001Perfect. Well, good afternoon everyone. Thank you for joining us for our webinar this afternoon. Um, couple housekeeping or reminders. We are recording this and so the recording once it's finished um will be posted in the same place where you got the link to join the meeting. Um, and any links and stuff provided when they are ready because there's some things that you're going to see. They're not posted yet. So, once they're posted, we'll add the uh links to the site as well. Please use our Q&A feature if there's questions um that you have that will be followed up later and the follow-up will come time sometimes through another webinar. Um but we're not going to answer questions directly today. So if you put something in the chat or raise your hand, there won't be a
002way for us to respond. So just use that Q&A feature at the bottom. So um alrighty well it's an important topic. So we've got 112 people it looks like that have joined us so far this afternoon. Um Lori, I'm going to turn it over to you. >> Perfect. Well, thank you so much and good afternoon everybody. And yeah, I know this is a very hot topic and we wanted to bring it to you as soon as it was ready. We are still working out some of the logistics on the web pages and the accessibility on the documents. This is why we don't have the link to provide to you today, but we're hoping that we'll have it in the next week, maybe two at the latest. but we are working on it and wanted to
003give you guys an overview of what to expect for cyclical monitoring in what we're calling phase 2. So, we just completed cycle six of phase 1 and we are launching into phase two and we've made some enhancements, some changes and wanted to bring those to you guys um as soon as they were ready. So, I'm going to go ahead and share my screen so you guys can see um our our new resource. Let me know. Anna, are you seeing that? Just the document. >> It just popped up. Just the document. It's showing. >> Perfect. Perfect. Perfect. So, first off, you can see we've changed formatting and style. Um, you may remember that in the past we've had that one large DMS guide and all the information from our department, other departments was all integrated and
004embedded. And while that was great, right, that one-stop shop, sometimes it led to some elements of, well, am I this or am I that does this dot reflect what I have to do? So, one of our goals with phase 2 was to try to streamline the resources to clean them up, to provide more clarity, but to also provide insight into some of our processes um that you guys will engage in routinely with us. So, first off, you'll see that the formatting looks different. There will still be an all-inclusive DMS guide as there has always been. What we've done is we've just made every content area. So, every type of monitoring event, every type of general supervision requirement, they each have their own what we're calling chapters. And then each of those chapters can serve as
005a standalone guide or they can be references or if you want the whole manual, you can have the whole manual. Um, but this way we're hoping that we kind of provide that clarity and that streamline effect. So, um, this is what it's going to look like. You can see the table of contents. we're providing those really detailed overviews um and then a couple appendix to appendices to help um navigate some of the more nuanced details. Another big space is that we have embedded what we used to have as a standalone document that desk review rubric that housed all the questions that we start from when we're doing our reviews. We have gone ahead and just embedded that into the cyclical review manual. So it really is a one-stop shop. So everything that's going to occur
006for cyclical monitoring is going to be found in this manual. You'll be able to see how we do the sampling. You'll be able to see how and what we're looking for in that desk review. So with that, um, let me check my notes. I think, yep, I think I got everything for the design. So now to a couple of updates for phase two. um there are some processes that are going to look and feel a little different. So the first one is what we've always called that policy review. First off, we're going to refer to it as a policy and procedure review because many of the things we're looking for are actually more operating procedures than they are actual policies, board approved policies. Um, I know you guys have all heard uh Kristen and Laura
007talk through the legal framework and some of the work that's being done and how for the 2526 school year, you know, there won't be that requirement to upload those policies by the typical deadline that we we receive. That impacts our team because our team um uses that legal framework to do that policy and procedure review prior to the start of the cyclical reviews. So to accommodate that and to make sure that we have that real sound legal framework system when it is rolled out, we're going to have eleas so you guys, we're going to have you upload to us um certain buckets of of policies and procedures. So in that document upload submission that you used to get um that so showed like what elements of the folder do you need to upload and as
008said, there's also one that's for policies and procedures. So it'll show you which policy and procedure areas do we need, what do we need to see procedures wise. Doesn't tell you all the details, doesn't outline the questions, but it tells you the buckets that we need to review to complete our policy and procedure review. So that's something different. If you are engaging in cycle one, your reviewer will go through that in much greater detail than I just did, and they will be available to answer any questions and navigate um any aspects of the situation. So the other big piece is that we've been sharing with you guys for over a year is that beginning with the 2526 school year, direct dyslexia services are now part of IEPs, which means that dyslexia review that we were
