200 WEST BALTIMORE STREET BALTIMORE, MD 21201 410-767-0100 | 410-333-6442 TTY/TDD
MarylandPublicSchools.org
To: Members of the State Board of Education
From: Mohammed Choudhury, State Superintendent of Schools
Date: February 28, 2023
Subject: Deep Dive: Students with Disabilities, Part 2
Purpose
To take a deep dive into data related to Maryland’s children with disabilities (birth through 21 years) and the
strategic response and programming of the Division of Early Intervention and Special Education Services. This
presentation is a continuation of the Deep Dive: Students with Disabilies from September 27, 2022.
Background/Historical Perspective
The Maryland State Department of Education’s Division of Early Intervention and Special Education Services
provides leadership, accountability, technical assistance, and resource management to local education agencies,
public agencies, and stakeholders through a seamless, comprehensive system of coordinated services to children
and students with disabilities, birth through age 21, and their families.
Executive Summary
The presentation provides information and data on the following:
• Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
• Significant Disproportionality
• Maryland Initiatives
Action
No action is required; this information is for discussion only
Attachments
• Deep Dive: Students with Disabilities Powerpoint
MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
Presented By |
Data Deep Dive: Students with Disabilities
DIVISION OF EARLY INTERVENTION AND SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES
D
IVISION OF ASSESSMENT, ACCOUNTABILITY AND PERFORMANCE REPORTING
Fe
bruary 28, 2023
Dr. Deann Collins, Deputy State Superintendent for Teaching and Learning
Chandra Haislet, Assistant State Superintendent, Division of Assessment, Accountability and Performance Reporting
Dr. Brian Morrison, Branch Chief, Division of Early Intervention and Special Education Services
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA)
Ensuring students with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE)
1. Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA)
2. Division of Early Intervention and
Spe
cial Education Services
3. What Makes Maryland Unique?
4. COVID-19 and Compensatory
Ed
ucation/Recovery Services
5. Dispute Resolution: Rights of
Fa
milies
6. Students with Disabilities
De
mographic and Outcome Data
7. Significant Disproportionality
8. Maryland Initiatives
2
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities:
Demographic and Outcome Data
1. Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA)
2. Division of Early Intervention and
Spe
cial Education Services
3. What Makes Maryland Unique?
4. COVID-19 and Compensatory
E
ducation/Recovery Services
5. Dispute Resolution: Rights of Families
6. Students with Disabilities
Demo
graphic and Outcome Data
7. Significant Disproportionality
8. Maryland Initiatives
Students with Disabilities by the Numbers
3
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Trend: Students with Disabilities, SY 2012-2022
The percentage of the total population of Maryland students identified as students with disabilities
has been consistent over time.
95,733
96,888
97,025
98,507
99,420
98,372
103,269
105,541
108,054
102,387
106,216
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Year
Percent of
Total
Population
2016 11.3%
2017 11.0%
2018 11.5%
2019 11.7%
2020 11.8%
2021 11.6%
2022 12.0%
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection
4
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Counts of Students in Maryland's Public Special Education and
Nonpublic Placement Schools
The count of Maryland public special education schools has remained consistent, however the count of
students enrolled has decreased since SY 2018-2019.
4,374
4,280
3,640
3,602
3,816
3,818
3,696
3,372
0
2,500
5,000
2019 2020 2021 2022
Public Nonpublic Placement
Year
Count of
Public Special
Education
Schools
2019 37
2020 36
2021 37
2022 37
• A special education school is a public elementary/secondary school that focuses primarily on serving the educational needs of students with disabilities
and which adopts curriculum, materials, or instruction for these students. (EDFacts specification, FS029)
• If a school has 10 or more students and 90% or more of those students have IEPs, the school should be reported as a Special Education School. (U.S
Department of Education, Common Core of Data)
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection (public); September Enrollment (nonpublic placement)
5
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Students with Disabilities by Grade Span, SY 2021-2022
Statewide, 12% of students are identified as a student with a disability.
51,378
24,531
30,307
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
Pre-K to 5 6 to 8 9 to 12
12.4% of total
Pre-K-5 population
12.1% of total 6-
8 population
11.2% of total
9-12 population
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection
6
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Maryland’s Students with Disabilities: Disability Categories
All Disability Categories
• Autism
• Deaf-blindness
• Deafness
• Developmental Delay
• Emotional disability
• Hearing impairment
• Intellectual disability
• Multiple disabilities
• Orthopedic impairment
• Other health impairment
• Specific learning disability
• Speech or language impairment
• Traumatic brain injury
• Visual impairment, including blindness
Data Source: October 1, 2022 Child Count Data Collection
Developmental Delay
12%
Autism
13%
Speech or Language
Impairment
14%
Other Health
Impairment
17%
Specific Learning
Disability
26%
Emotional Disability
5%
Intellectual Disability
5%
Other
8%
7
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Students with Disabilities: Disability Type by Race, Gender, and
Eligible for Free and Reduced Meals (FARMs)
More Black/African American students are identified as having a specific learning or emotional disability as
compared to the statewide percent of Black/African American of 33.2%.
