RDA Monitoring System
Idaho’s Results Driven Accountability (RDA) Monitoring System mirrors that of the U.S. Department of Education in the monitoring activities it conducts and the supports provided to Local Education Agencies (LEAs). RDA and support (general supervision) systems serve to improve outcomes for students with disabilities with a focus on improved results, while continuing to assist LEAs in ensuring compliance with the IDEA’s requirements.
Resource Files
For additional documents, click the appropriate + sign below to open a dropdown list.
-
Contact
Debi Smith
Coordinator
(208) 332-6915
dsmith@sde.idaho.gov
GSFR Checklists
- 2024 SLD Checklist Review Tool
- 2024 General Checklist Review Tool
- 2024 Preschool Checklist Review Tool
- 2024 Secondary Checklist Review Tool
Training
-
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires each state to develop a state performance plan/annual performance report (SPP/APR) that evaluates the state’s efforts to implement the requirements and purposes of the IDEA and describes how the state will improve its implementation. The SPP/APRs include indicators that measure student and family outcomes and other indicators that measure compliance with the requirements of the IDEA.
Contact
Kate Hill
Coordinator
(208) 332-6933
khill@sde.idaho.govResources
Results indicator: Percent of youth with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) graduating from high school with a regular high school diploma.
(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))
Results indicator: Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school.
(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))
Results indicator: Participation and performance of students with IEPs on statewide assessments.
(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))
- The participation rate for students with IEPs on the regular state-wide assessment (Idaho Standard Achievement Test (ISAT)) and alternate assessment (Idaho Alternate Assessment (IDAA)).
- Proficiency rate for children with IEPs against grade-level academic standards ISAT.
- Proficiency rate for students with IEPs against alternate academic achievement standards IDAA.
- Gap in proficiency rates for children withIEPs and all students against grade-level academic achievement standards ISAT.
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 3A: Participation in Statewide Assessments Math
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 3A: Participation in Statewide Assessments Reading
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 3B: Performance on the Regular Statewide Assessments (ISAT) Math
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 3B: Performance on the Regular Statewide Assessments (ISAT) Reading
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 3C: Performance on Alternate Assessment (IDAA) Math
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 3C: Performance on Alternate Assessment (IDAA) Reading
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 3D: Gap in Performance on Regular Assessment (ISAT) Math
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 3D: Gap in Performance on Regular Assessment (ISAT) Reading
A. Results indicator, B. Compliance indicator: Rates of suspension and expulsion: Significant discrepancy in the rate of suspension and expulsion for students with disabilities (SWD) greater than 10 days.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A); 1412(a)(22))
- Significant discrepancy in the rate of suspensions and expulsions of greater than 10 days in a school year for students with IEPs.
- Significant discrepancy, by race or ethnicity, in the rate of suspensions and expulsions of greater than 10 days in a school year for students with IEPs; and (b) policies, procedures or practices that contribute to the significant discrepancy and do not comply with requirements relating to the development and implementation of IEPs, the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and procedural safeguards.
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 4A: Significant Discrepancy in Long Term Out of School Suspensions and Expulsions (Coming Soon)
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 4B: Significant Discrepancy in Long Term Out of School Suspensions and Expulsions by Race-Ethnicities (Coming Soon)
Results indicator: Education environments (students 6-21): Percent of students with IEPs aged 6 through 21 served in the least restrictive environment. Starting in school year 2020-2021 reporting includes students age 5 in kindergarten through age 21.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A))
- Inside the regular class 80% or more of the day;
- Inside the regular class less than 40% of the day; and
- In separate schools, residential facilities, or homebound/hospital placements.
Results indicator: Percent of students with IEPs aged 3 through 5 served in the least restrictive environment. Starting in school year 2020-2021 reporting includes students age 3 through 5 not in kindergarten.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A))
- Regular early childhood program and receiving the majority of special education and related services in the regular early childhood program; and
- Separate special education class, separate school or residential facility.
Results indicator: Percent of preschool students aged 3 through 5 with IEPs who demonstrate improved:
- Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships);
- Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/ communication and early literacy); and
- Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs.
(20 U.S.C. 1416 (a)(3)(A))
Each of the measures A, B, and C are further broken down by sub categories 1 and 2 (A1, A2, B1, and etc.):
- Of those students who entered or exited the program below age expectations in the given outcome area, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program.
