Indicator 8A: Early Childhood Transition
Instructions and Measurement
Monitoring Priority: Effective General Supervision Part C / Effective Transition
Compliance indicator: The percentage of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transition planning for whom the Lead Agency has:
- Developed an IFSP with transition steps and services at least 90 days, and at the discretion of all parties, not more than nine months, prior to the toddler's third birthday;
- Notified (consistent with any opt-out policy adopted by the State) the State educational agency (SEA) and the local educational agency (LEA) where the toddler resides at least 90 days prior to the toddler's third birthday for toddlers potentially eligible for Part B preschool services; and
- Conducted the transition conference held with the approval of the family at least 90 days, and at the discretion of all parties, not more than nine months, prior to the toddler's third birthday for toddlers potentially eligible for Part B preschool services.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B) and 1442)
Data Source
Data to be taken from monitoring or State data system.
Measurement
- Percent = [(# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and services at least 90 days, and at the discretion of all parties not more than nine months, prior to their third birthday) divided by the (# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C)] times 100.
- Percent = [(# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where notification (consistent with any opt-out policy adopted by the State) to the SEA and LEA occurred at least 90 days prior to their third birthday for toddlers potentially eligible for Part B preschool services) divided by the (# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C who were potentially eligible for Part B)] times 100.
- Percent = [(# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C where the transition conference occurred at least 90 days, and at the discretion of all parties not more than nine months, prior to the toddler's third birthday for toddlers potentially eligible for Part B) divided by the (# of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C who were potentially eligible for Part B)] times 100.
Account for untimely transition planning under 8A, 8B, and 8C, including the reasons for delays.
Instructions
Indicators 8A, 8B, and 8C: Targets must be 100%.
Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect these data. Provide the actual numbers used in the calculation.
Indicators 8A and 8C: If data are from the State's monitoring, describe the procedures used to collect these data. If data are from State monitoring, also describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring. If data are from a State database, describe the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarter, selection from the full reporting period) and how the data accurately reflect data for infants and toddlers with IFSPs for the full reporting period.
Indicators 8A and 8C: States are not required to report in their calculation the number of children for whom the State has identified the cause for the delay as exceptional family circumstances, as defined in 34 CFR §303.310(b), documented in the child's record. If a State chooses to report in its calculation children for whom the State has identified the cause for the delay as exceptional family circumstances documented in the child's record, the numbers of these children are to be included in the numerator and denominator. Include in the discussion of the data, the numbers the State used to determine its calculation under this indicator and report separately the number of documented delays attributable to exceptional family circumstances.
Indicator 8B: Under 34 CFR §303.401(e), the State may adopt a written policy that requires the lead agency to provide notice to the parent of an eligible child with an IFSP of the impending notification to the SEA and LEA under IDEA section 637(a)(9)(A)(ii)(I) and 34 CFR §303.209(b)(1) and (2) and permits the parent within a specified time period to "opt-out" of the referral. Under the State's opt-out policy, the State is not required to include in the calculation under 8B (in either the numerator or denominator) the number of children for whom the parents have opted out. However, the State must include in the discussion of data, the number of parents who opted out. In addition, any written opt-out policy must be on file with the Department of Education as part of the State's Part C application under IDEA section 637(a)(9)(A)(ii)(I) and 34 CFR §§303.209(b) and 303.401(d).
Indicator 8C: The measurement is intended to capture those children for whom a transition conference must be held within the required timeline and, as such, only children between 2 years 3 months and age 3 should be included in the denominator.
Indicator 8C: Do not include in the calculation, but provide a separate number for those toddlers for whom the parent did not provide approval for the transition conference.
Indicators 8A, 8B, and 8C: Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in OSEP's response table for the previous SPP/APR. If the State did not ensure timely correction of the previous noncompliance, provide information on the extent to which noncompliance was subsequently corrected (more than one year after identification). In addition, provide information regarding the nature of any continuing noncompliance, methods to ensure correction, and any enforcement actions that were taken.
