Ohio s Caseload Ratio Project: The Results, The Implications, and Where Do We Go From Here?

Transcription

1 Ohio s Caseload Ratio Project: The Results, The Implications, and Where Do We Go From Here? Charles H. Carlin, The University of Akron Bernadette Laughlin, Ohio Department of Education OSLHA Annual Convention: 3/13/2014

2 Agenda History of Caseloads in Ohio Overview of Caseload Ratio Study and Results : Two Prong Approach for Workload Determination Example Data Collection Process Activity: Use Data to Calculate Appropriate and Defensible Caseload Ratios

3 History of Caseloads in Ohio In 1982, teachers were located in special education classrooms Services were provided to students in those classrooms (units) Students were assigned by disability category Even students with mild needs were served using a pullout model (LD tutors) Related services were provided using a pull-out model

4 History of Caseloads in Ohio In 2004, IDEA mandated that each school district must ensure that, to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities are educated with children who are nondisabled; and Special classes, separate schooling or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily 20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(5)(A)

5 History of Caseloads in Ohio Following IDEA s 2004 mandate, service delivery has changed but caseload ratios in the Ohio Administrative Code have remained unchanged since In early 2008, when changes were made to the Operating Standards for Ohio Agencies Servicing Children with Disabilities, the stakeholders could not agree how to improve Ohio Administrative Code on caseload ratios for the delivery of services. 5

6 History of Caseloads in Ohio This impasse resulted in the formation of a Steering Committee Educators; Parents; Special education and related service providers; Children s advocates; Staff representing state agencies; Members of regulatory boards; and Leaders of organizations. The Steering Committee was charged with: 1. Gather information from research and stakeholders 2. Analyze data 3. Recommend rule changes to ODE

7 Caseload Ratio Study and Results Steering Committee Recommendation #1 ODE will incorporate a review of the service provider ratios into its existing monitoring process. Status of Recommendation #1 ODE tried to monitor ratios, but the reporting process needed to be refined. ODE postponed monitoring caseload ratios until the end of the Caseload Ratio Study. Monitoring has resumed.

8 Caseload Ratio Study and Results Steering Committee Recommendation #2 Allow educational agencies to apply for the opportunity to participate in a study of alternative processes for calculating the FTE of service provider ratios within the ratios established by current rules. Office for Exceptional Children issued an RFP Selected educational agencies could receive up to $35,000 to develop an alternative method to calculate service provider caseload ratios The RFP was issued with an October 2010 deadline, then again with a January 2011 deadline A second year of funding for implementation of the plan became available contingent upon: -Successful completion of year one -Review of the second year application

9 Caseload Ratio Study and Results Status of Recommendation #2 Awarded 21 LEAs from rural, suburban and urban areas Traditional public schools, community schools and career centers. Studied the workloads and caseloads of ISs, SLPs, OT/OTAs, PT/PTAs, and School Psychologists. Developed various processes, standards, rubrics, weights, and formulas for calculating caseload ratios. Implemented a multitude of workload reducing strategies.

10 Results of the Caseload Ratio Study

11 Caseload Ratio Study- The Philosophy In order to ensure students received FAPE, the majority of LEAs developed their approaches based on one overarching workload philosophy: Time for workload duties + Time for services = The total number of hours in a service provider s work week.

12 Caseload Ratio Study-The Approaches Most LEAs used a hybrid approach Productivity Approach A percentage of the service provider s time (60-90%) was devoted to direct and sometime indirect services. A percentage of time was allocated for lunch and workload duties (e.g., documentation, assessment, planning, meetings). Some LEAs used time ranges for direct IEP services (20-22 hours). Weighted Approach Students were weighted based on student characteristics, (e.g., grade, disability category), associated workload, and the level/frequency of services. Students were equitably assigned to service providers by weights. A predetermined number of weighted students was established as a fulltime equivalent.

