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

National Activities--IDEA Part D

Goal 8: National Activities--IDEA Part D Specific Goal/Mission
Objective 1 of 5: PROGRAMS RESPOND TO CRITICAL NEEDS OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES AND THEIR FAMILIES.
Indicator 8.1.1 of 1: Responsive to critical needs: The percentage of IDEA program activities that are determined by expert panels to respond to critical needs of children with disabilities and their families will increase: (a) Research and innovation, (b) Technology, (c) Personnel preparation, (d) Technical assistance, and (e) State improvement.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of program priorities: Research & Innovation
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
2000
91
Continuous Improvement
2001
72
 Continuous Improvement

Percentage of program priorities: Technology
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1999
43
 Continuous Improvement
2000
75
 Continuous Improvement

Percentage of program priorities: Media
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
2000
67
Continuous Improvement
2001
41
 Continuous Improvement

Percentage of program priorities: Personnel preparation
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
2000
67
 Continuous Improvement
2001
68
Continuous Improvement

Percentage of program priorities: Technical assistance
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
2000
50
 Continuous Improvement
2001
57
Continuous Improvement
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: Fluctuations in data are expected for several years while the data collection methodology is refined. To improve the quality of the evaluations the size of the review panel representing a variety of stakeholders in special education was increased from 5 persons in 2000 to 80 persons in 2001. This is expected to produce more robust and accurate measures under this indicator.  
Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2002.
Validated By: Federal Statistical Agencies.

 

Objective 2 of 5: PROJECTS USE HIGH-QUALITY METHODS AND MATERIALS.
Indicator 8.2.1 of 1: Highest standards for methods and materials: Expert panels determine that IDEA-funded projects use exceptionally rigorous quantitative or qualitative research and evaluation methods (for Research and innovation and Technology and media activities); or use current research-validated practices and materials (for Personnel preparation, Technical assistance, and State improvement activities).
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of projects that meet exceptionally high standards: research and innovation
Year Actual Performance
 
Research Demo. Outreach PPrep TA Tech State Imprvt
1999
60 12 20        
2000
50 70 20 97 94 50  
2001
 
Year Performance Targets
 
Research Demo. Outreach PPrep TA Tech State Imprvt
1999
       
2000
65 20 25  
2001
77 13 11 8 40 50  
Status: Unable to judge.

 
Additional Source Information: Project information.
Frequency: Annually
Validated By: No Formal Verification.

 

Objective 3 of 5: PROJECTS COMMUNICATE APPROPRIATELY AND PRODUCTS ARE USED TO IMPROVE RESULTS FOR CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES AND THEIR FAMILIES.
Indicator 8.3.1 of 2: Communication with target audiences: The percentage of IDEA-funded projects that communicate appropriately with target audiences will increase. (a) Research and innovation (b) Technology (c) Personnel preparation projects of national significance (d) Technical assistance.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of projects that meet exceptionally high standards: research and innovation
Year Actual Performance
 
Research Demo Outreach Tech PPrep TA
2001
60 40 100 40   100
  Performance Targets
 
Research Demo Outreach Tech PPrep TA
2001
 
Status: Unable to judge. FY 2001 data represents baseline.

Explanation: Projects are expected to be of high quality and communicate findings through appropriate referred journals and other vehicles such as the Internet, association publications, CD-ROMs, films, teaching modules, state and national directories, career plan, radio interviews, course syllabi, and Federally-funded technical assistance providers, and to include a citation of funding support under IDEA.  
Additional Source Information: Project information.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2002.
Validated By: Federal Statistical Agencies.
Project information is reviewed by a panel consisting of independent, third party reviewers who are experts in the program content and trained in the review procedures. The panel results are analyzed by experts in evaluation research.

