U.S. Department of Education: Promoting Educational Excellence for all Americans

A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

Grants to States and Preschool Grants Program--IDEA Part B

Goal 8: To improve results for children with disabilities by assisting state and local educational agencies to provide children with disabilities access to high-quality education that will help them meet challenging standards and prepare them for employment and independent living.
Objective 1 of 5: ALL PRESCHOOL CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES RECEIVE SERVICES THAT PREPARE THEM TO ENTER SCHOOL READY TO LEARN.
Indicator 8.1.1 of 2: Inclusive settings: The percentage of preschool children with disabilities who are receiving special education and related services in inclusive settings (e.g., regular kindergarten, public preschool programs, Head Start, or child care facilities) will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of preschool children with disabilities receiving services
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1998
41.40
 
1999
39.80
 
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: 1998-99 was the first year of data collection. New state data collections typically take up to 5 years to achieve reliability.   		Additional Source Information: State-reported drafts.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2000 - 2001.
Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED.
Verified by ED attestation process and ED Standards for Evaluating Program Performance Data. ED's Office of Inspector General is conducting a review of state data reporting under IDEA part B.

Limitations: The Department is taking steps to reduce the amount of time for collecting and reporting data.

 
Indicator 8.1.2 of 2: Readiness skills: The percentage of preschool children receiving special education and related services who have readiness skills when they reach kindergarten will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of preschool children with readiness skills
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
- No Data -
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: This is a new data collection. Data are not available from another source. Baseline data will be collected in 2002-03 and will be available in 2003.   		Additional Source Information: Preschool/Elementary Longitudinal Study.

Frequency: Other.
Collection Period: 2002 - 2003.
Data Available: January 2003.
Validated By: Experienced Public/Private Entity.
Data to be validated by an experienced data collection contractor

Limitations: Because data are obtained from a longitudinal survey, updates will be infrequent.

 

Objective 2 of 5: ALL CHILDREN WHO WOULD TYPICALLY BE IDENTIFIED AS BEING ELIGIBLE FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION AT AGE 8 OR OLDER AND WHO ARE EXPERIENCING EARLY READING OR BEHAVIORAL DIFFICULTIES RECEIVE APPROPRIATE SERVICES EARLIER TO AVOID FALLING BEHIND THEIR PEERS.
Indicator 8.2.1 of 1: Earlier identification and intervention: The percentage of children served under IDEA ages 6 or 7, compared to ages 6 to 21, will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of children served under IDEA under ages 6 or 7
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1997
13
 
1998
13.40
 
1999
12.80
14
Status: Unable to judge. Unable to determine.

Explanation: This indicator is under review by the Department. Therefore no actual data or are shown after 1999-00.   		Additional Source Information: State-reported data.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2001.
Data Available: Unknown 2002.
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
Data to be reviewed by an experienced data collection contractor. ED Office of Inspector General is conducting a review of state data reporting under IDEA Part B.

 

Objective 3 of 5: ALL CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES HAVE ACCESS TO THE GENERAL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENTS, WITH APPROPRIATE ACCOMMODATIONS, SUPPORTS, AND SERVICES, CONSISTENT WITH HIGH STANDARDS.
Indicator 8.3.1 of 3: Regular education settings (school age): The percentage of children with disabilities ages 6 to 21 who are reported by states as being served in the regular education classroom at least 80 percent of the day will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of children
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
% of Children
% of Children
1997
45.70
 
1998
46.40
 
1999
47.40
48
2000
47.30
47.50
2001
 
48.50
2002
 
48.80
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: The percentage of children served in regular education classrooms at least 80 percent of the day remained essentially the same, decreasing from 47.4 percent in 1998-99 to 47.3 percent in 1999-2000.   		Additional Source Information: State-reported data.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2000 - 2001.
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
Verified by ED attestation process and ED Standards for Evaluating Program Performance Data. ED Office of Inspector General is conducting a review of state data reporting under IDEA Part B.

Limitations: ED will pursue strategies to decrease the amount of time between collection, reporting, and availability of data. The Department is taking steps to reduce the amount of time for collecting and reporting data.

 
Indicator 8.3.2 of 3: Performance on National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP): The percentage of students with disabilities who meet or exceed basic levels in reading, math, and science in the NAEP will increase. The number of students with disabilities who do not meet basic standards will decrease. The percentage of students who are excluded from the NAEP because of their disabilities will decrease.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of students with disabilities who met or exceeded basic levels-4th grade
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Reading Math Science
Reading Math Science
1996
43.30  38.6
     
1998
24  
     

Percentage of students with disabilities who met or exceeded basic levels-8th grade
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Reading Math Science
Reading Math Science
1996
26.8  16.7
     
1998
28  
     

Percentage of students with disabilities who met or exceeded basic levels-12th Grade
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Reading Math Science
Reading Math Science
1996
9.4  16.3
     
1998
34  
     

Number of students who did not meet basic level-4th Grade
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Reading Math Science
Reading Math Science
1996
275,907  298,778
     
1998
387,016  
     

Number of students who did not meet basic level-8th Grade
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Reading Math Science
Reading Math Science
1996
308,728 351,326 
     
1998
321,330  
     

Number of students who did not meet basic level-12th Grade
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Reading Math Science
Reading Math Science
1996
241,110 223,672
     
1998
200,173  
     

Percentage of students excluded from NAEP-4th Grade
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Reading Math Science
Reading Math Science
1996
4 6 
     