13 Caseload Ratio Study Workload Approach Workload duties were determined and quantified. A predetermined and reasonable number of known duties were assigned to each provider. Non-essential or overflow duties were reassigned in order to focus service providers on services. Providers with extra time were given services or overflow duties. Stipends given for some overflow duties (e.g., morning IEP meetings).

14 Caseload Ratio Study Homogeneous Student Grouping Approach Students grouped by service delivery (e.g., general education with accommodations, co-taught classrooms, and resource rooms) or primary needs (e.g., intensively structured, technology based). Obtained age range waivers. Other Trained staff on referral, dismissal, and other special education procedures; RTI; co-teaching; roles and responsibilities of service providers; and accommodations/modifications. Reduced the amount of unnecessary referrals, streamlined special education procedures and paperwork, and built capacity in the system. Utilized co-planning with regular education staff or peers. Professional development took the form of supervisors, mentors, trainings for regular education staff, on-going departmental meetings, and in-services.

15 Caseload Ratio Study: Desired Outcomes Student Outcomes Majority of students (80%) mastered or made adequate progress on IEP or intervention goals. Majority of students (80%) passed core academic classes. On group standardized testing, majority of student test scores (75%) were at least proficient or clearly on track. Provision of FAPE Majority of students (95%) received specified IEP or intervention services, when make-up services were considered.

16 Caseload Ratio Study: Desired Outcomes Workload Indicators Worked a reasonable work week Total hours worked each week were less than or equal to the total hours contracted to work plus 20% time. No more than 7.5 hours in overtime for 37.5 hour week (FTE). No more than 2 hours in overtime for a 10 hour week (part-time). Received full lunch and planning time

17 Caseload Ratio Study: Desired Outcomes Stakeholder Perceptions Majority of service providers (90%) in the experimental group believed they could reasonably provide FAPE using the new approach.

18 Results As a whole, the majority of approaches produced better outcomes than the traditional head count approach. Student outcomes Provision of FAPE Reasonable workweeks The most promising approaches were developed by: Batavia, Crestview, Fredericktown, Wayne and Westerville Schools Virtual School House Montgomery Co. ESC Tuscarawas County Board of DD

19 Caseload Ratio Study-Recommendations Caveat: Methodological limitations and incomplete data prevented the research team from fully recommending one approach to ODE for universal adaption.

20 Caseload Ratio Study-Recommendations Utilize a workload process approach that aligns with updated Use a team of stakeholders to collect data and calculate. Formulate caseload ratios using quantifiable data. Number and type of workload duties Data from IEP, intervention plans, and 504 s on direct and indirect services Evaluate caseload ratios and workload duties on an ongoing basis. Implement workload reducing strategies to focus service providers time on services.

21 Caseload Ratio Study-Recommendations Service providers in 79% of the participating LEAs reported they were not in compliance with age ranges or ratios. 29% (51/176) of service providers worked beyond a reasonable workweek. 72% (13/18) of LEAs consistently provided extra services to at least a quarter of the students Need for professional development and guidance on Need for guidance on waiver process Need for monitoring

22 Changes to

23 Changes to Service provider ratios workload determination for delivery of services School districts, county boards of developmental disabilities and other educational agencies shall determine workload for an individual service provider based upon all of the factors set forth in subsections 1, 2, and 3 below. Notice the focus on workload and not just caseload ratios!

24 Changes to (Subsection 1a) (1) Workload for an individual service provider shall be determined by following process, which incorporates the following components: (a) All areas of service provided to children with and without disabilities, including screening, assessment, consultation, counseling, training, and related duties in the school setting, intervention design, and educational interventions., but not limited to: school duties, staff meetings, professional development, supervisions, travel/transitions, screening, assessment, evaluation, progress documentation and reporting, secondary transition service planning, conference/consultation pertaining to individual students, documentation for individual students, and third party billing requirements. Notice the expanded and more inclusive list of workload duties!

25 Changes to (Subsection 1b) (b) The severity of each eligible child s need, and the level and frequency of services necessary for children to attain IEP goals and objectives to provide a free and appropriate public education (FAPE). Notice how much this subsection assumes all IEPs are written to reflect FAPE!

