Cherokee County Schools (200) Annual Public Report for Students with Disabilities

School Year: 2007-08

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA 2004) requires each state to submit a State Performance Plan (SPP). The SPP is a six-year performance plan which evaluates the State’s efforts to implement the requirements of IDEA and improve results for students with disabilities. It describes how North Carolina will improve its performance on 20 prescribed indicators. Fourteen of the SPP indicators (Indicators 1-14) focus on educational outcomes for students with disabilities, as well as compliance with IDEA requirements. The last six SPP indicators (Indicators 15 -20) review the State Education Agency's general supervision authority under IDEA. North Carolina established measurable and rigorous targets for each indicator and must report annually through the Annual Performance Report (APR) on the performance of the state. The IDEA also requires states to report annually to the public on the performance of each local education agency on certain indicators. This year, reporting is on Indicators 1, 2, 3, 4a, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 and is based on data collected during the 2007-08 school year.

To review the North Carolina SPP/APR, visit the following link:

www.ncpublicschools.org/ec/plan/

Annual Performance Report Legend
--     No Data Available
*      Less than 5 students in the category and data masked for confidentiality
N/A    This particular metric does not apply for this district this school year

Indicator 1: Graduation Rate

Percent of youth with individualized education programs (IEPs) graduating from high school with a regular diploma.

State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
>= 55.00 56.30 Yes 62.5 YES

Indicator 2: Dropout Rate

Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school.

State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
<= 6.50 8.00 No 5.81 YES

Indicator 3: Student Participation and Performance

Statewide Assessment Participation and Performance for Students with Disabilities.

Indicator 3a: Adequate Yearly Progress for Disability Subgroup

District performance compared to State AYP objectives for the disability subgroup.

Cherokee County Schools did not make adequate yearly progress for the 2007-08 school year.

Indicator 3b: Statewide Assessment Participation Rates for Children with IEPs

Reading participation rates:

Grade State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
3 >= 99.70 99.60 No 100 Yes
4 >= 99.70 99.70 Yes 100 Yes
5 >= 99.70 99.70 Yes 100 Yes
6 >= 99.60 99.20 No 100 Yes
7 >= 99.40 99.00 No 100 Yes
8 >= 99.30 98.70 No 100 Yes
10 >= 96.00 96.50 Yes 100 Yes

Math participation rates:

Grade State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
3 >= 99.70 99.60 No 100 Yes
4 >= 99.70 99.60 No 100 Yes
5 >= 99.70 99.70 Yes 100 Yes
6 >= 99.40 99.10 No 100 Yes
7 >= 99.20 99.00 No 100 Yes
8 >= 99.30 98.90 No 100 Yes
10 >= 96.00 91.80 No 100 Yes

Indicator 3c: Statewide Assessment Proficiency Rates for Children with IEPs

Reading proficiency rates:

Grade State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
3 >= 66.00 29.60 No 23.53 No
4 >= 63.90 30.80 No * *
5 >= 72.30 27.20 No 39.29 No
6 >= 58.40 27.80 No 20.59 No
7 >= 63.80 22.40 No 16.28 No
8 >= 68.40 24.50 No * *
10 >= 23.00 25.40 Yes * *

Math proficiency rates:

Grade State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
3 >= 61.30 51.80 No 44.12 No
4 >= 70.30 48.00 No 45.16 No
5 >= 62.90 45.50 No 60.71 No
6 >= 58.90 43.20 No 61.76 Yes
7 >= 49.30 41.30 No 34.09 No
8 >= 48.30 41.20 No 34.29 No
10 >= 55.60 42.50 No 42.31 No
Note
Readinhg proficiency rates decreased substantially due to changes to the State reading curriculum and the resetting of the State reading standards in 2007-08, increasing their rigor.

Indicator 4a: Suspension/Expulsion Rates

Districts identified as having a significant discrepancy in rates of greater than 10 day suspensions and expulsions of students with disabilities in a school year. District rates for suspensions/expulsions greater than twice the state average indicate a significant discrepancy.

Measurement Rate (%) and Discrepancy
State Rate 0.30
District Rate 0.00
Is there a significant discrepancy between the district's rate and the state average? No

Indicator 5: Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) placements for school-age children (ages 6-21).

Percent of students with IEPs (ages 6-21) removed from regular education class for special education services.

LRE State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
Indicator 5a:

Percent of children with IEPs removed from regular class less than 21% of the day.

 >= 62.60 64.00 Yes 86.59 Yes
Indicator 5b:

Percent of children with IEPs removed from regular class greater than 60% of the day.

 <= 16.50 15.80 Yes 5.23 Yes
Indicator 5c:

Percent of children with IEPs served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound or hospital placements.

 <= 2.10 2.30 No -- --


Note: The Objective is to increase 5a, and decrease 5b and 5c.

Indicator 8: Parent Involvement

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 children with disabilities.

State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA(%) Did District Meet Target?
= 28.00 33.00 Yes N/A N/A

Indicator 9: Disproportionate Representation - Child with a Disability

Does the LEA have disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that is the result of inappropriate identification?

State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? Did District Meet Target?
= 0.00 0.00 Yes Yes

Indicator 10: Disproportionate Representation - Eligibility Category

Does the LEA have disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories that is the result of inappropriate identification?

State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? Did District Meet Target?
= 0.00 0.00 Yes Yes

Indicator 11: Timely Evaluation

Percent of children for whom a referral was received and placement determined within 90 days.

State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
= 100.00 85.47 No 100 Yes

Indicator 12: Early Childhood Transition

Percent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3 and who are found eligible for Part B who receive special education and related services by their 3rd birthday.

State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
= 100.00 85.64 No * *

Indicator 13: Secondary Transition

The percentage of youth age 16 and above with an IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet the post-secondary goals.

State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
= 100.00 85.80 No 100.00 Yes

Indicator 14: Post-School Outcomes

The percent of youth who had IEPs, are no longer in secondary school and who have been competitively employed, enrolled in some type of postsecondary school, or both, within one year of leaving high school.

State Target (%) State Average (%) Did State Meet Target? LEA (%) Did District Meet Target?
= 75.00 73.00 No N/A N/A