- The percent of preschool students who were functioning within age expectations in the given outcome area by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program.
Results indicator: Percent of parents with a child receiving special education services who report that schools facilitated parent involvement as a means of improving services and results for students with disabilities.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A))
Compliance indicator: Percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that is the result of inappropriate identification.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(C))
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 9: Disproportionate Representation (Coming Soon)
Compliance indicator: Percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories that is the result of inappropriate identification.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(C))
- Indicator Summary - Indicator 10: Disproportionate Representation in Specific Disability Categories (Coming Soon)
Compliance indicator: Percent of students who were evaluated within 60 days of receiving parental consent for initial evaluation or, if the State establishes a timeframe within which the evaluation must be conducted, within that timeframe.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))
Compliance indicator: Percent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3, who are found eligible for Part B, and who have an IEP developed and implemented by their third birthdays.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))
Compliance indicator: Percent of youth an IEPs that includes appropriate measurable postsecondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those postsecondary goals, and annual IEPs goals related to the student’s transition service needs. There also must be evidence that the student was invited to the IEPs Team meeting where transition services are to be discussed and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency was invited to the IEPs Team meeting with the prior consent of the parent or student who has reached the age of majority.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))
Results indicator: Post-school outcomes: Percent of youth who are no longer in secondary school, had IEPs in effect at the time they left school, and were:
- Enrolled in higher education within one year of leaving high school.
- Enrolled in higher education or competitively employed within one year of leaving high school.
- Enrolled in higher education or in some other postsecondary education or training program; or competitively employed or in some other employment within one year of leaving high school.
Results indicator: Percent of hearing requests at the that went to resolution sessions that were resolved through resolution session settlement agreements. This is a state level indicator and is not measured at the LEA level.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B))
Results indicator: Percent of mediations at the held that resulted in mediation agreements. This is a state level indicator and is not measured at the LEA level.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3(B))
Frequently Asked Questions
For answers, click the appropriate + sign below.
-
RDA was introduced in 2014 by the US Department of Education, and focuses on helping states build a better statewide system to improve results for students with disabilities. States have been doing an excellent job of meeting the compliance requirements related to the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). But each state now has the opportunity to develop a plan to improve our practices for the benefit of students with disabilities.
States are developing and submitting a plan to the Office of Special Education Programs every year for five years, as the plan each year evolves over time. Phase I was submitted in April 2015 and included the data and analysis done by the state team. Phase II was submitted in April 2016 and included the development of the infrastructure to support change, the evidence-based practices identified for implementation, and the evaluation plan to show how the team will evaluate both the process of implementation and the actual student outcomes that result from the implementation. Phase III will be submitted in April 2017 and will include the actual evaluation data and any changes or adjustments needed to the implementation identified through the evaluation process.
The state team reviewed longitudinal data related to the ISAT assessment, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), and IRI data to analyze trends in student performance. This analysis identified reading as the academic area in which the largest gap existed between students without disabilities and students with disabilities. The team also considered initiatives already in place in Idaho that the SSIP could partner with in order to maximize available resources and programs. Idaho has a Comprehensive Literacy Plan, ELA/Literacy Network Coaches, and statewide fluency assessment (Idaho Reading Indicator) that could all be leverage points for the SSIP Improvement Strands.
In selecting districts to be in the first Cohort for the SSIP, it was important to the SSIP Team and stakeholders to have cross-state representation, large and small districts, urban and rural districts, and a diverse representation of student demographics. The first Cohort includes Coeur D’Alene, Lewiston, Vallivue, Kuna, Minidoka, Bonneville, and Sugar-Salem. These seven districts will receive professional development and coaching, as well as provide valuable data and feedback to the SSIP Team as they continue to adjust and modify the SSIP implementation plan in preparation for scaling up statewide.
Districts who are not currently in the SSIP Cohort can access available resources at the Results Driven Accountability page on the Idaho Training Clearinghouse. Training materials and resources are being continually developed and posted to the page in an effort to make information available statewide.
Training Resources
For training, please view the Idaho Training Clearinghouse.
Resource Links
-
General Links
-
General Links
-
Idaho Department of Education Links