26 Changes to (Subsection 1c) (c) Time needed for planning in accordance with paragraph (A)(9) of rule of the Administrative Code, including statutory and/or contractual agreements applicable to the educational agency. Paragraph (A)(9) of Ohio Admin. Code states the following: Planning includes: designing work, evaluating student progress, conferencing and team planning, collaborative planning for the development of lesson plans, professional development and shared learning. The schedule of a full- time equivalent service provider or intervention specialist with a teacher day of six hours or longer, excluding the lunch period, shall include two hundred minutes per week for the purposes of planning.

27 Changes to (Subsection 1c) (d) Additional time for diagnostic testing and classroom observation; coordination of the program; parent, staff and agency conferences concerning individual children; staff development activities; and follow-up; and the demands of an itinerant schedule, including the number of buildings, the distance between the buildings, and travel.

28 Changes to (Subsection 3) (3) Related service providers for preschool and schoolage children with disabilities shall provide direct services specially designed instruction in accordance with the following ratios. requirements limiting the number of students per licensed professional: Additionally, consideration shall be given to paragraph (I)(l) of this rule. Indirect and direct services shall be provided in accordance with each child s IEP.

29 Changes to (Subsection 3f) (f) A speech and language pathologist shall provide services to no more than eighty school-age children with disabilities; or no more than fifty school-age children with multiple disabilities, hearing impairments, or orthopedic/other health impairments; or no more than fifty preschool children with disabilities. Each school district shall provide services at a ratio of one speech and language pathologist per two thousand children as required by division (F) of section of the Revised Code.: (i) Eighty school-age children with disabilities, or (ii) No more than fifty school-age children with multiple disabilities, hearing impairments, autism, or orthopedic/other health impairments, or (iii) No more than fifty preschool children with disabilities, or (iv) A combination of preschool and school-age children with disabilities or children with multiple disabilities, hearing impairment, autism, or orthopedic/other health impairments proportionate to the ratios set forth in (I)(3)(f)(i), (ii), and (iii).

30 Waivers and Monitoring Waivers will only be granted for one year maximum Must submit a plan and timeline for bringing the district into compliance within one year and no later than June 30 th of the school year the waiver request was granted OSEP s emphasis on Results Driven Accountability (RDA) focuses on the importance of data collection, results OEC s onsite monitoring teams will monitor for caseload/workload compliance as part of RDA

31 Data Collection Process See Handout

32

33 Use Data to Calculate Appropriate and Defensible Caseload Ratios Small Group Activity

34 Small Group Activity Now you know and the intent behind it. You understand the waiver and monitoring processes. You ve been introduced to a process that allows you to collect and analyze workload data. Let s do a mock analysis of workload.

35 Small Group Activity Get into small groups Brainstorm your various workload duties Which duties fall under the existing categories? Which duties need to be added in Other section? Determine best data collection method What challenges are inherent in each? How will you manage the data? How do we ensure fidelity? Estimate average times per duty per 4 week period of time What are the dangers of averages? What do outliers tell us? Calculate total time per 4 week period of time Calculate total time (and consider relative to a FTE of 150 hours)

36 Group Discussion What are the strengths and weaknesses of ? Which workload reducing strategies can be implemented in order to reduce the total time and save more time for services? Are there any financial, ethical, or legal considerations that must be addressed? As a department, what is the best way to determine the equitable distribution of caseload and workload duties? What can be done if someone is over- or under-reporting the time needed for workload duties (to include FAPE)? How do we work with administration, parents, and faculty to ensure the implementation of ? What resources do you need to implement ?

