of the SSIP. Those concerns were transformed into three Infrastructure Improvement Strategies, including High Expectations and Beliefs, Content Knowledge and Effective Instruction, and MTSS in Secondary Settings. The Theory of Action then demonstrated how each Infrastructure Improvement Strategy leveraged the strengths of USBE and LEA initiatives and priorities to build LEA capacity for improvement, while at the same time decreasing the impact of infrastructure gaps. All three Infrastructure Improvement Strategies were implemented during the reporting period and to summarize what is required to implement each Strategy, common components or considerations of and across each Strategy that were then turned into improvement activities are listed below. Strategy I- High Expectations and Beliefs components: 1. Inclusion in grade-level Core content, 2. Assessment, 3. Graduation requirements and College and Career Ready (CCR) plans, 4. Leadership,