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

IDEA: Special Education Technology and Media Services - 2004

Program Goal: To link scientifically based practices to states, school systems and families to improve results for infants, toddlers and children with disabilities
Objective 8.1 of 3: 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 program funding priorities that respond to critical needs of children with disabilities and their families.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
The percentage of program funding priorities that respond to critical needs of children with disabilities and their families.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
 
Technology (from T&M) Media (from T&M)
Technology (from T&M) Media (from T&M)
2001
79 82
   
2002
73.80 70
75 75
2003
71.40 65
75 75
2004
   
75 75
2005
   
75 75
2006
   
75 75
2007
   
75 75


 
Additional Source Information: Published funding priorities.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2003 - 2004
Data Available: October 2004

 

Objective 8.2 of 3: Projects use high-quality methods and materials
Indicator 8.2.1 of 1: Highest standards for methods and materials: The percentage of IDEA-funded projects use exceptionally rigorous quantitative or qualitative research and evaluation methods or current research-validated practices and materials, as appropriate.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
The percentage of IDEA-funded projects that use exceptionally rigorous quantitative or qualitative research and evaluation methods or current research-validated practices and materials, as appropriate
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1999
50
 
2000
50
 
2001
16
 
2002
 
25
2003
 
35
2004
 
45
2005
 
55
2006
 
65
2007
 
75


Explanation: All successful applications under IDEA programs include high quality methods and materials, as judged by panels during the review process. This indicator applies a more rigorous standard to assess projects that have exceptionally high standards based on a standard measurement protocol. It takes at least three years to achieve stability in review and assessment process. Fluctuations in data are expected for several years while the data collection methodology is refined. The improvement in Demonstration and Outreach activities from 2000 to 2001 resulted after significant changes were made in the application requirements for these activities. Increased emphasis was placed on project evaluation, and limits on the length of applications were increased.  
Additional Source Information: Project information.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2003 - 2004
Data Available: October 2004
Validated By: No Formal Verification.

 

Objective 8.3 of 3: Projects Communicate appropriately and products are used for children with disabilities and their families.
Indicator 8.3.1 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.
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
The percentage of expert panels that 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.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
1998
78
 
1999
 
89
2000
47
 
2001
62
 
2002
 
65
2003
 
75
2004
 
75
2005
 
75
2006
 
75
2007
 
75


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 information.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2002
Data Available: September 2003
Validated By: No Formal Verification.

Limitations: Data for 2002-2004 were not collected.

 
Indicator 8.3.2 of 2: Communication with target audiences
Targets and Performance Data Assessment of Progress Sources and Data Quality
The percentage of IDEA-funded projects that both (1) communicate high-quality products and information and (2) employ strategies to communicate with appropriate target audiences will increase.
Year Actual Performance Performance Targets
2000
40
 
2001
80
 
2002
 
75
2003
 
75
2004
 
75
2005
 
75
2006
 
75
2007
 
75


Explanation: Experts review a sample of products submitted by project directors of a sample of funded projects that have ended. Raters use a scale of 0 to 2, with an overall mean rating of 1.5 considered appropriate communication with target audience.  
Additional Source Information: Project information from products developed by grantees.

Frequency: Annually.
Collection Period: 2002
Data Available: September 2003
Validated By: No Formal Verification.
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.

 

Return to table of contents