State Performance Plan 2005-2012 - Part B - Arkansas Department Of Education (Page 250 of 277) in pdf

State Performance Plan 2005-2012 - Part B - Arkansas Department Of Education Page 250

Arkansas Department of Education Special Education Unit

Part B State Performance Plan

1. Child Count records/Disabling Conditions/

9. ACSIP (Arkansas Comprehensive School

Placements (LRE)

Improvement Plan)

2. LEA Special Education Budget

10. Hearings and Investigations

3. LEA Annual Financial Report (AFR)

11. Surrogate parent program data

4. Previous visitation letters

12. AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) status

5. Previous monitoring reports

13. Statewide Assessment data

6. Annual Statistical Report

14. IDEA indicators data

a) District Profile

15. IDEA “trigger” data

b) Indicator Report

16. IDEA determination status

c) Program Approval

17. Residential Treatment Facility

7. Extended Year Services data

Reimbursement, if applicable

8. Non-bonded debt

Correction of Noncompliance and Improved Performance

When an LEA/Co-op or other public agency is determined to have a finding of noncompliance, a CAP is

written to address the deficiency with specified timelines for correction and submission of evidence for

review. In the monitoring system, the ADE-SEU may impose needed corrective strategies on a public

agency, along with specific documentation to be submitted to demonstrate implementation of corrective

actions.

Individual LEAs may be required to conduct a self-assessment, as well as address activities and strategies to

be implemented in the district’s Arkansas Comprehensive School Improvement Plan (ACSIP) to address

identified deficiencies, with the corresponding timelines for review to gauge the effectiveness of their

implementation of corrective actions. A similar plan may be required of a Co-op or other public agency who

is not a participant in the ACSIP process. ADE-SEU staff monitoring the public agency’s effectiveness will

require revisions to the ACSIP or other plan if the efforts appear to be ineffective or are not working. Prior

to determining that the public agency has substantially corrected the noncompliance, additional on-site

follow up and/or review of more recent data will occur to verify correction of noncompliance.

Public agencies must submit written assurance and/or evidence that the deficiencies within a CAP have been

corrected as directed. When written assurance is provided, evidence that documents the public agency’s

progress in correcting the noted deficiencies must be available at the public agency for review by the ADE-

SEU staff. Upon the receipt of all requested evidence cited in a CAP or CAPs and verification by the ADE-

SEU staff of full correction, the ADE-SEU will notify the public agency of its compliance status.

DRS staff review corrective strategies proposed by the public agency in light of corrective actions required

in a hearing decision or complaint report. Activities and strategies are required to meet the letter and intent

of the corrective action. At times, corrective strategies can be evaluated based upon documentation

submitted to the ADE by the public agency. It is common for initial proposed corrective strategies to be

insufficient in some substantive way in addressing the required corrective action. When the initial strategy

is insufficient, the DRS staff works with the public agency to prompt the actions needed to achieve

compliance. As needed, the ADE-SEU sends one or more supervisory staff on site to determine if a public

agency is complying with the corrective action(s).

A public agency under a corrective action directive in a hearing decision or complaint investigation report is

required to submit documentation addressing the status of compliance with corrective actions within thirty

(30) days of the date the report was disseminated by the ADE. Effective correction of noncompliance in a

Page | 248

State Performance Plan 2005-2012 - Part B - Arkansas Department Of Education Page 250

Related Articles

Related forms

Related Categories