CEIS SIGNIFICANT DISPROPORTIONALITY

Significant Disproportionality and Coordinated Early Intervening Services 2017-2018 CEIS Report

I. INTRODUCTION

In accordance with ? 613(f) of the IDEA U.S.C. ? 1413(f) and the regulations in 34 CFR ? 300.223, coordinated early intervening services are services provided to students in kindergarten through grade 12 (with a particular emphasis on students in kindergarten through grade three) who are not currently identified as needing special education and related services, but who need additional academic and behavioral supports to succeed in a general education environment. Local education agencies (LEAs) identified as having significant disproportionality, as defined by the state, are required to set aside 15% of their new allocation for the development and provision of CEIS for students not currently identified as needing special education services. LEAs may also voluntarily set aside funds (up to 15%) for the development and provision of CEIS.

The rationale for using IDEA funds for CEIS is based on research showing that the earlier a child's learning problems or difficulties are identified, the more quickly and effectively the problems and difficulties can be addressed and the greater the chances that the child's problems will be ameliorated or decreased in severity. Conversely, the longer a child goes without assistance, the longer the remediation time and the more intense and costly services might be.

This 2017-2018 CEIS District Profile is based on the federally required seven racial/ethnic groups in the areas of

identification, disability category, least restrictive environment category, and discipline.

Racial/Ethnic Groups

Disability Categories

1. American Indian/Alaskan Native (N) 2. Asian (A) 3. Black or African American (B) 4. Hispanic or Latino (H) 5. Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (P) 6. White (W)

7. Two or more race groups (T)

1. Autism (AU)

7. Deaf-Blindness Disabilities (DB)

2. Emotional Disturbance (ED)

8. Hearing Impairments (HI)

3. Mental Retardation (MR)

9. Multiple Disabilities (MD)

4. Other Health Impairment (OHI) 10. Orthopedic Impairment (OI)

5. Speech/Language Impairment (SI) 11. Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

6. Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) 12. Visual Impairment (VI)

Least Restrictive Environments Categories

1. Students in the regular classroom between 40% to 79.99% of the school day 2. Students in the regular classroom less than 40% of the school day 3. Students receiving special education services in a day school setting

Discipline

1. Students with out of school suspensions/expulsions totaling greater than 10 days

2017-2018 CEIS Report prepared by IDEA Data and Research

March, 2018, Page 1 of 8

The requirement for using CEIS funds by an LEA is the identification of significant disproportionality in special education in the following four areas: identification, disability category, discipline, and least restrictive environment. In other words, states must collect and examine data to determine if significant disproportionality based on race and ethnicity is occurring in the state and LEAs with respect to:

1) the identification of children as children with disabilities 2) the identification of children as children with a particular disability 3) the incidence, duration and type of disciplinary actions, including suspensions and expulsions 4) the placement of these children in particular educational settings

This 2017-2018 CEIS Report is to be used in conjunction with the 2017-2018 CEIS Profile for each district. When an LEA has been identified with significant disproportionality in any of the above four categories, the LEA is required to reserve the maximum amount of funds for CEIS and publicly report on the revision of its policies, practices, and procedures used with respect to the identification of children as children with disabilities or the placement of these children in particular educational settings.

Districts identified as having a significantly disproportionate representation of racial/ethnic groups within one or more of the mentioned areas are required to budget and expend 15% of the current fiscal year Part B allocation to offer CEIS to general education students at risk of being identified as needing special education and related services.

In summary, the Arkansas Department of Education-Special Education Unit identifies significant disproportionality based on race or ethnicity in an LEA with respect to the following four areas:

CEIS Requirement based on Significant Disproportionality:

Coordinated Early Intervening Services

Annual Performance Report

Description

Part 1. Significant Disproportionality ? Identification (All Disabilities)

Indicator 9: Identification

The identification of children with disabilities

Part 2. Significant Disproportionality ? Disability Category Analysis of all 12 categories required

Indicator 10: Disability Category Analysis of six categories required: AU, ED, MR, OHI, SI, SLD

The identification of children in specific disabilities.

Part 3. Significant Difference ? Discipline (Suspension/Expulsion)

Indicator 4B: Discipline Significant discrepancy by race or ethnicity, in the rate of suspensions and expulsions of greater than 10 days in a school year.

