Meeting 1 - 2021-09-07

Materials/Agenda

Participants

Support

Ann Su - Ed-Fi Governance Support

Meeting recording LINK

Refer to the  PPT  for additional details on the meeting minutes and discussions.

The meeting was held on 2021-09-07 11:00 am -11:45 am CT via WebEx

Agenda

• Evaluation Data Collection Need (Child Find Collection)
• Hear from WI what they learnt from the Survey
• Discuss the proposed model
• Hear answers to the questions
• Discuss the next steps 

Meeting Notes

• Evaluation Data Collection Need (Child Find Collection)
  • SEAs need to collect SPED evaluation data for compliance reasons.
  • Collecting evaluation data for eligibility determination for student evaluation is different from collecting program service data
  • Initially the thought was around using the SPEDProgramAssciation and creating extensions in there for capturing evaluation data. Hence the Alliance has designed the authorization by
    • Adding 2 new views by including the GeneralStudentProgramAssociation in addition to enrollment views.
    • Authorization for unenrolled students
      • https://edfi.atlassian.net/wiki/display/EFTD/Authorization+for+Unenrolled+Students
  • Great Oak Charter
    • Are home school students not assigned to a district still?
    • In some states we work in those students are still attached to the district school which is responsible for provisioning of services
  • WI
    • In our case, I believe homeschool students are not connected to a district.
    • Here is a detailed doc explaining WI Home School rules (most driven by legislative rullings) https://dpi.wi.gov/sites/default/files/imce/parental-education-options/pdf/home_faq_2021_6.pdf
    • On the Home School pupil count report parents have to submit they must indicate their resident district
  • NM
    • Variation of this situation not just special education for pre-school screening
    • Challenge of not having enrollment in the district
    • Need to authorize district for submitting the program similar to WI
    • Program designed based on funding
  • IN
    • Does the proposal for the student association cover other program types?
    • The Alliance came to an understanding that the eligibility process could be common across many program services like Title1, FoodService, ELL...

• • • • Sayee - Yes. can be common across programs
      • MN - Yes. Includes other program areas.

• • • Working across 2 systems to pull the data

• • AZ
    • Expect to have multiple program as well
    • Phase 1 - Department of Economic Security collects data from ages 0-3 year olds. AZ wants to collect this 0-3 years of age kids evaluation data including parent consent date, consent received date, eligibility determination date….through AZEDS API.    For now how they are loading the data is, we treat the department of economic security as a LEA, we created records in the LEA table and therapy centers are treated as  schools, included in StudentSchoolAssociation. 
    • Phase 2 will have program association - parent consent, evaluation data
      • Parent consent data - more will be required in Phase 2 for Part C
  • TEA
    • Issue - No ability to track non-enrolled student SPPI-11 and SPPI-12
      • Need data for Transition from C to B in Ed-Fi
      • Minnesota would also be interested in Part C to Part B transition data.
    • Will need in the future - Parent association - another data collection SPPI 14 with parent relationship identified
    • Transition from C to B in Ed-Fi
• Discuss the proposed model (see PPT for proposed model)
  • Ed Comer
    • SPED association is not appropriate because if 1000 students are evaluated only 500 could be eligible to receive services. So landing all 1000 kids in the SPED Program association is a good way. 
    • Model based on WI proposal
  • WI
    • Not sure if parental consent can be generic, not tracked outside of special education. ParentConsentDate can go into the SPEDProgramEligibilityAssociation. 
    • Eligibility determination and status can be generic
  • AZ
    • Need to check with stakeholder to see if data required matches the model
  • MN
    • Excited to see how model works for SPED and other programs
  • IN

• • • Overall model looks good; parental consent date is SPED focused; everything else belongs to all programs
    • How is eligibility and the program participation linked? There could be more than one record in the Eligibility, how do we connect which one is he right one that is linked to the SPED Program Participation - Sayee to discuss this with Eric and Ed.   
  • New eligibility association

• • • Referral date.  Should this be part of the key?
• Discuss the next steps

• • Refine proposed model to:
    • Remove parent consent date from the model, move to SPED
    • Add referral date
    • Add eligibility status for multiple programs

Action Items:

• Sayee and Ed to refine model and email to group for feedbacks
• Schedule follow up meeting to present new model

Next meeting: 29 Sep 2021