osep personnel development program
DESCRIPTION
OSEP Personnel Development Program. Welcome! Program Meeting July 23, 2012. Program Performance Measure Results 2011 Discussions on Program Improvement. Agenda. Discussions ( 4:10 -5:30). Grant Priority or Focus. Room Number. Early Childhood High Incidence (Ts) Leadership - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Welcome! PROGRAM MEETING
July 23, 2012
OSEP Personnel Development
Program1
Agenda
Program Performance Measure Results 2011
Discussions on Program Improvement
Grant Priority or Focus Room Number
Early ChildhoodHigh Incidence (Ts) LeadershipLow IncidenceMinority InstitutionsParaprofessional Related ServicesSecondary Transition
Washington 5Washington 6Virginia A, B, CWashington 4HooverBalcony BDelaware A & BBalcony A
Discussions (4:10-5:30)
Summer 2012 Doctoral Interns
University of Central FloridaFlorida International UniversityGeorge Washington UniversityGeorge Mason
UniversityUniversity of MarylandUniversity of NC-Charlotte
GOAL To prepare personnel in areas of critical need who are highly qualified to improve outcomes for children with disabilities
5
PDP Investments
Program Improvement
Preparation National Centers
Program Evaluation
5
Program ObjectivesObjective 1. Improve the curricula of IDEA training programs to ensure that personnel preparing to serve children with disabilities are knowledgeable and skilled in practices that reflect the current knowledge base. Objective 2. Increase the supply of teachers and service providers who are highly qualified for and serve in positions for which they are trained. Objective 3. Enhance the efficiency of the expenditure of Federal dollars under this program
7
INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
Program Investments
Activities Participation Short Term Long Term
Project OfficersFundingEvidence-Based &Best PracticesResearchProgram & Grants Policy Technology
Process Measures Outcome Measures
Intermediate
Increased supply of fully qualified personnel* with awareness and knowledge of EBP & best practices
Increased training opportunities
Increased placement of fully qualified*personnel
Improved personnel development infrastructures
Increased retention of fully qualified* personnel in workforce.
Increased collaboration - SEAs, IHEs, LEAs & lead agencies
GranteesFacultyStudents in IHEsSEAs & LEAsLead AgenciesPractitioners AdministratorsChildrenFamilies
Develop priorities &manage competitions
Monitor grants
Build models & networks for collaboration
*Fully Qualified = Highly Qualified for special education teacher; Qualified for paraprofessional/aide; Fully Certified for administrator/coordinator, for related or supportive services in a school setting, or for teacher, related services, or supportive services in early intervention, early childhood.
CONTEXT
Federal Law & Regs
Time
OSEP Personnel Development Program - Logic Model Goal: To prepare personnel in areas of critical need who are fully qualified to improve outcomes for children with disabilities
Train personnel
Redesign &build models & networks for collaboration
Develop and disseminate resources
6/09
As required by the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993, OSEP has developed a strategic plan for measuring performance and will collect information to assess progress and performance.(FY 2012 325D, 325K, 325T Appl icat ion Package)
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
Program Performance MeasuresFY 2011 Results
http:/ /ww w2. ed. gov/about/over v iew/budget/ budget1 3/ justifications/ i - spec ia le d .pdf
OSEP Personnel Development
Program9
Performance Measure 1 Percentage of projects that incorporate
evidence-based practices into their curricula
20072008
20092010
2011
0102030405060708090
100
41.555.5
48.7
91.3100
Performance Measure 2Percentage of scholars completing OSEP- funded training programs who are knowledgeable and
skilled in evidence based practices for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.
20072008
20092010
2011
0102030405060708090
100
0
43.5 39.140.1
84.9
Performance Measure 3Percentage of program scholars who exit preparation programs prior to completion due to poor academic performance
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3 3
1.8 2
1.4 1.61.95
Performance Measure 4Percentage of funded degree/certification program recipients who are working in the area(s) in which they were trained upon program completion.
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
8075.3
69.476.669.7 73.273.4
Performance Measure 5 Percentage of funded degree/certification program recipients who are working in the area(s) in which they were trained upon program completion and
who are fully qualified under IDEA.
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
70.265.3
73.169
Measure 5Results
Percent of Scholars Over Four YearsRY 2008
(FY 2006)RY 2009
(FY 2007)RY 2010
(FY 2008)RY 2011
(FY 2009)
Scholars who were employed in the area trained and fully certified
69.0 70.2 65.3 73.1
Scholars who were employed in the area trained but NOT fully certified
2.2 3.2 2.7 1.9
Scholars who were employed but NOT in area trained 13.1 7.7 11.0 9.8
Scholars who were not employedor whose employment, area trained, and/or certification status was unknown
15.7 18.8 21.1 15.1
Total 100.0 99.9 100.1 99.9
Performance Measure 7 The Federal cost per degree/certification program recipient who completed the program.
20082009
20102011
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000 26,15521,944 24,197 27,398
1. STUDENT LEARNING2. TEACHER RETENTION3. EMPLOYER SATISFACTION
New Outcome Measures
Program Improvement
Training on – Preparing Annual Performance
ReportsUsing Logic ModelsWriting Performance MeasuresImproving Performance
Measurement Data QualityDesigning Measurement of
Student Growth
Our Future, Our Teachers: the Obama Administration’s Plan for teacher Education Reform and Improvement:
Our Future, Our Teachers: the Obama Administration’s Plan for Teacher Education Reform and Improvement
http://www.ed.gov/teaching/documents/our-future-our-teachers.pdf
Grant Priority or Focus Room Number
Early ChildhoodHigh Incidence (Ts) LeadershipLow IncidenceMinority InstitutionsParaprofessional Related ServicesSecondary Transition
Washington 5Washington 6Virginia A, B, CWashington 4HooverBalcony BDelaware A & BBalcony A
Grant Area Discussions