1

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

FOR PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

Revised 3/19/14

A. Justification 

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify

any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a hard 

copy of the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing 

the collection of information, or you may provide a valid URL link or paste the 

applicable section. Please limit pasted text to no longer than 3 pages. Specify the review 

type of the collection (new, revision, extension, reinstatement with change, reinstatement 

without change). If revised, briefly specify the changes. If a rulemaking is involved, 

make note of the sections or changed sections, if applicable.

This is a request for review and approval of a revision of the currently-approved Part B 

State Performance Report (Part B SPP) and Annual Performance Report (Part B APR) 

[Information Collection 1820-0624 / Expiration Date: 07/31/15]. In accordance with 20 

U.S.C. 1416(b)(1), not later than one year after the date of enactment of the Individuals 

with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Improvement Act of 2004, each State must have 

in place a Part B SPP that evaluates the State’s efforts to implement the requirements and 

purposes of Part B and describes how the State will improve such implementation. IDEA 

section 616(b)(1)(C) requires each State to review its SPP at least once every six years. 

In accordance with 20 U.S.C. 1416(b)(2)(C)(ii), the State must report annually to the 

public on the performance of each local educational agency located in the State on the 

targets in the State’s performance plan. The State also must annually submit a Part B 

APR to the Secretary on the performance of the State under the State’s performance plan. 

Information Collection 1820-0624 corresponds to 34 CFR §§300.600-300.602. The 

regulations may be accessed at this link -

http://idea.ed.gov/download/finalregulations.pdf. 

This collection is conducted in a manner that is consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 

1320.5.

Each State submitted its SPP, including targets through FFY 2009 in December 2005. In 

2011, to meet the requirement set forth in IDEA section 616(b)(1)(C) to review the SPP 

every six years, and in the absence of IDEA reauthorization, the Office of Special 

Education Programs (OSEP) proposed to make no major changes to the SPP, e.g., 

significant revisions to indicators.1Since it was anticipated that Congress would soon act 

to reauthorize IDEA, it was less of a reporting burden to maintain the indicators as 

 

1 Many of the indicators that stakeholders suggested be removed or changed significantly are prescribed by statute, 

and in the absence of Congressional action, may not be removed.
2

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

written. Therefore, each State extended its targets and improvement activities through 

FFY 2012.

In 2012, OSEP sought OMB reapproval for the Part B SPP/APR and eliminated two 

indicators that were not required by statute and for which the data were available to the 

Department through other sources. Burden was further reduced in response to OMB’s 

terms of clearance for 1820-0624 in November 2012, which permitted OSEP to make 

several technical amendments that reduced reporting burden.

2

With this request, OSEP is proposing to further reduce reporting burden within the 

parameters of the current IDEA statutory and regulatory requirements. See OSEP’s 

answer to Question 12 for a full explanation.

2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a 

new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received 

from the current collection.

As required by IDEA section 616(b)(1)(A), each State must have an SPP in place that 

evaluates the State's efforts to implement the requirements and purposes of Part B of the 

IDEA, and describes how the State will improve its implementation. IDEA section 

616(b)(2) requires that the State report annually to the Secretary on its performance under 

the State’s SPP for Part B of the IDEA. Specifically, the State must report, in its APR, on 

its progress in meeting the measurable and rigorous targets it established in its SPP. In

the past, OSEP has required States to maintain a separate SPP and APR. However, OSEP 

proposes to combine the SPP/APR into one document. This change reflects the current 

practice of many States to maintain a combined SPP/APR for public dissemination 

purposes and represents a significant burden reduction.

IDEA section 616(d) requires that the Department review the APR each year. Based on 

the information provided in the State's APR, information obtained through monitoring 

visits, and any other public information, the Department will determine if the State: 

“Meets requirements” and purposes of the IDEA or “Needs Assistance,” “Needs 

Intervention,” or “Needs Substantial Intervention” in implementing the requirements of 

the IDEA.

3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of 

automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or forms 

of information technology, e.g. permitting electronic submission of responses, and the 

basis for the decision of adopting this means of collection. Also describe any

consideration given to using technology to reduce burden.

