ANALYSIS OF STATE PERFORMANCE PLANS FOR INDICATOR 13 (Spring, 2006)

Indicator 13 requires states to report data on the percent of youth aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the child to meet the post-secondary goals. Baseline data must be reported by February 1, 2007. The sections below summarize states’ plans for collecting and reporting data for Indicator 13. Since 100% of states and territories responded, percentages are based on n = 60

Age

Almost all respondents (93.3%; n = 56) indicated that they would gather data on students age 16 and above, as stated in the indicator. Three respondents (5%) indicated they would collect data on students age 14 and above and one (1.6%) indicated they would collect Indicator 13 data on students age 15 and above.

Data Collected to Calculate Standard Percentage

The vast majority of respondents (85%; n = 53) did not indicate what data they would gather to measure Indicator 13, instead they merely stated that they would calculate the standard percentage. However, nine (15%) respondents did provide some detail on what data they would gather to measure Indicator 13 (e.g., post-secondary education/employment goal, community/independent living goal, and a minimum of one transition service per goal).

Data Collection Procedures

Respondents indicated that data to measure Indicator 13 would be gathered using a variety of strategies including:

1. Electronic monitoring system (41.7%; n = 25)
2. Student file review (26.7%; n = 10)
3. On-site monitoring (5.0%; n = 3)
4. Student and parent surveys (3.3%; n = 2)
5. Combination of strategies (13.3%; n = 8)
6. To be determined/not indicated (10%; n = 6)

Activities for Improvement

In terms of activities that would be needed to improve respondents’ ability to measure and use Indicator 13 data, 31.7% (n = 19) did not state any activities, 26.7% (n = 16) stated that they would wait until baseline data had been collected, and 41.6% (n = 25) defined activities that would be needed to improve their system. Of the 25 respondents who defined activities for improvement, the activities were divided into the following five categories:

1. Training/Technical Assistance (88%; n = 22). For example, developing research-based, transition-focused rubrics, training, and curriculum for LEAs and providing professional development on transition requirements and IEP development.
2. Monitor/Adjust Policies/Practices/Procedures (76%; n= 19). For example, developing quality indicators to support high quality transition planning in the IEP process and submitting improvement plans through the state process.
3. Data Monitoring/Recording (64%; n = 16). For example, analyzing data and preparing plans for APRs and reporting data for the public.
4. Develop Interagency Collaboration (40%; n = 10). For example, developing a statewide community of practice for collaborative efforts related to transition services and working with IHEs to improve their transition-related pre-service and in-service coursework.
5. Materials Development/Dissemination (15%; n = 9). For example, creating web-based training modules in the area of family and student involvement, interagency collaboration, and the transition planning process.

Summary of Indicator 13

Although baseline data for Indicator 13 are not required until February 1, 2007, all states have started the planning process to collect the necessary data. First, almost all states/territories will follow the Indicator 13 requirement for collecting data beginning at age 16 (93.3%). Second, while 90% have a plan for collecting Indicator 13 data (e.g., electronic monitoring systems, student file review), only 15% provided a description of what data they will collect to measure Indicator 13. Finally, while 58.3% (n = 35) did not list any activities for improvement, 41.6% (n = 25) listed activities in a variety of areas including training/technical assistance, monitoring/adjust policies/practices/procedures, data monitoring/recording, develop interagency coordination, and materials development/dissemination.