 
Indicator 8.3.2 of 2: Practitioners use results: Expert panels determine that practitioners, including policy-makers, administrators, teachers, parents, or others as appropriate, use products and practices developed through IDEA programs to improve results for children with disabilities. (a) Research and innovation (b) Technology (c) Personnel preparation (d) Technical assistance (e) State improvement.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of expert panels with positive determination: Research & Innovation
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
2001
53
 

Percentage of expert panels with positive determination: Technology
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1999
78
 
2000
 89
2001
47
 

Percentage of expert panels with positive determination: Personnel Preparation
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
2001
55
 

Percentage of expert panels with positive determination: Technical Assistance
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1999
67
 
2000
 78
2001
59
 

Percentage of expert panels with positive determination: State Improvement
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
- No Data -
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: Fluctuations in data are expected for several years while the data collection methodology is refined. To improve the quality of the evaluations the size of the review panel representing the variety of stakeholders in special education was increased from 5 persons in 2000 to 80 in 2001. This improvement has resulted in a much more robust and accurate measure of this indicator.  
Additional Source Information: Project Applications.

Frequency: Annually.
Data Available: Unknown 2002.
Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED.

Limitations: Baseline data for the State improvement grant program are being collected through an evaluation study and will be available in 2002.

 

Objective 4 of 5: PERSONNEL ARE PREPARED TO SERVE CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES.
Indicator 8.4.1 of 3: Persons trained to serve children with disabilities: The percentage of persons who obtain their degrees with IDEA support and serve children with disabilities as teachers, early intervention personnel, related services personnel, or leadership personnel within 3 years of receiving their degrees will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
- No Targets And Performance Data -
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: Baseline data will be collected from project performance reports in 2001. This is a new data collection.  
Additional Source Information: Annual Performance Reports.

Frequency: Annually.
Validated By: Federal Statistical Agencies.

Limitations: In 2001 this indicator will be revised to reflect employment, 1 year after receipt of degrees. This data is more readily accessible and timely than data in the current indicator.

 
Indicator 8.4.2 of 3: Grants to minority institutions: The percentage of IDEA grants for personnel preparation awarded to Historically Black Colleges and Universities and other minority institutions, including tribal colleges, will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of all personnel-preparation awards (new and continuation) that went to minority institutions
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1997
15.40
 
1998
17.70
 
1999
26.40
 
2000
34
28
2001
32
 
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: There was a decrease in personnel preparation awards to minority institutions from 2000 to 2001. Starting in 2002, to provide a more meaningful indication of support to minority entities under all of Part D of IDEA, this indicator will measure funding to minority institutions from all Part D programs and not only from the personnel preparation program. The competition for which only minority entities are eligible will be excluded from the calculation.  
Additional Source Information: Analysis of project information.

Frequency: Annually.
Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED.
Verified by ED attestation process and ED Standards for Evaluating Program Performance Data.

Limitations: See explanation.

 
Indicator 8.4.3 of 3: Minority and disabled personnel: The percentage of personnel who are minority and the percentage who are disabled who receive financial assistance for training under IDEA will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
- No Data -
Status: Unable to judge.

Explanation: Baseline data will be collected from project performance reports in 2001. This is a new data collection. Target to be determined upon receipt of baseline data.  
Additional Source Information: Performance Report.

Frequency: Annually.
Validated By: On-Site Monitoring By ED.

Limitations: Self-report by projects may hamper validity. OSEP will verify results with follow-up survey.

 

Objective 5 of 5: FAMILIES RECEIVE INFORMATION ABOUT SERVICES FOR CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES.
Indicator 8.5.1 of 1: Increase in informed families: The percentage of families that report that the training and technical assistance received from the Parent Information and Training Centers made a positive difference in their child's supports and services will increase.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
Percentage of families reporting positive difference
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1999
71
 
2000
86.50
75

Percentage of families reporting positive difference from face-to-face and telephone sessions
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Face-to-face Telephone
Face-to-face Telephone
2001
97 69
   
Status: Positive movement toward target.

Explanation: For 2001 data show results for two types of training mechanisms: face-to-face training, and telephone assistance. These were not differentiated in prior years.  
Additional Source Information: Project Performance Data.

Frequency: Annually.
Validated By: NCES.
Verified by ED attestation process and ED Standards for Evaluating Program Performance Data.

Limitations: Self-report by projects may hamper validity. OSEP will verify results with follow-up survey.

 

Return to table of contents