009used to being separate from this idea review, they are now combined. So later on in our time together today, I'm going to review the questions that um we have drafted for our desk review for phase two and you'll see that there are several that are new questions or revised questions and that is to account for that embedding of the dyslexia piece. Also in policy and procedure, we've pulled in those dyslexia questions that used to be part of the dyslexia monitoring piece. Um and we will review those during our policy and procedure review. So still looking at all things dyslexia just not having a separate review and not having a separate reviewer. So that is the other big process change. You will have one reviewer that you will be collaborating with. Um we will work with
010you if if the work that we need to review, discuss, meet on is more than one person in your LEA. Of course we would want all all representatives to be involved in our meetings. But for our end, we'll only have one reviewer assigned per LEA doing all of the pieces of the cyclical review. So, that's another big change. Um, I'm going to go ahead and go into some of the content just to give you a preview so you can see we're really trying to provide more details. We're walking you also through the steps of the review process. So that if you are new um or maybe you for many of you that are about to engage in cycle one, a lot has changed since your since that first cycle um of reviews. Uh some of
011the questions have expanded. Some of the elements are different. Some of the processes have been um reorganized, reviewed, revised. So really making sure everyone's aware of and familiar with what to expect. So you can see we've provided some brief information on that initial monitoring meeting. Um we go into the comprehensive desk review. This should be familiar to everyone. We did not make any changes to our diagnostic framework. This is still where we see their greatest need for us to ensure that we are compliant um and and executing all of our best practices and and doing all the things in these buckets of work to make sure that we are meeting those needs of the students and and positively impacting student outcomes. So, um, that is still the same, still the same seven areas that we're
012reviewing in that desk review under those same three required areas of implementation, student outcomes, and family engagement. I've already explained and talked through the policy and procedure review, but it is captured here again just in case um you want to read more about it. And like I said, your reviewer will provide you more detail and walk you through what is requested for the upload. Student samples um pretty much the same as they've been done in the past. We'll be providing you a sample set. We'll walk through those samples. any students who are withdrawn or graduated will mark through and we'll have multiple tabs to provide a supplemental pool if we can't make the the full sample set with the first tab of students. Um other than that no real big changes when it comes to
013the student sampling size side. We are going to discuss later on in the manual this the folder submissions the number of folders and the sample size for each LEA based on your population. we went ahead and um put information in the manual that addresses clarifications. So, we've always called this step of the process the clarifications process, but to truly align it with OEP's 2301 guidance, we really want to make sure that um everyone's understanding that these are pre-finding corrections. And there's some elements where we do get to issue a pre-finding correction and then there's other elements where it's systemic and we cannot. So, we've spelled that out in the manual. Um, your reviewer will review this with you as well, not only at your initial conference, but during the clarifications phase, um, too. But to
014just give a a brief overview, when the initial folder review is complete, the reviewer will reach out to the um the representative of the LEA um who's, you know, kind of coordinating the monitoring review and um request a clarifications meeting. And during that meeting, they will review anything that we're calling an individual instance of non-compliance. So that's maybe one or two folders that we found with that area of non-compliance or review systemic non-compliance. Both types of non-compliance have the opportunity to provide us any supplemental evidence that may have been omitted initially. So, I always think to when we start seeing a pattern in either of these where we're missing a notice or we're missing an item that's typically considered a supplement in a program that that is that's the first point on this is to
015say we're seeing a trend that these aren't existing in IEPs. If these are items that maybe didn't get submitted to us, we want to provide an opportunity for them to submit to be submitted and us to be able to review them. for those one to two instances when it's appropriate, we can go through and determine if those individual instances could be considered pre-finding corrections. So again, minimal instances, it's one to two and we're going to determine if the district could go and make go back to ARD, make those corrections and submit them to us before we issue our final findings. So much more information in this section of the guide and like I said your reviewer will go into greater detail. Um but wanted everyone to see this and and be able to understand it.