The taking of disciplinary actions

Part 4. Significant Disproportionality ? Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)

The placement of children with disabilities in particular educational environment

2017-2018 CEIS Report prepared by IDEA Data and Research

March, 2018, Page 2 of 8

II. METHODOLOGY USED TO EXAMINE SIGNIFICANT DISPROPORTIONALITY

The methodology for this report used to collect relevant student data for analysis and the selection criteria for identification purpose are listed in the following steps:

1. Using the December child count for the most recent three years, students were identified if they were receiving services in a private residential treatment program. These students were removed from the special education child count number and the district October enrollment numbers. The reason for excluding students in private residential treatment facilities is found in the state rules governing private residential treatment facilities.

These rules state that a student belongs to the district where the facility is located; therefore, enrollment of such students artificially increases the district's special education child count and district wide enrollment.

2. Once the October enrollment and December child count have been adjusted for private residential treatment students, student counts and the respective percentages are obtained. The district student counts and percentage District student counts are summed by racial/ethnic group and by district to generate totals. The percentage of each racial/ethnic group in the district is calculated.

The special education student counts and percentage

Special education student counts are summed by racial/ethnic group and by district to generate totals. The percentage of each racial/ethnic group of special education student is calculated.

The general education student counts and percentage

General education student counts by racial/ethnic group are calculated by subtracting the "adjusted

December child count" from the "adjusted October enrollment count".

General education student counts are summed by racial/ethnic group and by district to generate totals The percentage of each racial/ethnic group of general education students is calculated.

3. There may be small numbers of students counted in some of the analysis categories, which may impact the reliability and validity of a calculation method. The risk ratio methodology has been used to determine if a disproportionate representation exists among students with disabilities and all students (or general education students). This methodology, however, makes it difficult to interpret when there are small numbers of students in either the racial/ethnic group or the comparison group. When risk ratios are based on small numbers, minor variations in the number of students in either the racial/ethnic group or the comparison group can produce dramatic changes in the size of the risk ratio. In order to preserve the reliability and validity of data, some selection criteria and limitations based on the size of numbers are implemented for the CEIS Study.

2017-2018 CEIS Report prepared by IDEA Data and Research

March, 2018, Page 3 of 8

III. SIGNIFICANT DISPROPORTIONALITY Based on IDEA Regulations Section 300.646, the state will use a combination of risk ratios and weighted risk

ratios (whichever is lower); hereafter referred to as risk ratios. The state must choose a cutoff that is both high enough to provide an acceptably low risk of failing to identify districts that have significant disproportionality and low enough to provide an acceptably low risk of falsely identifying districts that do not have significant disproportionality.

In this CEIS Profile study, any LEA with risk ratios greater than 4 for three consecutive years will be designated as a district having significant disproportionality in the area of identification (all disabilities), a specific disability category, and educational placement. Also in this report, the percentage difference in composition value greater than 4 is used to identify a significant disproportionality for disciplinary practices.

Part 1. Significant Disproportionality ? Identification (All Disabilities) Using the Risk Ratios methodology, special education student count and general education student count were

used and risk ratios were generated for identifying significant disproportionality by race/ethnic group by district. Risk ratios were examined in relation to district composition. Risk ratio of the racial/ethnic group will be considered invalid and be excluded if

i. the district enrollment of a racial/ethnic group is less than 5% or more than 95%; or ii. the number of students in the district's special education child count is equal to or less than 40.

The protocol of the CEIS study has been developed such that districts with risk ratios greater than 4 for three consecutive years are considered to have a pattern of disproportionate identification and are required to set aside funds for CEIS.

2017-2018 CEIS Report prepared by IDEA Data and Research

March, 2018, Page 4 of 8

Part 2. Significant Disproportionality ? Disability Category Using a risk ratio methodology, 12 disability categories are examined for significant disproportionality. District

enrollment and special education child count data were examined and adjusted according to the following criteria. 1. Using the December 1 child count for the selected three year, students were identified if they received services in a private residential treatment program. These students were removed from the special education child count numbers and the district October 1 enrollment numbers for the selected year. 2. After the October 1 enrollment and December 1 child count have been adjusted for private residential treatment students, risk ratios by racial/ethnic groups were generated for each of the disability categories. 3. Risk ratios were examined in relation to district composition and are considered invalid and excluded if i. the district enrollment of a racial/ethnic group is less than 5%; or ii. the number of students in a disability category is less than 25.

After adjustments, districts with risk ratios greater than 4 for three consecutive years are considered to have a pattern of disproportionate identification in a disability category and are required to set aside funds for CEIS. These districts are also required to conduct a self-assessment for inappropriate policies, procedures, and practices.

2017-2018 CEIS Report prepared by IDEA Data and Research

March, 2018, Page 5 of 8

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download