If the State reported less than 100% compliance for the previous reporting period (e.g., for the FFY 2021 SPP/APR, the data for FFY 2020), and the State did not identify any findings of noncompliance, provide an explanation of why the State did not identify any findings of noncompliance.
8A - Indicator Data
Historical Data
Baseline Year: 2005
Baseline Data: 71.80%
| FFY |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
| Target |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
| Data |
95.01% |
94.54% |
96.01% |
96.01% |
87.88% |
Targets
| FFY |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
2025 |
| Target |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
FFY 2021 SPP/APR Data
Data include only those toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C with timely transition planning for whom the Lead Agency has developed an IFSP with transition steps and services at least 90 days, and at the discretion of all parties, not more than nine months, prior to the toddler's third birthday. (yes/no)
YES
Number of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and services: 366
Number of toddlers with disabilities exiting Part C: 371
FFY 2020 Data: 87.88%
FFY 2021 Target: 100%
FFY 2021 Data: 98.65%
Status: Did not meet target
Slippage: No Slippage
Number of documented delays attributable to exceptional family circumstances
This number will be added to the "Number of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and services" field to calculate the numerator for this indicator.
0
Provide reasons for delay, if applicable.
Since the information for this indicator is collected via Monitoring and not the state database, we have not historically captured the reasons for delays. We are currently working with our Monitoring partner to refine their process and have flagged this as an issue to be addressed in both future Monitoring visits as well as in our new data system. We are hopeful that the new data system will allow both better information about the steps and services being developed as well as enhanced monitoring of timely completion. We have also updated our transition page in the IFSP to provide more support for service coordinators as they develop transition steps and services with families.
What is the source of the data provided for this indicator?
State monitoring
Describe the method used to select EIS programs for monitoring.
Illinois EI Monitoring monitors all 25 CFC offices for this Indicator. The sample of files pulled is based on the number of children exiting within a specific month who are determined potentially eligible for Part B.
Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)
Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified in FFY 2020
| Findings of Noncompliance Identified |
Findings of Noncompliance Verified as Corrected Within One Year |
Findings of Noncompliance Subsequently Corrected |
Findings Not Yet Verified as Corrected |
| 1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
FFY 2020 Findings of Noncompliance Verified as Corrected
Describe how the State verified that the source of noncompliance is correctly implementing the regulatory requirements.
The subsequent data collected during the FFY21 monitoring visit verified that the one program that was issued a finding last year is now demonstrating full compliance with the regulatory requirements for timely steps and services. All files reviewed during the most recent Monitoring visit included timely steps and services. Therefore, this program had timely services for 100% of the children reviewed.
Describe how the State verified that each individual case of noncompliance was corrected.
In addition, the state was able to verify via a quarterly data submission that two of the four individual cases of noncompliance were corrected prior to the children exiting the program. The other two individual cases of noncompliance are resolved as the children are no longer under the jurisdiction of the program.
Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2020
Year Findings of Noncompliance Were Identified
Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected as of FFY 2020 APR
Findings of Noncompliance Verified as Corrected
Findings Not Yet Verified as Corrected
8A - Prior FFY Required Actions
Because the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2020, the State must report on the status of correction of noncompliance identified in FFY 2020 for this indicator. When reporting on the correction of noncompliance, the State must report, in the FFY 2021 SPP/APR, that it has verified that each EIS program or provider with noncompliance identified in FFY 2020 for this indicator: (1) is correctly implementing the specific regulatory requirements (i.e., achieved 100% compliance) based on a review of updated data such as data subsequently collected through on-site monitoring or a State data system; and (2) has corrected each individual case of noncompliance, unless the child is no longer within the jurisdiction of the EIS program or provider, consistent with OSEP Memo 09-02. In the FFY 2021 SPP/APR, the State must describe the specific actions that were taken to verify the correction.
If the State did not identify any findings of noncompliance in FFY 2020, although its FFY 2020 data reflect less than 100% compliance, provide an explanation of why the State did not identify any findings of noncompliance in FFY 2020.