States will be required to submit using the online system beginning with the FFY 2013 

(February 2015) SPP/APR submission. OSEP adopted this means of collection to reduce 

reporting burden. The online system (GRADS 360) has the capability to prepopulate 

previous year’s SPP/APR data and text, as well as the current reporting year’s data. 

 

2 OSEP made conforming technical amendments to 1820-0578.
3

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

GRADS 360 is coded to complete calculations for grantees and will have carry forward 

functionality to populate text fields.

4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information 

already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2

above.

Since 2005, all States have completed and submitted seven APRs. Beginning with the 

APR to be submitted in February 2015, a combined Part B SPP/APR is taking the place 

of the previous APR (see Answer 12). This proposed change will eliminate duplicate 

reporting in the SPP and in the APR on the State’s targets and its discussion of 

improvement activities completed. In addition, with the proposed revision of this 

collection, the Department would allow States to use data already collected for other 

purposes whenever possible. 

The SPP/APR provides States an opportunity to analyze and explain data that the State is 

required to report annually under section 618 of the IDEA, i.e., data on educational 

environments, dispute resolution, and assessment. During the last approval cycle, with 

stakeholder input, the Department determined that it is no longer necessary for States to 

report on Indicators 16 and 17 – the timeliness of State complaint and due process 

hearing decisions, as OSEP is able to evaluate State performance on these indicators by

using data collected through IDEA section 618 without having to require States to report 

this information through the SPP/APR collection. OSEP is currently proposing to 

eliminate Indicators 15 and 20 because, as with Indicators 16 and 17, OSEP is able to 

evaluate State performance in these areas (monitoring and data collection) without the 

information provided in those indicators. (See discussion under item 12 below.)

5. If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities, describe 

any methods used to minimize burden. A small entity may be (1) a small business which 

is deemed to be one that is independently owned and operated and that is not dominant in 

its field of operation; (2) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise that is 

independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field; or (3) a small 

government jurisdiction, which is a government of a city, county, town, township, school 

district, or special district with a population of less than 50,000.

The information requested does not involve the collection of information from entities 

classified as small businesses or other small entities.

6. Describe the consequences to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not 

conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to 

reducing burden.

Activities described in answers A1 and A2 would not be completed, and OSEP would be 

in violation of section 616 of the IDEA, if this collection was not conducted.

7. Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be 

conducted in a manner:
4

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

 requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than quarterly;

 requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in 

fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;

 requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any

document;

 requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical, government 

contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records for more than three years;

 in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to produce valid and 

reliable results than can be generalized to the universe of study;

 requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and 

approved by OMB;

 that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority established 

in statute or regulation, that is not supported by disclosure and data security policies 

that are consistent with the pledge, or that unnecessarily impedes sharing of data with 

other agencies for compatible confidential use; or

 requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secrets, or other confidential 

information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to 

protect the information’s confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

There are no special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be 

conducted as described in the bulleted items.

8. As applicable, state that the Department has published the 60 and 30 day Federal Register 

notices as required by 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting comments on the information 

collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments received in 

response to that notice and describe actions taken by the agency in response to these 

comments. Specifically address comments received on cost and hour burden.

Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the 

availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instruction and record keeping, 

disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be recorded, 

disclosed, or reported.

Consultation with representatives of those from whom information is to be obtained or 

those who must compile records should occur at least once every 3 years – even if the 

collection of information activity is the same as in prior periods. There may be 

circumstances that may preclude consultation in a specific situation. These 

circumstances should be explained.

A 60-and 30-day Federal Register Notice was published, OSEP has addressed the 

comments received during the 60-day comment period and that discussion is included as 

a part of this package.
5

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

9. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than 

remuneration of contractors or grantees with meaningful justification.

This collection does not require gifts or payments to be made to respondents.

10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the 

assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy. If personally identifiable information 

(PII) is being collected, a Privacy Act statement should be included on the instrument. 

Please provide a citation for the Systems of Record Notice and the date a Privacy Impact 

Assessment was completed as indicated on the IC Data Form. A confidentiality statement 

with a legal citation that authorizes the pledge of confidentiality should be provided.

