Technical Assistance for Part B, Indicator 13

The following information should be available when using these questions to guide TA decisions:

• The State Performance Plan
• The Annual Performance Reports
• Letters of Determination with accompanying Tables
• Tools used to gather Indicator 13 data
• Actual response data by LEA by question or probe

Background Information

1.  Describe what is happening now in your state and local districts relative to secondary transition? Are there, or have there been, any:
   1. Changes in legislation or policy?
   2. Leadership changes?
   3. Compliance agreements/case law?
   4. Changes in procedures, definitions or procedures?
   5. Disputes?
   6. Parent advocacy?
   7. Philosophical disagreements?
   8. Stakeholder involvement?
   9. Collaboration with other agencies, programs, etc?
   10. Press issues?
2. What have your target data been to date? If there have been any changes, why do you think they occurred?
   • If you have had improvement or slippage, can you explain why?
   • Are there other state and/or district data available to explain data variations noted?

Data Collection

1. Describe the approach used to collect the state and local district data? How did the state and local district ensure that the data were accurate, valid, and reliable?
2. What questions or probes does the state and local district use to determine Indicator 13? Did the state and local district use:
   • An NSTTAC Checklist?
   • The Transition Outcomes Project (TOPs) Checklist?
   • A State developed I-13 checklist? Has it been MSIP approved? What were the specific questions used? How were these questions chosen?
3. How long has the state and local district data been collected using these     questions/items?
4. What type of training was/is provided to the state and local district data collectors? To whom was/is it provided? How often? How is new staff trained?
5. What other steps have been taken to ensure accuracy and reliability of your data?
   • Do you review district data to examine reliability?
   • What efforts have been made to assure that questions (including definitions and instructions) are used consistently across the state?
6. Are there missing data? If so, why?
   • Have you tried any strategies to improve your data collection? If so, what?

Data Reporting

1. Describe the approach used to report the required data and information.
   • Did the state and local district report the required data by question/item? If not, why not?
   • Does the report format support our ability to disaggregate data for drill down purposes? If not, what implications does this have for improvement planning?

Data Analysis

1. Describe how the state and local district analyzed the data using the questions or probes  to determine performance on Indicator 13.
2. What were the results for each item/question?
3. What variation exists across districts (e.g., geographic regions, district/program size, etc.) in our state?  What variation factors might influence the data?
4. In looking at the data, how does the data vary across districts in the state?
   • What variation do we notice when looking at the aggregated results for each district?
   • What variation do we notice when looking at the performance of each item/question? Across district by question for the state? Within district by question?
5. What factors might contribute to this variation?
6. Have your data shown any changes over time? Can you say why?
7. What conclusions can be drawn from this data analysis? 
   • What are the areas of strength?
   • What additional information do we need in order to better understand our results?
   • What areas seem to be the areas of concern? 

Data Use & Improvement Planning

1. How does the State and local district use the data to improve or ensure compliance?
   • IEP Correction
     1. What process is in place to inform LEAs of non-compliance with any IEP that does not meet I-13 criteria?
     2. What is the timeline with which the LEA must demonstrate compliance with any IEP that does not meet the I-13 requirements?
     3. What steps, if any, do you take to follow-up with LEAs to ensure that the IEP has been corrected?
   • Systemic Correction
     1. Are you looking at your I-13 data (at the state and local level) to determine if there are any systemic problems? If ‘no’ then why not?
   • How do you differentiate individual IEP correction from systemic correction?
   • If you are looking at systemic problems at the state or local level, what steps or   actions are you taking to address those systemic problems?
   • What resources have been allocated to address the systemic problems (at the state and local level)
2. How does the State and local district use the data to improve results?
   • Describe your improvement plan and the improvement strategies used to date, specifically including the activities/strategies and resources used.
   • Do you have a plan to improve -13results at both the local and state levels? If no, why not?
   • Does this plan include activities addressing both individual IEP corrections and systemic problems?
   • Does this plan include improvement activities that specify action steps, timelines, responsible parties and resources? If no, why not?
   • Did the development of this plan include a variety of stakeholders including local teachers and administrators, parents, students, adult agency representatives? If not, why not?
   • How has the State and local district evaluated the impact of the improvement efforts taken to date?
   • How is this information and the data collected used to identify or modify improvement activities?
   • Based upon any previous efforts to improve indicator 13 results, identify what has worked and what has not worked.
   • Explain why you believe those efforts did or did not work. 
   • Explain what you plan to do to continue efforts that worked and change efforts that did not work
   • What might be the barriers to improved performance?
     1. State and district policies
     2. State and district funding
     3. Lack of understanding of the various component requirements
     4. Other
   • How do your improvement activities for Indicator 13 relate to Indicators 1, 2, and 14?
3. Given your responses to the above questions, what areas of focus are needed to best improve performance on Indicator 13?
   • Do you need to improve collection or use of data?
     1. Data collection process?
     2. Data analysis process?
     3. Data reporting process?
     4. Data use process?
   • Do you need to improve implementation of Indicator 13 requirements?
     1. Understanding and implementation of requirements?
     2. Transition planning process?
     3. IEP development?
4.  What strategy(ies) might you use to improve your performance on Indicator 13?
   • Provide targeted TA and/or training?
     1. To targeted districts
     2. By question or data source
   • Produce and disseminate or post (on the web) guidance documents, reference materials, forms, training modules and/or other tools?
   • Develop and promote model sites?
   • Develop new inter- or intra- agency agreements, plans and communication protocols?
   • Conduct efforts to strengthen parent-community relations?
   • Extend marketing/public relations efforts?
   • Re-allocate/re-structure resources and staffing?
   • Other (specify)
5.  What, if any, assistance do you need to demonstrate improvement with indicator 13?