37 Appendix A Workload Activity Clusters Direct services to students Indirect activities that support students in the least restrictive environment and general education curriculum Counsel students Evaluate students for eligibility for special education Identify students with speech and language impairment Implement IEPs and IFSPs Provide direct intervention to students using a continuum of service-delivery options Re-evaluate students Indirect services that support students educational programs Engage in dynamic assessment of students Connect standards for the learner to the IEP Consult with teachers to match students learning style and teaching style Design and engage in prereferral intervention activities Design/recommend adaptations to curriculum and delivery of instruction Design/recommend modifications to the curriculum to benefit students with special needs Participate in activities designed to help prevent academic and literacy problems Observe students in classrooms Screen students for suspected problems with communication, learning, and literacy Analyze and engineer environments to increase opportunities for communication Analyze demands of the curriculum and effects on students Attend student planning teams to solve specific problems Attend teacher/service provider meetings (planning, progress monitoring, modifications to program) Communicate and coordinate with outside agencies Contribute to the development of IEPs, IFSPs Coordinate with private, nonpublic school teachers and staff Design service plans Design and implement transition evaluations and transition goals Design and program high-, medium-, and low-tech augmentative communication systems Engage in special preparation to provide services to students (e.g., low incidence populations, research basis for intervention, best practices) Interview teachers Make referrals to other professionals Monitor implementation of IEP modifications Observe students in classrooms Plan and prepare lessons Plan for student transitions Provide staff development to school staff, parents, and others Program and maintain assistive technology/ augmentative communication systems (AT/AC) and equipment Train teachers and staff for AT/AC system use Activities that support compliance with federal, state, and local mandates Attend staff/faculty meetings Carry out assigned school duties (e.g. hall, lunch, bus, extracurricular) Collect and report student performance data Complete compliance paperwork Complete daily logs of student services Complete parent contact logs Document services to students and other activities Document third-party billing activities Participate in parent/teacher conferences Participate in professional association activities Participate in professional development Participate on school improvement teams Participate on school or district committees Serve multiple schools and sites Supervise paraprofessionals, teacher aides, interns, CFYs Travel between buildings Write funding reports for assistive technology and augmentative communication Write periodic student progress reports Write student evaluation reports Source: American Speech-Language- Hearing Association. (2002). A workload analysis approach for establishing caseload standards in the schools. Guidelines. ASHA Desk Reference (vol. 3). Rockville, MD: Author.

38 Use Data to Calculate Appropriate and Defensible Caseload Ratios Charles H. Carlin The University of Akron Workload Duty Direct services (student groups)- level and frequency of services Indirect services (student groups)- level and frequency of services School duties Staff meetings Professional development Supervision Travel/transitions Screening Assessment Evaluation Progress documentation and reporting Secondary transition service planning Conferences pertaining to individual students Consultation pertaining to individual students Documentation for individual students Third party billing requirements Time needed for planning (at least 200 hundred minutes per week for FTE) Other: 1 Data Collection Method. Average time in minutes. Specify time frame. Number of times duty occurs within 4 week period of time. 2 Total amount of time. Other: Other: Other: Total Amount of Time Per 4 Week Period of Time 1 Data Collection Methods: a. review of IEPs or plans, b. time study, c. review of workload records, d. contractually determined, and/or e. other. 2 Where appropriate, consider workload reducing strategies to decrease the total amount of time needed to complete each duty.

39 Office for Exceptional Children Talking Points: Service Provider Caseloads Ohio law mandates a two prong approach to determining caseload ratios for service providers: 1. The school district, county board of developmental disabilities (county board of DD), and other educational agencies shall determine ratios for an individual service provider by considering scheduling and time demands of pre school or school age service providers, including but not limited to the following: a. All areas of service provided to children with and without disabilities including Screening, assessment, consultation, counseling, training and related duties in the school setting; intervention design, and educational interventions. b. The severity of each eligible child s need The level and frequency of services necessary for children to attain IEP goals and objectives. c. Time needed for planning in accordance with paragraph (A)(9) of Ohio Admin. Code : Planning includes: designing work, evaluating student progress, conferencing and team planning, collaborative planning for the development of lesson plans, professional development and shared learning. The schedule of a full time equivalent service provider or intervention specialist with a teacher day of six hours or longer, excluding the lunch period, shall include two hundred minutes per week for the purposes of planning. Source: Ohio Admin. Code (A)(9) d. Additional time for: Diagnostic testing and classroom observation; coordination of the program; parent, staff and agency conferences concerning individual children; staff development activities and follow up; the demands of an itinerant schedule, including the number of buildings, the distance between buildings and travel. Source: Ohio Adm. Code (I)(1)(a d) Revised October 3, 2013

