Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Gill-Montague
Districts Schools
Select an Org
View Previous Year
2011
View Next Year
print page show video

Gill-Montague - Special Education Data


For more information on state performance in this area, please see the Massachusetts State Performance Plan and Annual Performance Report.

Indicator 1 - Graduation Rate

The state target and district and state rates for Indicator 1 are the most current data available. Data reported in the State Performance Plan and Annual Performance Report reflect a one year data lag in reporting.

For the 2010-11 school year, the state target for the Graduation Rate for Students with IEPs is 75%.
 
Reported Cohort 2011 Graduates # of Students in 2011 Cohort District
Rate		 State
Rate		 State
Target
Students with IEPs 3 13 23.1% 65.6% 75.0%
General Ed 46 60 76.7% 87.8% NA
All Students 49 73 67.1% 83.4% NA

Special Education data are suppressed for enrollment counts fewer than 6.



Indicator 2 - Dropout Rate

The state target and district and state rates for Indicator 2 are the most current data available. Data reported in the State Performance Plan and Annual Performance Report reflect a one year data lag in reporting.

For the 2010-11 school year, the state target for the Dropout Rate for Students with IEPs is 4.7%.
 
Reported2011 DropoutsStudents Enrolled in Grades 9-12District
Rate		State
Rate		State
Target
Students with IEPs116317.5%4.6%4.7%
General Ed122315.2%2.4%NA
All Students232947.8%2.7%NA

Special Education data are suppressed for enrollment counts fewer than 6.



Indicator 3 - Participation and Performance of Students with IEPs on Statewide Assessments (MCAS)




Indicator 4 - Suspension/Expulsion for Students with IEPs

In all years, the state target for Suspension/Expulsion is 0%.

Indicator 4A: Significant discrepancy in the rate of suspensions and expulsions of greater than ten days in a school year for children with IEPs. Massachusetts' definition for 'significant discrepancy' is five times the state rate for two consecutive years.


 
ReportedSpecial Education
FY2009FY2010FY2011
# of Students212211227
# of Students Suspended for Greater than 10 days114
District Rate0.5%0.5%1.8%
State Rate1.2%1.2%1.3%
State Target000

Special Education data are suppressed for enrollment counts fewer than 6.

Indicator 4B: Significant discrepancy (a) by race or ethnicity, in the rate of suspensions and expulsions of greater than ten days in a school year for children with IEPs; and (b) policies, procedures or practices (PPPs) that contribute to the significant discrepancy and do not comply with requirements relating to the development and implementation of IEPs, the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and procedural safeguards.



DistrictIndicator 4B: Significant Discrepancy by Race or Ethnicity in Rates of Suspension and Expulsion
1) Significant discrepancy by race or ethnicity2) Noncompliant PPPs that contribute to significant discrepancy
Gill-MontagueNoNo


1) Massachusetts identifies a district as having a significant discrepancy, by race or ethnicity, in the rates of suspensions and expulsions of greater than 10 days in a school year of children with IEPs rates if, for three consecutive years, the district’s suspension rate for students with disabilities in a particular race or ethnicity has been five times the state suspension rate for students with disabilities.

2) For districts that have a significant discrepancy (Yes), the Department is required to review their policies, procedures or practices (PPPs) to determine whether the PPPs contribute to the significant discrepancy and do not comply with requirements relating to the development and implementation of IEPs, the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and procedurals safeguard.

3) The Department will make a finding if districts’ PPPs contribute to significant discrepancy and do not comply with certain requirements. Districts that have a finding (Yes) are required to make corrections to their PPPs and take other corrective actions.
 


Indicator 5 - Educational Environments for Students Aged 6 - 21 with IEPs

For 2010-11, the state target for % of Students with IEPs served in Full Inclusion is 58%, the target for % of Students with IEPs served in Substantially Separate placements is 14.5%, and the target for % of Students with IEPs served in Separate Schools, Residential Facilities, or Homebound/Hospital placements is 5.5%.