1998
6  
     

Percentage of students excluded from NAEP-8th Grade
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Reading Math Science
Reading Math Science
1996
3 4
     
1998
5  
     

Percentage of students excluded from NAEP-12th Grade
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Reading Math Science
Reading Math Science
1996
3  3
     
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: For Math and Science the percentage excluded from NAEP includes public and private school students. For Reading the percentage includes only public school students. The percentage reported for 8th grade Math who met or exceeded basic levels has been corrected to 26.8 percent based on an error in reporting last year's data. Math and Science numbers for children who did not meet basic levels have been revised based on additional analysis of NAEP data.   		Additional Source Information: Analysis of data from National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Frequency: Other.
Collection Period: 2001.
Data Available: January 2002.
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
Analysis of data from National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Limitations: Data on children with disabilities who meet or exceed basic standards and those who do not meet basic standards are based on very small sample sizes, and, therefore, have a low level of reliability.

 
Indicator 8.3.3 of 3: Suspensions or expulsions: The percentage of children with disabilities who are subject to long-term suspension or expulsion, unilateral change in placement, or change in placement if their current placement is likely to result in injury to someone, will decrease.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of children with disabilities subject to suspensions or expulsions
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
2000
1.10
 
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: The Department is reviewing the validity of this data for this indicator. Data were first collected during school year 1998-99, and were reported by states in November 1999. A study conducted to assess the quality of the data has determined that the data are not valid. The data collection forms are being revised to improve quality of the data.   		Additional Source Information: State-reported data.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2001.
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
Data to be validated by an experienced data collection contractor. ED Office of Inspector General is conducting a review of state data reporting under IDEA Part B.

Limitations: The Department is taking steps to reduce the amount of time for collecting and reporting data.

 

Objective 4 of 5: SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES RECEIVE THE SUPPORT THEY NEED TO COMPLETE HIGH SCHOOL PREPARED FOR POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION OR EMPLOYMENT.
Indicator 8.4.1 of 2: Graduation: The percentage of children with disabilities exiting school with a regular high school diploma will increase, and the percentage who drop out will decrease.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of students
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Graduate Drop out
Graduate Drop out
1996
52.60 34.10
   
1997
53.50 32.70
   
1998
55.40 31
   
1999
57.40 28.90
56 31
2000
56.20 29.40
57 30
2001
   
59 27
2002
   
60 26
Status: Negative trend away from target.

Explanation: From 1998-99 to 1999-2000, the number of children with disabilities who graduated with a high school diploma decreased from 57.4 percent to 56.2 percent, while the number who dropped out increased from 28.9 percent to 29.4 percent. The slight movement away from the target may reflect high stakes testing. When new standards are imposed there is usually a drop at first before instruction catches up to standards. Figures do not total to 100 percent because some children exit school in other ways.   		Additional Source Information: State-reported data.

Frequency: Other.
Collection Period: 2000 - 2001.
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
Verified by ED attestation process and ED Standards for Evaluating Program Performance Data. ED's Office of Inspector General is reviewing state data reporting under IDEA Part B.

Limitations: Children who move and who are not known to continue services are not included in these numbers. Supplemental descriptive information will be provided by the National Longitudinal Study II. The Department is taking steps to reduce the amount of time for collecting and reporting data.

 
Indicator 8.4.2 of 2: Postsecondary education: The percentage of students with disabilities who are enrolled in some type of postsecondary school, including 2-year community colleges and technical schools, within 2 years of leaving high school will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
- No Targets And Performance Data -
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: In school year 1986-87, 14 percent of students with disabilities were enrolled in some type of postsecondary school, including 2-year community colleges and technical schools, within 2 years of leaving high school. Because no longitudinal study on this population has been conducted since 1987, there will be no additional data to report until 2005, when the next study will yield results. NCES reports that 6 percent of undergraduates in postsecondary education reported having a disability.   		Additional Source Information: National Longitudinal Transition Study II.

Frequency: Other.
Collection Period: 2004 - 2005.
Data Available: January 2005.
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
Data to be validated by an experienced data collection contractor.

Limitations: Because data are obtained from a longitudinal survey, updates will be infrequent.

 

Objective 5 of 5: STATES ARE ADDRESSING THEIR NEEDS FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CONSISTENT WITH THEIR COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM OF PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT (CSPD).
Indicator 8.5.1 of 1: Qualified personnel: The number of states and outlying areas where at least 90 percent of special education teachers are fully certified in the area in which they are teaching will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Number of States
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
No. of States Serving Ages 3-5 No. States Serving Ages 6-21
No. of States Serving Ages 3-5 No. States Serving Ages 6-21
1996
34 39
   
1997
36 38
   
1998
38 40
   
1999
36 37
40 41
2000
36 37
41 42
2001
   
40 42
2002
   
40 42
Status: Target not met.

Explanation: The number of states and outlying areas where at least 90 percent of special education teachers are fully certified remained the same for both age ranges in this indicator. As noted last year, a clustering of states around the 90 percent goal in the indicator, which may result in unpredictable changes from year to year. However, evidence of a positive trend is expected to be evident over a 5- to 7- year period.   		Additional Source Information: State reported data.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2001.
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
Verified by ED attestation process and ED Standards for Evaluating Program Performance Data. ED Office of Inspector General is currently conducting a review of state data reporting under IDEA Part B.

Limitations: In 2000, ED clarified this data collection by specifying that the data is intended to count the number of teachers who are certified in the areas in which they are teaching. The Department is taking steps to reduce the amount of time for collecting and reporting.

 

Return to table of contents