40 2a. Related Service Providers shall provide direct services 1 in accordance with the following ratios: 2 Services School Age OR Preschool Adapted Physical Education 100 OR 100 Audiologist 100 OR 75 Occupational Therapist 50 OR 40 Orientation & Mobility 50 OR 40 Physical Therapist 50 OR 40 Speech Language Pathologist 80 OR MD,HI,OH,OHI, School Psychologist 125 AND 3 75 Work Study Coordinator 75 OR N/A Vocational Special Education Coordinator 50 OR N/A Source: Ohio Admin. Code (I)(3 4) Occupational Therapy Assistants An occupational therapy assistant must be supervised as required by rule of the Administrative Code. Source: Ohio Admin. Code (I)(5)(d) Physical Therapy Assistants A physical therapy assistant must be supervised as required by Chapter of the Administrative Code. Source: Ohio Admin. Code (I)(5)(e) 1 Direct Services are defined as specially designed instruction provided to the student as designated on the student s IEP in section 7. Specially designed instruction means adapting, as appropriate to the needs of an eligible child the content, methodology, or delivery of instruction. (See 34 CFR (b)(3)). 2 Service providers shall serve no more than the numbers represented in this chart. However, service providers may need to serve less based on the workload factors in number 1 (See Ohio Admin. Code (I)(1)(a d) that directs educational agencies to consider scheduling and time demands of individual service providers and the severity of each eligible child s need.) 3 Please refer to Ohio Admin. Code (I)(1)(a d) that directs educational agencies to consider scheduling and time demands of individual service providers and the severity of each eligible child s need. Revised October 3, 2013

41 2b. School age Service Providers (Intervention Specialists) shall provide direct services in accordance with the following ratios: Caseload Ratios for Intervention Specialists 4 Disability Category By School Level Per Instruction Period Age Range Per Instruction Period Elementary Middle/Jr. High High School Elementary Middle/Jr. High High School Cognitive Disabilities Months SLD Months HI, VI, OH, OHI Months ED Months MD Months Autistic, Deaf Blind, TBI Months Multiple Categories Months Source: Ohio Admin. Code (I 2) Determining Caseloads for Service Providers Who Have Mixed/Shared Caseloads Ohio law does not bar a Service Provider from servicing a caseload that has both school age and preschool children, or in the case of a speech language pathologist, a caseload of school age children in which some, but not all, of the children are identified as MD, HI, OH or OHI. The Office for Exceptional Children recommends using the shared caseload formula in the document, Determining Caseloads for Service Providers Who Serve Both Preschool and School Age Children. The question that we at the Ohio Department of Education, Office for Exceptional Children ask is this: Can the Service Provider or Intervention Specialist reasonably provide services to a given number of students, accounting for all the factors in Part 1 that, by Ohio law, must be considered? 4 Service providers shall serve no more than the numbers represented in this chart per instructional period. However, service providers may need to serve less students based on the workload factors in number 1 (See Ohio Admin. Code (I)(1)(a d) that directs educational agencies to consider scheduling and time demands of individual service providers and the severity of each eligible child s need.) 5 Requires plan for classroom management and crisis intervention support or at least one full time paraprofessional 6 At least one full time paraprofessional is required in each class 7 Instructional period ratio requirements for specific disability categories cannot be exceeded. E.g., a high school intervention specialist could serve no more than 12 students with emotional disturbance (ED) as part of the 24 students served during an instruction period. Revised October 3, 2013