 
  Enrollment District Rate State Rate State Target
Enrolled students with IEPs 211 -- -- NA
Full Inclusion (inside the general education classroom 80% or more of the day) 97 46.0% 57.9% 58.00%
Partial Inclusion (inside the general education classroom 40%-79% of the day) 55 26.1% 20.1% NA
Substantially Separate (inside the general education classroom less than 40% of the day) 46 21.8% 15.1% 14.50%
Separate Schools, Residential Facilities, or Homebound/Hospital placements (does not include parentally-placed private school students with disabilities) 11 5.2% 6.7% 5.50%

Special Education data are suppressed for enrollment counts fewer than 6.




Indicator 7 - Early Childhood Outcomes

cohort reporting Year 2010-11
The percent of preschoolers who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they exited preschool
A. Positive emotional skills B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills C. Use of appropriate behavior to meet their needs
District Rate 80.0% 92.3% 80.0%
State Rate 76.9% 76.6% 78.9%
State Target 82% 83% 84.5%
The percent of preschoolers who were functioning within age expectations by the time they exited preschool
A. Positive emotional skills B. Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills C. Use of appropriate behavior to meet their needs
District Rate 68.8% 68.8% 81.3%
State Rate 53.3% 56.8% 65.2%
State Target 75% 75% 75%

Special Education data are suppressed for districts reporting 10 or fewer students.

For districts which have data in the table above, this is the first full 3-year cohort completion cycle. As districts continue to participate in Indicator 7 data collection cycles, it is to be expected that data reliability will increase. Therefore, these data should be interpreted with caution.

For information on the data collection and reporting schedule, please see the Memorandum on the Updated Data Collection Schedule and District Cohort Assignments for the Massachusetts State Performance Plan for Special Education (MA SPP) Activities.



Indicator 8 - Parent Involvement

For 2010-11, the state target for Parent Involvement is 80%.

This indicator measures the % of parents with a child receiving special education services who report that school facilitated parent involvement as a means of improving services and results for students with IEPs.

For information on the data collection and reporting schedule, please see the Memorandum on the Updated Data Collection Schedule and District Cohort Assignments for the Massachusetts State Performance Plan for Special Education (MA SPP) Activities.
 
Surveys Period Data Avail   # Surveys Issued Surveys Returned # Surveys Meeting Standard % Surveys Meeting Standard
# %
Spring 2012 Data Not Available District Rate NA NA NA NA NA
State Rate NA NA NA NA NA

Special Education data are suppressed for 10 or fewer returned surveys.

A survey is considered to have met the standard if the parent completing the survey was in agreement with more than 50% of the survey items (13 of 25). In order to yield reliable results, districts need at least 75 total responses. Interpret results with caution for districts with fewer than 75 surveys returned. Additionally, for districts with fewer than 75 students with IEPs, interpret results with caution when return rate is less than 50%.




Indicator 9 - Disproportionality in Special Education

In all years, the state target for disproportionality in special education is 0%.

This indicator measures the % of districts showing a disproportionate over- or under-representation of students from racial/ethnic groups in special education that was the result of inappropriate identification policies, practices, or procedures. At-Risk districts are those that exhibit a weighted risk ratio of 3.0 or greater for three consecutive years. These districts were subject to review of the appropriateness of their policies, practices, and procedures for special education eligibility determination and disability identification).

 
  Disproportionate Over-Representation in Special Education Disproportionality Due to Inappropriate Identification
District No No disproportionality found.

For information regarding how disproportionality is calculated, please see http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/,root,dynamic,TopicalBrief,7,.

For information regarding how disproportionate representation is determined in individual districts, please see the Indicator 9 Flowchart Download PDF Document  Download MS WORD Document.



Indicator 10 - Disproportionality in Specific Disability Categories

In all years, the state target for disproportionality in special education is 0%.

This indicator measures the % of districts showing a disproportionate over- or under-representation of students from racial/ethnic groups in special education that was the result of inappropriate identification policies, practices, or procedures. At-Risk districts are those that exhibit a weighted risk ration of 4.0 or greater for three consecutive years. These districts were subject to review of the appropriateness of their policies, practices, and procedures for special education eligibility determination and disability identification.

 
  Disproportionate Over-Representation in Specific Disability Categories Disproportionality Due to Inappropriate Identification
District No No disproportionality found.

For information regarding how disproportionality is calculated, please see http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/,root,dynamic,TopicalBrief,7,.

For information regarding how disproportionate representation is determined in individual districts, please see the Indicator 10 Flowchart Download PDF Document  Download MS WORD Document.



