Archived Resources

The Part B State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report 2019 Indicator Analyses presents a national quantitative picture of the implementation of Part B of IDEA based on a review of information 60 states and jurisdictions reported in the FFY 2017 APRs and amended SPPs they submitted to OSEP in spring 2019.

This Version 2.0 of the Data Display Wizard creates data displays based on user entry of SPP/APR data. The tool gives users various options for displaying that data. LA staff can use this tool to engage with various stakeholders on how to best display reported SPP/APR data based on the audience, message, and purpose of the desired report or presentation.

IDC staff joined the NPSO Community of Practice call December 11 to present examples for states to consider that would constitute a change of their sampling plans. Staff explained how states can get TA on sampling from IDC. The call also offered a refresher on the NPSO sampling and response calculators that states can use for their SPP/APR work.

The Part C State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report 2016 Indicator Analyses presents a national picture of the implementation of IDEA based on a review of information 56 states and jurisdictions reported in their FFY 2014 APRs and amended SPPs that they subsubmitted to OSEP in spring of 2016.

The Part B State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report 2016 Indicator Analyses presents a national picture of the implementation of IDEA based on a review of information 60 states and jurisdictions reported in their FFY 2014 APRs and amended SPPs that they subsubmitted to OSEP in spring of 2016.

Presenters revisited the connections (improvement strategies, data sets, program evaluation) across several of the IDEA Part B Indicators–the gist of RDA–with a particular focus on the indicators most closely related to secondary students.

This presentation provided an overview of the challenges of data collection for IDEA Part B Indicator 14 and identified some successful efforts to overcome challenges such as representativeness and response rates. Additionally, presenters shared one state's effort to improve the quality of their student post-school outcome data to increase confidence in programmatic decisions that could be made from those data.