Louisiana Annual Performance Report--Part B. July 1, 2011-June 30, 2012. Under the Individuals with Disabilities Educational Improvement Act of 2004
Author: White, John
Date: 2013-02-15
Type: Numerical/Quantitative Data
Subjects: Disabilities,Graduation Rate,Dropout Rate,Suspension,Expulsion,Individualized Education Programs,Special Education,Related Services (Special Education),Early Childhood Education,Preschool Children,Student Evaluation,Measurement,Skill Development,Emergent Literacy,Language Skills,Parent Participation,Disproportionate Representation,Minority Group Students,Disability Identification,Eligibility,Adolescents,Individualized Transition Plans,Enrollment,Postsecondary Education,Hearings,Supervision,Conflict Resolution,Arbitration,Children,Federal Legislation,Educational Legislation

The reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), signed on December 3, 2004, required that, not later than one year after the date of enactment of the reauthorized IDEA, each state is required to have in place a performance plan evaluating the state's implementation of Part B and describing how the state will improve such implementation. This plan, called the Part B State Performance Plan (SPP), is required to be posted on the state's website. In addition, each state reports annually to the public on the performance of each of its local educational agencies according to the targets in its SPP. The state also reports annually to the Secretary on its performance in meeting its SPP targets. This report is called the Part B Annual Performance Report (APR). Under the first monitoring priority, &quot;Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)&quot; the following indicators are evaluated in this report: (1) Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high school with a regular diploma; (2) Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school; (3) Participation and performance of children with IEPs on statewide assessments; (4) Rates of suspension and expulsion; (5) Percent of children with IEPs aged 6 through 21 served; (6) Percent of children aged 3 through 5 with IEPs attending a regular early childhood program and receiving the majority of special education and related services in the regular early childhood program; or attending a separate special education class, separate school or residential facility; (7) Percent of preschool children aged 3 through 5 with IEPs who demonstrate improved positive social-emotional skills acquisition and use of early language/communication and early literacy; (8) Percent of parents with a child receiving special education services who report that schools facilitated parent involvement as a means of improving services; and (9) Percent of LEAs with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that are the result of inappropriate identification. Under the second monitoring priority, &quot;Disproportionality&quot;, the following indicator is included: (10) Percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories that are the result of inappropriate identification. Under the third monitoring priority, &quot;Effective General Supervision Part B/Child Find,&quot; indicator (11) describes the percent of children who were evaluated within 60 days of receiving parental consent for initial evaluation or, if the State establishes a time frame within which the evaluation must be conducted, within that time frame. The next monitoring Priority, &quot;Effective General Supervision Part B/Effective Transition,&quot; provides: (12) Percent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3, who are found eligible for Part B, and who have an IEP developed and implemented by their third birthdays; (13) Percent of youth with IEPs aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes appropriate measurable postsecondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age appropriate transition assessment; (14) Percent of youth who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they left school, and enrolled in a postsecondary education or training program. Monitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Part B/General Supervision contains the following indicators: (15) General supervision system (including monitoring, complaints, hearings, etc.); (18) Percent of hearing requests that went to resolution; (19) Percent of mediations held that resulted in mediation agreements; and (20) State reported data. Improvement activities, targets, and improvement discussions are provided with each indicator. The appendix contains &quot;Timelines and Resources.&quot;