016If you've been reading through the SP clarifications process and the pre-finding corrections, you'll see that this aligns uh closely with that with that language as well. We are maintaining the stakeholder survey. Um so this is the survey that we provide districts a link with and you send it out to um general educators, parents, families, community members, special educators, assessment staff to to get information from those stakeholders. One change is that and we actually implemented this in cycle six, but one change is that we are going to make those fields related to the LEA name and the region required. We had um several instances where those weren't indicated because they weren't required and that created a system of orphan data that we couldn't link to eleas which frustrated eleas who knew that stakeholders had engaged with
017the survey but they had no results in their report. So that was a feedback that we received. So that was a mechanism we've implemented to ensure that we get that feedback and that districts can can um see in those three constructs how they're being rated by their stakeholders. It is important to stress that we do not provide access to those individual responses and that is to protect the stakeholder um who participated in the survey. Um the monitoring report you'll see that that's going to look a little different. Um the first round of reports we really focused on explaining in those first few pages why we were engaging in the process, what the process um entailed, gave this overview. Since we have this document and um most everybody has probably been through um a cyclical review
018at this point, our reports will be streamlined to better focus on those areas um of non-compliance, those technical assistance opportunities, the support opportunities um and then address um the various elements that were positive areas that could be enhanced for best practice. So you'll see the report looks a little different, but for the most part the the meat of the report that everyone usually read was the is is going to remain as it was previously. Um there is an optional preview of the report meeting. We offer this to every LEA and it is your option to participate in it or not. Um it just provides an opportunity for us to kind of showcase the various elements of the report, make sure it's tracking with as you understood your results to be and allows an opportunity to
019ask some questions and um get answers prior to the report being issued to the district and then posted 10 days later. um the service quality survey. So we call that serve qual. That is that survey that we send to gather feedback on our team. In phase one, we sent a pre and a post survey. The pre was really to get a feeling of how prepared do you feel? Are there additional areas that we need to develop to support uh districts as they prepare uh for this cyclical review? Now that we're entering into phase two, we're going to eliminate that um that pre-ervey because everyone's been through it in theory, right? Every district has been reviewed. Um and what we're only going to have is that post uh serve quil survey to allow the opportunity for
020you guys to give us feedback so that we can improve and enhance our resources, our supports, our responses, activities. So, um that will stay the same. The last big part of the manual goes into the findings of non-compliance and really just outlining and identifying the requirements. It's important to note that when non-compliance is cited that um the LEA has up to 365 days to complete that non-compliance, but really what the REGGG says is that non-compliance should be completed as soon as possible, but not to exceed 365 days. And that's important. And so we really tried to spell that out here to make sure that we are engaging in those corrective actions and we're making those student level corrections, getting those systems and processes in place so that you can actually address the non-compliance and improve
021the system and then again improve student outcomes. We did provide a sample overview of what we would expect to be submitted for each element of that corrective action plan for us to review to begin to determine if that section or that part of the corrective action plan can be closed completed. Um, this list is where we start for all LEAs. As we engage in this review and we're making our determinations as to whether or not the non-compliance has been corrected for that element of the corrective action plan, we may request more. So, we always reserve the right to request more data, but this is the starting point for each of these areas. And we wanted just to let you guys know so that you understood as you're engaging in that corrective action plan process what
022to explain what to expect to have to have to demonstrate correction. Another big process change. Um, if you have engaged in a corrective action with us, when you get to that evidence of systemic correction, you may recall that in the past you've had the opportunity to select your own folders that you'll submit to demonstrate systemic. In order for us to truly say that it's a random selection that we're reviewing to determine systemic correction, um we will have steps in place where we will provide to you a time frame and a set number of folders in the areas of non-compliance. You will provide to us a list of all students who would fall within that category and then we'll make a randomized sample and request those folders from you. And that is how we will um
023review and determine systemic correction. So that is the big change in the corrective action process. And again, your reviewer will walk you through that and you'll be prepared and ready by the time that part comes in the corrective action plan process. We did add um this final page kind of addresses what happens if there's uncorrected non-compliance as well as an overview of all the interventions and sanctions that are in 891076. This is a very important piece just to remember because we do have the discretion as the state that if we see a need or data determines that there's a need um multiple ways that we can um implement other interventions and sanctions outside of just doing the cyclical review and outside of just the corrective action plan. um uncorrected non-compliance. We referred to that in
024phase one as continuing non-compliance, but again in an effort to align with language from OAP um and and language just kind of across all federal documents, we're now calling that uncorrected non-compliance. So, not a new concept, just a new term to create that greater alignment. All right, now to two big pieces. The first one is the special education sampling methods. So just a quick show of when those groups sampling production is pulled, what data sources are used for each and then what monitoring period those data sources and samplings link to. Um one of the biggest changes is the change to sample size. We received lots of feedback from stakeholders related to folder sample size um related to population. So we have adjusted those um you can see those on your screen and they will be
025in this manual. They will also be available with your reviewer who provides you your sample set. So um again another big change. And the last part, like I said, we've added the desk review, what we used to call the desk review rubric. We have added it to the end of this cyclical monitoring guide. Um, so that everything's all together. You get this one guide, you'll be able to walk through everything um that you need to know to expect for your cyclical monitoring review. So, for today's purposes, I've added a green star to anything that's been changed, added, um, refined. Um, in the version that post, it'll just be that this is what's going into effect for phase 2. This will be again the 2526. And then anytime we make a change or an update or