Response to actions required in FFY 2020 SPP/APR
There were two CFCs with less than 100% compliance in FFY2020, but one of these CFCs already had an open finding, so only one finding was issued in FFY2020. The data collected during the FFY21 monitoring visit verified that the one program that was issued a finding last year is now demonstrating full compliance with the regulatory requirements for timely steps and services. All files reviewed during the most recent Monitoring visit included timely steps and services. Therefore, this program had timely services for 100% of the children reviewed. In addition, the two individual cases of noncompliance identified the previous year were resolved as the children are no longer under the jurisdiction of the program. In addition, the Bureau was able to confirm that the CFC with longstanding noncompliance is correctly implementing the requirements through a subsequent review of a sample of manually provided IFSPs. The state was able to verify that the program was 100% compliant and that all children received their transition steps and services timely in their IFSP. Each individual case of noncompliance from FFY2009 was also resolved as the children are no longer within the jurisdiction of the program.
8A - OSEP Response
The State did not provide the reasons for delay, as required by the Measurement Table. The State acknowledged that "we have not historically captured the reasons for delay."
The State did not demonstrate that the EIS program or provider corrected the findings of noncompliance identified in FFY 2020 because it did not report that it verified correction of those findings, consistent with the requirements in OSEP Memo 09-02. Specifically, the State did not report that that it verified that each EIS program or provider with noncompliance identified in FFY 2020 is correctly implementing the specific regulatory requirements (i.e., achieved 100% compliance) based on a review of updated data such as data subsequently collected through on-site monitoring or a State data system; and has corrected each individual case of noncompliance, unless the child is no longer within the jurisdiction of the EIS program or provider.
In the State's local public reporting for FFY 2020, the State reported that two CFCs reported less than 100% correction for this indicator. However, the State only reported on the status of correction of one CFC. The State must report on the status of correction for all CFCs that reported less than 100% compliance under this indicator.
8A - Required Actions
IFSP WITH TIMELY TRANSITION STEPS/SERVICES
| CFC # |
Sampled Toddlers Exited in October 2021 |
Files with Transition Steps and Services |
Percent with Transition Steps and Services |
| 1 |
14 |
14 |
100.00% |
| **2 |
17 |
17 |
100.00% |
| 3 |
7 |
7 |
100.00% |
| **4 |
16 |
16 |
100.00% |
| **5 |
24 |
24 |
100.00% |
| *6 |
39 |
39 |
100.00% |
| *7 |
19 |
19 |
100.00% |
| *8 |
19 |
19 |
100.00% |
| *9 |
16 |
16 |
100.00% |
| *10 |
16 |
15 |
93.75% |
| *11 |
30 |
27 |
90.00% |
| *12 |
27 |
26 |
96.30% |
| 13 |
4 |
4 |
100.00% |
| 14 |
8 |
8 |
100.00% |
| **15 |
34 |
34 |
100.00% |
| 16 |
12 |
12 |
100.00% |
| 17 |
4 |
4 |
100.00% |
| 18 |
5 |
5 |
100.00% |
| 19 |
8 |
8 |
100.00% |
| 20 |
14 |
14 |
100.00% |
| 21 |
15 |
15 |
100.00% |
| 22 |
8 |
8 |
100.00% |
| 23 |
3 |
3 |
100.00% |
| 24 |
2 |
2 |
100.00% |
| **25 |
10 |
10 |
100.00% |
| Statewide |
371 |
366 |
98.65% |
| *Chicago - Cook County |
81 |
77 |
95.06% |
| *Suburban - Cook County |
85 |
84 |
98.82% |
| ** Collar Counties (2, 4, 5, 15, * 25) |
101 |
101 |
100.00% |
| Downstate (All Others) |
104 |
104 |
100.00% |
*Cook County Offices:
- CFC 6 - North Suburban
- CFC 7 - West Suburban
- CFC 8 - Southwest Chicago
- CFC 9 - Central Chicago
- CFC 10 - Southeast Chicago
- CFC 11 - North Chicago
- CFC 12 - South Suburban
