2012 NDTAC National Conference

You are here

2012 NDTAC National Conference

Monday, June 11, 2012

Compliance and Beyond: Continuous Quality Improvement Through Problem Solving

Annapolis, MD | June 11-13, 2012

The 2012 NDTAC National Conference explored the steps that Title I, Part D, (TIPD) coordinators can take to not only ensure TIPD grant compliance, but also to establish a climate of continuous quality improvement among their State and local subgrantees.





If you were to keep hard copies of any NDTAC resources on hand, these are the ones we would recommend. Look to the appendices for each for invaluable templates, checklists and other ready-to-use and easily adaptable tools:

Title I, Part D, State Coordinator’s Orientation Handbook

  • Section I. What Is Title I, Part D? This section provides an overview of the Part D program’s purpose, subparts, and requirements. You also can use this section as a handout for other staff members, partners, and stakeholders to give them a basic introduction to the program.
  • Section II. Part D Coordinators: Overview of Roles, Responsibilities, and Lessons Learned. This section provides an overview of the fundamental responsibilities of the State Part D coordinator and general strategies to help new coordinators get started.
  • Section III. Fundamental Responsibilities. This section reviews the core responsibilities of State Part D coordinators, including planning and funding, monitoring, and reporting and evaluation. Each subsection provides general information about each area and outlines responsibilities and resources related to that area.
  • Section IV. Spotlight on Areas of Interest. This section provides additional information on key areas that Part D coordinators have identified as being particularly of interest and concern, including transition, students with disabilities, pretesting and posttesting, and family involvement.

A Guide to Meeting Compliance Requirements for the Title I, Part D, Program

Designed to help Part D administrators prepare for a Federal monitoring review, this guide includes practical tips to meet compliance requirements for the program.

Title I, Part D, Program Administration Planning Toolkit

Provides assistance with conducting needs assessments, developing and reviewing applications, and creating formal agreements between agencies. Presents an overview of the steps involved and provides resources and hands-on tools to help coordinators comply with Federal requirements while implementing each task.

Transition Toolkit 2.0: Meeting the Educational Needs of Youth Exposed to the Juvenile Justice System

The Transition Toolkit 2.0 is organized into seven sections and an appendix (individual PDFs), as listed below. In each section, strategies specific to innovative practices, records transfer, and family involvement are presented.

Instructional Guide to Reporting Title I, Part D, Data in the CSPR for School Year 2010-11

Highlights the importance of the Federal data collection process, provides details about the Consolidated State Performance Report (CSPR)and the EDFacts initiative, and expands upon reporting instructions. May be accessed in full or as individual chapters.


Needs should be assessed at both the individual and institutional levels. Individual assessments will help you develop interventions for individual students and monitor their progress. Schoolwide assessment will help you identify the array of schoolwide, group, and individual strategies you may need to develop and will help you monitor schoolwide progress.


  • Individual assessments have traditionally employed deficit-oriented instruments. During the past decades, there has been movement toward employing strengths-based assessments. One of the most researched measures is the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale (BERS).54 The BERS is a 52-item scale normed on a racially and ethnically representative national sample of 2,176 children without disabilities and 861 children with emotional and behavioral disorders, ages 5 to 18. It is completed by adults familiar with the youth and measures emotional and behavioral strengths for five empirically derived factors: interpersonal strengths (e.g., accepts “no” for an answer), family involvement (e.g., participates in family activities), intrapersonal strengths (e.g., demonstrates self-confidence), school functioning (e.g., completes school tasks on time), and affective strengths (e.g., accepts a hug).
  • Schoolwide assessments collect information on how students experience the school climate. A number of reputable school climate assessments exist. Effective surveys should have valid and reliable items and scales. They can be administered on a schoolwide basis or to a sample of students, and their data can be disaggregated to see how subgroups of students are experiencing the school environment. To maximize the honesty of student responses, it is important that student confidentiality be ensured.

One well researched instrument for measuring the conditions for learning, initially developed for use in Chicago, is now being used in a number of U.S. districts. Both a middle grades version and a high school version of this survey are available (see the American Institutes for Research Conditions for Learning survey information on the SSSTA [Safe and Supportive Schools Technical Assistance Center] School Climate Measurement Web page). The surveys are administered annually in elementary and high schools in Cleveland and Syracuse. This type of data could be used when developing State N or D report cards. The data from the survey are also reported back to schools, in both an aggregated and disaggregated manner for continuous improvement by school improvement teams, who review the scores to identify needs and successes. Other school climate measures also may be found on SSSTA’s School Climate Measurement Web page.

For more information on improving the conditions for learning in an educational setting, refer to NDTAC’s article, “Improving Conditions for Learning for Youth Who Are Neglected or Delinquent.”



A few of you have asked about pre-post testing. There are a number of good resources to help you and/or your subgrantees identify an off-the-shelf test.  NDTAC has not recently conducted any assessment reviews so we cannot offer our own recommendations (although we featured two on our website in 2006: https://neglected-delinquent.ed.gov/nd/resources/spotlight/spotlight200604b.asp).  I can, however, point you to organizations that have conducted more recent reviews:

  • National Reporting System (NRS) Assessment Database: http://www.nrsweb.org/NRSwork/database/default.aspxThis resource was developed by NRS (a US Department of Education funded technical assistance center housed by the American Institutes for Research (AIR) like NDTAC) for states. It includes general information about assessments that may be appropriate for adult education and English literacy students. JJ facilities have used this tool as a resource for identifying appropriate tests.
  • National Literacy Project’s Resource Guide for Adolescent Literacy: http://www.nationalliteracyproject.org/addRead/ResourceGuideWdate.pdfThis guide developed with funding from the Gates Foundation includes a review of reading assessments designed for both individual and group administration.
  • National Center on Response to Intervention Screening Tools Chart: http://www.rti4success.org/screeningToolsThis center, also funded by the US Department of Education and housed by AIR, developed a chart that summarizes its review of both math and reading assessments that are brief, valid, reliable, and evidence-based. These screening tools are conducted with all students or targeted groups of students to identify students who are at risk of academic failure and, therefore, likely to need additional or alternative forms of instruction to supplement the conventional general education approach.

We know from our work in the field that BEST, TABE, BASI and DAR are commonly in use in JJ facilities but apart from that, I cannot offer any evaluative feedback on these assessments.