026post for the following cycle, we will add some type of symbol if we've added a question, changed a question, um anything different so that you know how to track with that as well. So you can see under evaluation just a couple of pieces that have been updated. Um this is actually not a new question. This is just a question that we worked diligently to streamline because in the initial question set it was a very um it had lots of if and then and lots of details to try to wade through. Our goal with the revisions to the desk review rubric was to focus in on what the actual regulation is looking for um to to link to the element that was being reviewed as opposed to getting lost in all the details. So that question
027on evaluation is really now just looking at did the evaluation gather all the relevant functional development and academic information which is the requirement of an evaluation. So, we're we're going back to those pieces of the of the um reggg or rule and really making sure that we've cleaned them up and we've streamlined them so that everyone knows what we're actually looking for. Um we've added a question related to re-evaluations to ensure that those trienals are going to be um that those are being accounted for and reviewed and um are on time. This was a question that kind of came and went throughout phase one and so we've brought it back and we plan for it to remain for phase 2. No big changes to IEP implementation if there were any. It was just some cleanup
028and revision. Um we did move some questions around to better fit in the correct category. Once we got to what the reggg was actually asking we realized that that may have been more of a content question than an implementation question. So you may see a familiar question down below, but um for the most part we didn't we didn't add anything to IEP implementation. Properly constituted AR is where we first start to see some of those inclusive um questions of the dyslexia review. Um, so this is actually a question that I believe we had something similar to in the past, but it has been revised to align with the wording in the dyslexia handbook as well as any resources that we have provided um to districts from the agency. So that way everything is cohesive, everything
029aligns. IEP content is where you will see the most um changes and additions. The first four questions all relate to dyslexia programming. Again, these used to be part of that more general dyslexia program review, but now that these elements would have an impact um or an expectation to be seen in an IEP because they relate to direct services, we have brought them over and added them into IEP content. So you can see we talk about um did the art committee discuss how the student will access the evidence-based dyslexia program including whether or not the present PLAs um or the the current PLASS or other areas of the IP show evidence of the program must be supplemented with a focus on one or more components. So tying in all of those required pieces um to ensure
030that we um continue that dyslexia review. Then we did add um to the last part of IEP content, we added a question that relates to restraints. So if in our review we determine that there is a student who did have a restraint used during the previous year, we will ask for um the written notification to see if efforts were made to deescalate the situation and the alternatives to restraints that were were attempted. Again, this is stakeholder feedback and this is something that we are focusing on to see if the process was completed and if the documentation as expected under um tech has been implemented correctly. IEP development. Um, again another question related to dyslexia and that is the section that talks about if the IEP progress report if that if that cadence if that structure
031of progress reporting would meet the intent of the requirement in state law for a progress report on dyslexia instruction. So again, this was set to be implemented in 2526 as any as as is. This is why we're pulling it into here as well to ensure that we have um accounted for that element that is unique to dyslexia and that we're monitoring for it in the same way that we're monitoring for progress reports. So right above it is the question related to overall progress reports um when folks will be notified as well as the dyslexia progress reporting. Um only changes to state assessment is we consolidated questions, refined them, clarified them to um make sure that we get to um the actual aspect that we're monitoring for in state assessment. Um so again, just kind of
032a cleanup and refinement. Nothing added and transition remained the same. No additions, just a little bit of cleanup and alignment with tech and TAC. Um, one piece that I will say is I'm sure as you've seen me scrolling through this, you've noticed that gone are those ID10s, SA1's. Um, we used to call those the friendly IDs. Um on the data side um we have removed those because our goal is to align more with citation and and the topic of the citation so that when you are an LEA and you are working through that corrective action the corrective action plan the report the communication the notifications they will all capture the citations that were non-compliant and then the category of that citation. ation or that the name the the um area the focus that the citation
033um is related to instead of it being ID2 ID 10 we're actually going to name it name the CFR and then name PLA and that way it'll align with how we notify for complaints it'll notify how other communications come out it'll notify with how we submit our data to the feds everything will tie together and um and and hopefully help you guys as you get communications from us see if there's trends, see if there's are systems um or systemic non-compliance that you can identify as well. So that is everything I had to share. I'm going to stop stop sharing my screen. >> Awesome. Thank you so much, Lori. Um, the one question that did come in and I responded, but I will let them know because a few people might have joined a little bit
034late. They were asking where the link for this was. So, I told them once it's 508 compliant, once it's finalized, it will be posted on the review and support site DMS. >> Yep. So, the DMS um web page, which is the differentiated monitoring supports web page, it's where you've always gone to get the um uh monitoring guide. Uh, so review and support is usually where you went to get some other elements, but the DMS page is where you went to get the monitoring guide. It's where you found your cyclical review reports, links, and all of that. So that is that is going to be the place where all of the guides and monitoring activities um information will be hosted and then review and support will be where you'll find greater details and some additional resources.
035But yeah, that's that's hopefully all going to be ready to go pretty soon. And um what we will do is we will alert all ESC's and we will make sure to update any links um to eleas as well. >> Awesome. So our what we're encouraging you guys to do is look at the site kind of keep an eye on it. You know it'll be posted soon. There's other good information on there in the meantime until that guide is posted. So >> absolutely. Yep. >> Lots of information today. Thank you so much, Lori, for joining us. And the recording for this will get out soon because I think a lot of people are going to want to rewatch it or maybe show it to some of their staff. So, >> absolutely. >> We'll get it to
036you as soon as possible. All right, I'm going to