Indicator 11 - Initial Evaluation Timelines

In all years, the state target for Initial Evaluation Timelines is 100%.

This indicator measures the % of children with parental consent to evaluate, who were evaluated within the State established timeline. Data is reported for all initial evaluations initiated in October, November, and December of the reporting year.

For information on the data collection and reporting schedule, please see the Memorandum on the Updated Data Collection Schedule and District Cohort Assignments for the Massachusetts State Performance Plan for Special Education (MA SPP) Activities..
 
  Special Education
School Year Reviewed 2012-13
# of Signed Evaluation Consent Forms Received Not Reported
# of Requests for Initial Evaluation Completed Within State Timeline Not Reported
District Rate Not Reported
State Rate Not Reported
State Target 100.0%

Data are suppressed if # of signed evaluation consent forms received is fewer than 10.



Indicator 12 - Early Childhood Transition

In all years, the state target for Early Childhood Transition is 100%.

This indicator measures the % of students referred by Part C, found eligible for special education services, and who have an IEP developed and implemented by their 3rd birthdays.
 
  Special Education
School Year Reviewed 2011-12
# of Students Referred by Part C and Found Eligible for Special Education Services Not Reported
# of Students who have IEP Proposed or Implemented by 3rd Birthday Not Reported
District Rate Not Reported
State Rate Not Reported
State Target 100.0%

Data are suppressed if number of students referred by Part C and found eligible for special education services is fewer than 10.



Indicator 13 - Secondary Transition

In all years, the state target for Secondary Transition is 100%.

This indicator measures the % of youth with IEPs aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes appropriate measurable postsecondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age appropriate transition assessment, transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those postsecondary goals, and annual IEP goals related to the student's transition services needs. There also must be evidence that the student was invited to the IEP Team meeting where transition services are to be discussed and evidence that, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency that is likely to be responsible for providing or paying for transition services, including, if appropriate, pre-employment transition services, was invited to the IEP Team meeting with the prior consent of the parent or student who has reached the age of majority.

For information on the data collection and reporting schedule, please see the Memorandum on the Updated Data Collection Schedule and District Cohort Assignments for the Massachusetts State Performance Plan for Special Education (MA SPP) Activities..
 
  Special Education
School Year Reviewed 2010-11
# of Student Records Reviewed 20
# of Student Records in Compliance with the Requirements of Indicator 13 20
District Rate 100.0%
State Rate 98.7%
State Target 100.0%

Data are suppressed if number of student records reviewed is fewer than 10.



Indicator 14 - Post-School Outcomes for Students with IEPs

This indicator measures the % of students with IEPs who exited high school during the 2009-10 school year and self-reported post-school engagement in education or employment one year after leaving high school. Engagement is defined through three measurements:

  • Measurement A: Enrolled in higher education within one year of leaving high school. (see #1 below)
  • Measurement B: Enrolled in higher education or competitively employed within one year of leaving high school. (see #1 + #2 below)
  • Measurement C: Enrolled in higher education, or in some other postsecondary education or training program; or competitively employed, or in some other employment within one year of leaving high school. (see #1 + #2 + #3 + #4 below)
Measurements are cumulative with measurement C reflecting the total number of exiters engaged in a post-secondary activity one year after leaving high school.

For the 2010-11 school year, state targets for the three measurements of Post-School Outcomes are Measurement A: 43%; Measurement B: 74%; and Measurement C: 82%.
 

The data used to calculate the measurement above:
Survey and Reporting School Year: 2009-10 Special Education Students
Total # of exiters who responded to the survey 21
#1. Number of respondents who are enrolled in higher education 0
#2. Number of respondents who are competitively employed (but not in category 1 ) 0
#3. Number of respondents who are enrolled in some other post-secondary education (but not in categories 1 or 2 ) 0
#4. Number of respondents who are in some other employment (but not in categories 1, 2 or 3) 0


A. Enrolled in higher ed. B. Enrolled in higher ed. or competitively employed C. Enrolled in higher ed., in some other postsecondary ed., competitively employed, or some other employment
District Rate 0% (0 students) 0% (0 students) 0% (0 students)
State Rate 42.3% 72% 81.3%
State Target 42.3% 72% 81.3%



School and District Profiles