Requests for this information are in accordance with the following ED and OMB 

policies: Privacy Act of 1974, OMB Circular A-108 – Privacy Act Implementation –

Guidelines and Responsibilities, OMB Circular A-130 Appendix I – Federal Agency

Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals, OMB M-03-22 – OMB 

Guidance for Implementing the Privacy Provisions of the E-Government Act of 2002, 

OMB M-06-15 – Safeguarding Personally Identifiable Information, OM:6-104 – Privacy

Act of 1974 (Collection, Use and Protection of Personally Identifiable Information). If 

the collection is subject to the Privacy Act, the Privacy Act statement is deemed 

sufficient with respect to confidentiality. If there is no expectation of confidentiality, 

simply state that the Department makes no pledge about the confidentially of the data.

No assurance of confidentiality is provided to respondent States. However, under 20 

U.S.C. 1416(b)(2)(C)(iii), a State must not report to the public or the Secretary any 

information on performance that would result in the disclosure of personally-identifiable 

information about individual children or where the available data is insufficient to yield 

statistically reliable information. All data provided in the APR are aggregated at the 

State level.

11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual 

behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered 

private. The justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the 

questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be 

given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to

obtain their consent.

There are no questions of a sensitive nature.

12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. The statement 

should:

 Indicate the number of respondents by affected public type (federal government, 

individuals or households, private sector – businesses or other for-profit, private 

sector – not-for-profit institutions, farms, state, local or tribal governments), 

frequency of response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden 

was estimated, including identification of burden type: recordkeeping, reporting or 
6

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

third party disclosure. All narrative should be included in item 12. Unless directed to 

do so, agencies should not conduct special surveys to obtain information on which to 

base hour burden estimates. Consultation with a sample (fewer than 10) of potential 

respondents is desirable. If the hour burden on respondents is expected to vary

widely because of differences in activity, size, or complexity, show the range of 

estimated hour burden, and explain the reasons for the variance. Generally, estimates 

should not include burden hours for customary and usual business practices.

 If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate hour burden 

estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens in the ROCIS IC Burden 

Analysis Table. (The table should at minimum include Respondent types, IC activity, 

Respondent and Responses, Hours/Response, and Total Hours)

 Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents of the hour burdens for 

collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories. 

The cost of contracting out or paying outside parties for information collection 

activities should not be included here. Instead, this cost should be included in Item 

14.

In previous versions of this collection, SPP and APR burden hours were calculated 

separately. The overall estimated SPP burden was 30,000 hours (500 hours per 

respondent times 60 respondents). With this request, OSEP is proposing to eliminate the 

separate reporting requirements for the SPP and APR. Therefore, OSEP will 

immediately eliminate 30,000 reporting burden hours.

Total burden hours for the combined SPP/APR (submitted annually) will be 60 

respondents times 1,700 hours (or an average3of 100 hours per indicator), which equals 

102,000 hours, a reduction of 228,600 burden hours from the previous collection. 

Of the total 1,700 hours, it is estimated that 1,620 hours will be spent planning the report, 

40 hours will be spent writing the report, and 40 hours will be spent typing and compiling 

the report.

The estimated cost burden to public agencies of preparing the SPP/APR is $3,162,000

annually. The estimated total cost burden is reached by multiplying the hours of response 

(1,700) by the number of responses (60) and then multiplying the newly-obtained product 

by the average hourly pay rate ($31) of the staff preparing the report.

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to respondents or record keepers 

resulting from the collection of information. (Do not include the cost of any hour burden 

shown in Items 12 and 14.)

 The cost estimate should be split into two components: (a) a total capital and start-up 

cost component (annualized over its expected useful life); and (b) a total operation 

and maintenance and purchase of services component. The estimates should take into 

 

3 OSEP bases its average on the staff hours associated with collecting and analyzing data, and reporting in the 

SPP/APR for each indicator. Some indicators may require more staff time than the average, e.g., Indicators 11, 12, 

and 13, while others may require far less than the average, e.g., Indicators 15 and 16.
7

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

account costs associated with generating, maintaining, and disclosing or providing the 

information. Include descriptions of methods used to estimate major cost factors

including system and technology acquisition, expected useful life of capital 

equipment, the discount rate(s), and the time period over which costs will be incurred. 