For a list of TA resources, please see the Indicator 13 Resource Document for State Selected TA Resources ideas.

Original Word Document

OSEP Funded Specialty Centers

National Secondary Transition Technical Assistance Center (NSTTAC)
NSTTAC is the national technical assistance and dissemination center for secondary transition funded by the Office of Special Education Programs (#H326J050004). NSTTAC’s goals are to:

• Assist states with collecting, reporting, and using Indicator 13 data to improve transition services
• Generate knowledge of evidence-based secondary transition practices that provide a foundation for states to improve transition services that enhance post-school outcomes
• Build state capacity to implement evidence-based secondary transition practices that improve post-school outcomes
• Disseminate information regarding evidence-based secondary transition practices that improve post-school outcomes to state personnel, practitioners, researchers, parents, and students

For more information, please visit the web site or contact:

David W. Test - 704-687-8853
Catherine Fowler - 704-687-8735

Indicator 13 Basics and Tools Developed by NSTTAC

1. For an overview of Indicator 13 see: What Is Indicator 13? 
2. For two checklists developed by NSTTAC that can be used document for determining if an IEP meets Indicator 13 requirements see: NSTTAC Indicator 13 Checklist
3. For a downloadable document with frequently asked questions and answers about Indicator 13 see: I-13 Checklist FAQ (Being revised- new version coming soon!)
4. For a downloadable document that can be used to collect data for Indicator 13 see: Data Collection Tool (Being revised- new version coming soon!)
5. For a downloadable checklist developed by NSTTAC that can be used to determine if all required elements were addressed when developing the APR response to Indicator 13 see: I-13 Annual Performance Report Checklist.
6. For an OSEP developed Part B, Indicator 13 FAQ and Part B, Indicator 13 Submission Checklist see this page.
7. For training materials and examples and non-examples for the Indicator 13 checklist. (Being revised- new version coming soon!)
8. For a downloadable document with a variety of case studies see the Case Studies for the I-13 Training Materials. (Being revised- new version coming soon!)
9. For a description of how to use NSTTAC’s Indicator 13 resources for professional development. 

Information and Tools Developed by NSTTAC to Help with Improvement Activities

1. For a framework for planning secondary transition education and services see: Taxonomy for Transition Programming
2. For a cross-walk of the Taxonomy for Transition Programming and the NASET Standards for planning secondary transition education and services see: Cross-referencing Taxonomy and NASET Standards
3. For a framework for capacity building strategies see: NSTTAC State Capacity Building Model
4. For a planning tool to consider current status, needs, and a plan to build state capacity to improve secondary transition education and services, which includes reflective questions and indicators of progress see: Team Planning Tool for State Capacity Building: Secondary Transition Education and Services (National Institute)
5. For a planning tool for use by local teams during a state transition institute to consider current status, needs, and a plan for improvement see: Team Planning Tool for Improving Transition Education and Services (State Institute)
6. For an  Age-Appropriate Transition Assessment Guide, see: this page.
7. For a description of how to use NSTTAC’s evidence-based practices for professional development, see: this page.
8. For NSTTAC PowerPoint’s for providing training on Indicator 13 see: 
   • Transition rich IEPS: Addressing IDEA 2004 requirements (Paula Kohler)
   • Collecting Indicator 13 Data (David Test)
   • Using the I-13 Checklist to develop IEPs that are Student Centered (David Test)

Other Resources for Indicator 13 Basics and Improvement Activities

1. The Transition Outcomes Project (TOPS) that is working with a number of states to improve Indicator 13 data. For a set of materials on transition and the IEP see this site and for more information contact Ed O’Leary.
2. The six Regional Resource Centers are funded by OSEP to assist state education agencies in the systemic improvement of education programs, practices, and policies that affect children and youth with disabilities. These centers offer consultation, information services, technical assistance, training, and product development. For more information see the Regional Resource Centers for Special Education (RRCs)
3. Implementation Research Resource -The National Implementation Research Network (NIRN) offers State and local school districts a framework for understanding effective implementation processes that can be used to think about and conceptualize improvement efforts that are statewide and sustainable.

    

Examples or to Learn from States that are Doing Well on Indicator 13

1. For an example that includes Improvement Activities that are cross-reference Indicators 1, 2, 13, and 14 see: Kentucky
2. For an example that includes a good description of how data were collected, verification of correction of noncompliance, and a format for providing improvement activities for Indicator 13 see: Washington