To view the PDF please click on the document title.

December 24, 2009

This in-depth policy analysis provides a background of the early childhood mental health (ECMH) focus of many organizations and legal elements of why it is essential that children with disabilities be included in a comprehensive mental health system. Findings from interviews with four state early childhood staff (i.e., the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Part B section 619 and Part C staff) were conducted around select components of mental health: Connecticut – consultation; Michigan – preparation and professional development; Ohio – partnerships; and Illinois – finance. Findings include that a variety of staff at a mental health agency and staff for Part B, Section 619 and Part C share responsibilities related to ECMH. Data is also collected through a statewide ECMH partnership and some individual programs; however none of the states has developed a uniform or coordinated data system for ECMH. All states indicated a need for changes in Medicaid policy to accept coding from the Diagnostic Classification of Mental Health and Developmental Disorders. (Click here to download Adobe Acrobat Reader for free.)

December 24, 2009

This in-depth policy analysis begins with a background that briefly describes accountability requirements from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the assessments states use to meet this requirement. A comparison between the status model for determining performance levels and the growth models is given. Further, a description of three types of growth models that states in a federal pilot program use is given. A summary of the evaluation of this pilot program is provided as well. Fifteen states with approved growth models as part of their accountability system were interviewed. Findings are organized around the following topics: Special education staff involvement in the development of growth models; How students with disabilities are included in the growth models; Training provided on growth models; Reporting of growth model results; and Benefits and challenges of a growth model. The document closes with a discussion of the complexity of adding a growth model to a state’s accountability and assessment system; obstacles to including students who participate in alternate assessments based on alternate academic standards in a growth model; and progress in instruction and assessment for this population of students that could ease these obstacles. (Click here to download Adobe Acrobat Reader for free.)

November 30, 2009

Surrogate Parents and Children with Disabilities: State-level Approaches, an in-depth policy analysis from Project Forum at NASDSE in collaboration with the Legal Center for Foster Care and Education, is based on survey findings from 41 state departments of education. The document provides a detailed introduction to the intricacies of the provision of surrogate parents for children identified for service under IDEA. Survey findings include that most states have issued policy or formal guidance pertaining to surrogate parents and children with disabilities, and most also described efforts to ensure that the educational decision making rights of biological and adoptive parents were preserved whenever possible. Although only just more than a quarter of respondents described having a statewide surrogate parent program that addresses recruitment, training and retention of surrogates, all 12 of these states emphasized the value of a statewide system for ensuring that children with disabilities receive appropriate services. (Click here to download Adobe Acrobat Reader for free.)

September 30, 2009

This Brief Analysis examines the role of the local education agency superintendent in promoting, developing and sustaining a culture of collaboration between general and special educators. Selected superintendents were asked to describe their rational for advancing a culture of collaboration, the strategies they implemented, the challenges they faced and their recommendations to other superintendents. Findings include that all of the superintendents maintain a clear and consistent focus on student learning. They also identified several strategies to promote and sustain this collaboration. (Click here to download Adobe Acrobat Reader for free.)

September 30, 2009

This brief policy analysis gives a concise background to RTI, a definition, and describes the U. S. Department of Education’s role in RTI. The data on states (Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island) were gathered based on a document search protocol. The areas described include the state RTI frameworks; RTI administration including rules, guidance, and funding mechanisms; implementation; data and outcomes; and challenges. (Click here to download Adobe Acrobat Reader for free.)

September 30, 2009

This in-depth policy analysis begins with an introduction based on the most current research and includes the definition and prevalence of virtual K-12 education, outcomes, and federal and state guidance pertaining to these programs. Project Forum conducted a survey of all state departments of education. Findings are shared in the areas of number and type of state-level virtual public school programs. More information is given about how states are serving students with disabilities, including personnel, evaluation and identification, implementation of IEPs, provision of related services, assistive technology, accountability, and policy guidance. Benefits and challenges as described by the survey participants are outlined. (Click here to download Adobe Acrobat Reader for free.)

September 1, 2009

This Brief Policy Analysis provides survey findings from 49 state NIMAS coordinators. These findings are an update from a similar analysis in 2007. Findings are clustered in the areas of dedicated staff, coordination and collaboration with national center activities, guidance, professional development, legal issues, data collection, file conversions and availability, challenges and next steps. (Click here to download Adobe Acrobat Reader for free.)