Capital and start-up costs include, among other items, preparations for collecting 

information such as purchasing computers and software; monitoring, sampling, 

drilling and testing equipment; and acquiring and maintaining record storage 

facilities.

 If cost estimates are expected to vary widely, agencies should present ranges of cost 

burdens and explain the reasons for the variance. The cost of contracting out 

information collection services should be a part of this cost burden estimate. In 

developing cost burden estimates, agencies may consult with a sample of respondents 

(fewer than 10), utilize the 60-day pre-OMB submission public comment process and 

use existing economic or regulatory impact analysis associated with the rulemaking 

containing the information collection, as appropriate.

 Generally, estimates should not include purchases of equipment or services, or 

portions thereof, made: (1) prior to October 1, 1995, (2) to achieve regulatory

compliance with requirements not associated with the information collection, (3) for 

reasons other than to provide information or keep records for the government or (4) as 

part of customary and usual business or private practices. Also, these estimates should 

not include the hourly costs (i.e., the monetization of the hours) captured above in 

Item 12

Total Annualized Capital/Startup Cost:

Total Annual Costs (O&M): 

Total Annualized Costs Requested:

States have been preparing an APR for the past seven years. Therefore, there are no 

start-up costs. There are no anticipated costs for operation, maintenance, or purchase 

of services that are imposed on States by these requirements, other than those noted 

above.

14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government. Also, provide a 

description of the method used to estimate cost, which should include quantification of 

hours, operational expenses (such as equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff), 

and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of 

information. Agencies also may aggregate cost estimates from Items 12, 13, and 14 in a 

single table.

The estimated cost to the Federal Government includes the staff time to review and 

analyze the reports. It is estimated that it will take 10 hours of staff time to review each 

of the 60 responses, which equals 600 hours. The 600 hours is multiplied by the average 

hourly rate of pay for each reviewer ($36), to equal an estimated cost to the Federal 

Government of $21,600.00.
8

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments. Generally, adjustments in 

burden result from re-estimating burden and/or from economic phenomenon outside of an 

agency’s control (e.g., correcting a burden estimate or an organic increase in the size of 

the reporting universe). Program changes result from a deliberate action that materially 

changes a collection of information and generally are result of new statute or an agency

action (e.g., changing a form, revising regulations, redefining the respondent universe, 

etc.). Burden changes should be disaggregated by type of change (i.e., adjustment, 

program change due to new statute, and/or program change due to agency discretion), 

type of collection (new, revision, extension, reinstatement with change, reinstatement 

without change) and include totals for changes in burden hours, responses and costs (if 

applicable).

With this request, OSEP is proposing to eliminate the separate reporting requirements for 

the SPP and APR. There is a program change reduction of -228,600 burden hours from 

the previous collection. The following proposed revisions account for the significant 

reduction in burden hours –

1) States are no longer required to provide a discussion of –

a. SPP development;

b. State system by indicator;

c. Baseline data; 

d. Improvement activities completed; and 

e. Revisions to Improvement Activities, timelines, and resources.

2) States must only report on slippage if the State does not meet its target for the 

reporting year.

3) States are no longer required to report on Improvement Activities per indicator; 

rather States will present a comprehensive State Systemic Improvement Plan 

(SSIP) (Proposed Indicator 17). 

4) Eliminating Indicators 15 and 20

As a result of these revisions, respondents will be required to report on 17 SPP/APR

indicators, instead of the currently approved 18 indicators, which is a reduction from the 

original 20 indicators. The measurement table attached to this package reflects these 

revisions and the revised numbering.

16. For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for 

tabulation and publication. Address any complex analytical techniques that will be used. 

Provide the time schedule for the entire project, including beginning and ending dates of 

the collection of information, completion of report, publication dates, and other actions.

The collection of information does not require publication of the information or use of 

complex analytical techniques.
9

[ICR No. 1152.24] 1820-0624 - IDEA Part B State Performance Plan (SPP) and Annual 

Performance Report (APR)

17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the 

information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.

There is no request to ask for an approval not to display the expiration date.

18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in the Certification of 

Paperwork Reduction Act.

There are no proposed exceptions to the certifications.

B. Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods

This collection does not require that statistical methodology be employed.