Patterns, Trends, & Tips: IDC TA Providers Share SPP/APR Insights, Part One

00:00:01.52 >> You're listening to "A Date with Data" with your host, Amy Bitterman.

00:00:07.34 >> Hey, it's Amy, and I'm so excited to be hosting "A Date with Data." I'll be chatting with state and district special education staff who, just like you, work with IDEA data every day.

00:00:19.50 >> "A Date with Data" is brought to you by the IDEA Data Center.

00:00:24.56 >> Hi, welcome to "A Date with Data." In early February, states submitted their federal fiscal year 2022 SPP/APRs. IDC reviewed and provided feedback for many of those submissions, giving us a unique perspective on patterns, trends, strengths, and areas where states can continue to improve. Today I am joined by the two IDC TA providers who led this review effort: Rachel Wilkinson and Nancy Johnson. Thank you both so much for joining me. Let's start with what states are doing really well in their SPP/APRs. Rachel, would you like to begin?

00:01:14.98 >> Sure. We reviewed around 34 states' SPP/APR drafts this year. It was great to see how states approached the work, and we noticed improvements in several areas. One big one was slippage statements. These can be challenging because they require states to really dig into the data—not just describing solutions, but explaining the actual reasons slippage occurred. Many states put real effort into that deeper analysis, which was encouraging.

We also saw improvements in describing general supervision systems. With the new instructions and templates, states provided richer descriptions of monitoring processes and other components of general supervision.

And one more thing: states submitted drafts very early this year—many in early December or even earlier. That meant they had time to apply feedback and strengthen their submissions. The SPP/APR Summit seems to have helped spotlight the importance of starting early.

00:03:15.54 >> Yes, the timing of the summit really helps kick off the process. Even though states should ideally begin well before that point, the summit is a good reminder that IDC is available to review SPP/APRs. Hearing that so many states took advantage of that support is very exciting.

00:03:41.89 >> Yes, it was wonderful. We were thrilled.

00:03:44.03 >> Great. It's promising to hear how states are improving and strengthening their submissions. But we also know there are still areas where improvement is needed. Nancy, could you share some of those?

00:03:59.82 >> Sure, I'd be happy to, Amy. There are always opportunities to improve, and a few areas stood out. First is Indicator 4. OSEP provided specific comments related to reasonable methodology expectations, but some states did not fully address those requirements. Some may be waiting for more direction, or their processes were already set before OSEP’s June clarification. But we encourage states to revisit current processes alongside stakeholders to ensure students with disabilities are not experiencing inappropriate removals that affect access to instruction—and ultimately long-term outcomes.

Another area is stakeholder engagement. Some states did a strong job here, but many provided only generic information or referenced engagement from several years ago. Stakeholder engagement should be ongoing and should include reviewing data, targets, progress, improvement activities, and evaluation—not just setting targets. We sometimes struggled to find information about engagement that actually occurred during the most recent reporting year.

A third area is correction of noncompliance. This continues to be challenging. States must verify—not just report—that LEAs corrected both individual and systemic noncompliance. We saw issues including unclear descriptions of how systemic noncompliance was verified, combining individual and systemic prompts into one response, or providing boilerplate text instead of describing what the state actually did. Verification must align with OSEP QA 23-01 from last July.

00:08:17.06 >> Thanks, Nancy. Coming up in April is the clarification period. For newer state staff, Rachel, could you explain what that is?

00:08:44.89 >> Sure. The clarification period is a roughly two-week window when OSEP provides comments, feedback, or questions on states’ submissions. States review those comments in EMAPS and submit responses. OSEP then reviews those responses and determines whether additional actions are required. The final SPP/APR will include any required actions or feedback based on that review.

00:10:05.14 >> Thank you. And IDC is absolutely available to help states review and respond to OSEP’s clarification questions.

00:10:21.25 >> Absolutely. We strongly encourage states to hold a clarification call with OSEP. These calls allow you to ask questions, get clarity, and avoid misunderstanding. Some states have learned on these calls that an issue they thought required action actually did not—so the calls can be very beneficial. Having someone, such as your IDC state liaison, join the call to take notes or listen for nuance can also be extremely helpful.

00:11:16.80 >> Great. Are there any other tips that may help states during clarification?

00:11:28.13 >> Yes. One tip is to establish a clear internal plan for how your team will respond to clarification questions. Identify who will address programmatic questions, who will address data-related questions, and who will review the final responses for coherence. This helps ensure responses reflect all necessary expertise.

00:12:31.26 >> And I have a couple of additional tips. First, review all OSEP comments carefully—including those in the introduction section. Some states focus only on indicators and overlook that section. Second, begin documenting now how you plan to address required actions for the next SPP/APR. You can even ask OSEP about your planned approach during the clarification call to make sure you’re on the right track.

00:14:14.01 >> Yes, great suggestion—while everything is still fresh and you have direct access to OSEP, take advantage of that opportunity.

00:14:23.47 >> And again, invite your IDC state liaison to join your call. Having an extra listener and note-taker is incredibly helpful.

00:14:40.05 >> Wonderful. Thank you both so much. These tips are incredibly helpful, and I’m sure listeners will agree. Thank you for being here.

00:14:54.11 >> Thank you, Amy. This was a pleasure.

00:14:56.45 >> Thank you, Amy. It was our pleasure.

00:15:00.32 >> To access podcast resources, submit questions related to today’s episode, or share ideas for future topics, visit the Podcast page on the IDC website at IDEAdata.org.