42 Waiver Requests: (1) If a school district, county board of MR/DD or other educational agency exceeds the ratio requirements as stated in the Ohio Administrative Code (I)(1 4), a waiver request must be filed with the Ohio Department of Education, office for exceptional children. (2) Requests must be submitted in writing to the Ohio department of education, office for exceptional children. The written request shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (a) Identification of the specific rule for which a waiver is being requested; (b) Specific period of time for which the waiver is requested; and (c) Rationale for the request. Source: Ohio Admin. Code (K) Waiver Process Currently Under Review OEC is currently reviewing and updating the waiver request process. An application for the school year will soon be posted with instructions for completion. Waiver Database The wavier database is made available to the public to provide information regarding waiver requests related to school age instruction of students with disabilities. The database contains waiver applications from school districts, county boards of MR/DD and educational agencies requesting waivers to exceed individual service provider ratios (also known as class size, student to teacher ratio or caseload) or age range per instruction period waivers. The Ohio Department of Education s decisions on the waiver requests since March 1, 2010 are included. For more information: EMIS Questions: Anne Skaggs Anne.Skaggs@education.ohio.gov (614) Waiver Questions: Cathy Csanyi Caseload Questions: Bernadette Laughlin Bernadette.Laughlin@education.ohio.gov (614) Revised October 3, 2013

43 A Process to Consider Workload and Calculate Caseload Ratios Charles H. Carlin, Ph.D., CCC/SLP The University of Akron 1. Determine length of workweek and workday per provider. 2. Determine when students are available for instruction and services/interventions. 3. Determine standard deductions a. Lunch b. Planning time (at least 200 minutes a week or employment contract) c. School duties d. Staff meetings and professional development e. Supervision and mentorship f. Travel/transitions g. Other (e.g., time allocated to administrative tasks, professional development of staff). 4. Ensure IEPs and 504 plans reflect FAPE. 5. Ensure interventions and other student activities are documented (e.g., gaming club, service plans). 6. Ensure all direct and indirect services/interventions are reflected on IEPs, 504 plans, service plans, and intervention plans. a. Consider impact of free services b. Consider implications related to minimal services and extra services (e.g., workload calculation, change in placement, LRE). 7. Gather and centralize data on services/interventions and include data on group size restrictions, student groupings, frequency and duration, of services, type of services, etc. 8. Conduct time studies to quantify workload. a. School psychologists did month long because of the variability in their workload duties.

44 b. If caseload and workload are relatively stable, a representative week may be sufficient. 9. Conduct a review of records to determine the occurrence of workload duties (e.g., ETR, screenings) and average times. a. Average times can be broken down by disability category, grade level, LRE, amount and type of services, accommodations/ modifications provided, etc. b. Overall staff average times should be compared against individual providers. i. Outliers should be identified, investigated, and professionally developed (when necessary). 10. Collect all data across service providers. 11. Use a team-based approach. 12. Deduct standard deductions from workweek or work month (e.g., lunch, planning, supervision of assistants/aides, school duties). 13. Deduct time needed for correspondences, paperwork (e.g., third party billing), parentstudent meetings/correspondences, and diagnostics/screenings. 14. Remaining time is available for caseload (e.g., services, interventions, 504 accommodations/services, etc.). a. Consider student groupings, LRE, group size, and frequency and duration, as designated on each IEP, IP, and/or 504. b. Be sure that each group size does not exceed any allowable age ranges or group size restrictions. c. Ensure caseload does not exceed maximum caseload ratio, especially for service providers with mixed caseloads. i. Review the rule regarding caseload ratios. ii. Service providers with mixed caseloads can use a weight by disability category approach. 1. Calculate the weights associated with school-aged students on the caseload who were identified as MD, HI, OH, and OHI. Each equals 1.6.

45 2. Calculate the weights associated with students on the caseload who were identified as preschool-aged students. Each equals All other students on the caseload equal 1. iii. Service providers with mixed caseloads can use a percentage of time approach. 1. Calculate the percent of time the related service staff are assigned to preschool services 2. Subtract the percent of time for preschool from 100% to obtain the percent of time available for school-age services 3. Review the rule regarding caseloads for school-age 4. Multiply the percent of time available for school-age services to the allowable caseload for school-age children 5. Total the number of preschool and school-age children for the total number of children that can be served by the related service provider