White, 29.7
Black/African
American, 38.4
Hispanic, 25.5
Other,
6.4
Race
White, 32.7
Black/African
American, 50.4
Hispanic,
9.3
Race
Specific Learning Disability
Emotional Disability
Male,
70
Female,
30
Gender
Other,
7.5
FARMs,
56
Non-
FARMs,
44
FARMs
Male,
59
Female,
41
Gender
FARMs,
56
Non-
FARMs,
44
FARMs
White, 33.9 Black/African American, 33.2 Hispanic, 20.7
Other, 12.2
Percent Race/Ethnicity All Students
Data Sources: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection, Enrollment
Data Collection SY 2021-2022
8
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
9
Students with Disabilities: Disability Type by Race, Gender, and
Eligible for Free and Reduced Meals (FARMs)
More Black/African American students are identified as having an intellectual or developmental disability as
compared to the statewide percent of Black/African American of 33.2%.
White, 25.0
Black/African
American,
39.3
Hispanic, 23.7
Other,
12.0
Race
FARMs,
43
NON-
FARMS,
57
FARMs
FARMs…
NON-
FARMs,
37
FARMs
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
White, 20.9 Black/African American, 57.9
Hispanic,
15.7
Other
, 5.5
Race
Intellectual Disability
Developmental Disability
Male,
58
Female,
42
Gender
Male,
72
Female,
28
Gender
White, 33.9 Black/African American, 33.2 Hispanic, 20.7
Other, 12.2
Percent Race/Ethnicity All Students
Data Sources: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection,
Enrollment Data Collection SY 2021-2022
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
10
FARMs,
37
NON-
FARMs,
63
FARMs
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Students with Disabilities: Disability Type by Race, Gender and
Eligible for Free and Reduced Meals (FARMs)
Students identified as having Autism are more likely to be male and not eligible for free and reduced meals.
Autism
White,, 31.9
Black/African
American, 40.3
Hispanic,
14.2
Other,
13.6
Race
Male, 83
Female, 17
Gender
White, 33.9 Black/African American, 33.2 Hispanic, 20.7
Other, 12.2
Percent Race/Ethnicity All Students
Data Sources: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection,
Enrollment Data Collection SY 2021-2022
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
National Background
• The use of intellectual and emotional disability codes is often associated with the removal of students to more restrictive and segregated settings. This
can negatively impact our African American students, who face additional barriers and bias, as compared to their White peers. Students who are
misidentified are vulnerable to a less rigorous curriculum and lower expectations in a segregated setting
• Income does not fully explain the patterns of identification. Black students from non-low-income brackets had twice the likelihood of being identified
with intellectual disabilities (ID) or emotional disturbances (ED), compared to White students from non-low-income backgrounds.
• Placement decisions exacerbate achievement gaps with students in general education classrooms having better academic and employment outcomes
than students in separate spaces.
o While 55 percent of White students with disabilities spend more than 80 percent of their school day in a general education classroom, only a third of
Black students with disabilities spend that much time in a general education classroom. Hispanic and American Indian students with disabilities are
also more likely to be taught in separate classrooms, compared to White students.
o A study in Massachusetts found that students with disabilities taught in fully inclusive environments were five times more likely to graduate on time,
compared to other students with disabilities, and 11 percentage points more likely to be employed.
• Students of color often receive harsher punishments in school for the same behavior when compared to their White counterparts, and are more likely to
receive office referrals, suspensions, and expulsions from school. Discipline disparities are even more apparent for students with disabilities.
o Among students of color with disabilities, one in four boys and nearly one in five girls receive an out-of-school suspension. Black males from low-
income backgrounds receiving special education services are suspended at the highest rates of any student group.
o Students who are suspended or expelled are more likely to be held back, drop out, or enter the juvenile justice system when compared to their peers.
Significant Disproportionality in Special Education: Current Trends and Actions for Impact, National Center for Learning Disabilities;
https://www.ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020-NCLD-Disproportionality_Trends-and-Actions-for-Impact_FINAL-1.pdf (2020).
11
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Total Count of Students with Disabilities
by LEA, SY 2021-2022
Most students with disabilities are in Montgomery County,
Baltimore County, and Prince George’s County.
1,112
1,540
504
2,930
2,418
2,778
377
4,762
291
5,048
5,954
281
21,375
13,582
782
1,830
411
523
2,422
1,516
730
10,997
8,982
15,037
500 - 1,500
1,501 - 5,000
5,001 - 10,000
> 10,000
<500
21,375
15,037
13,582
10,997
8,982
5,954
5,048
4,762
2,930
2,778
2,422
2,418
1,830
1,540
1,516
1,112
782
730
523
504
411
377
291
281
Montgomery
Baltimore County
Prince George's
Baltimore City
Anne Arundel
Howard
Harford
Frederick
Carroll
Charles
Washington
Cecil
Saint Mary's
Calvert
Wicomico
Allegany
Queen Anne's
Worcester
Talbot
Caroline
Somerset
Dorchester
Garrett
Kent
*SEED School omitted from map (34 students).
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection
12
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Percentage of Students with Disabilities
by LEA, SY 2021-2022
Most students with disabilities are in Montgomery County,
Baltimore County, and Prince George’s County.
1.0
1.4
0.5
2.8
2.3
2.6
0.4
4.5
0.3
4.8
5.6
0.3
20.1
12.8
0.7
1.7
0.4
0.5
2.3
1.4
0.7
10.4
8.5
14.2
<1%
1 - 1.9%
2 - 4.9%
5 - 9.9%
>10%
The Maryland
Students with
Disabilities
percentage is
12% for SY 2021-
2022.
20.1
14.2
12.8
10.4
8.5
5.6
4.8
4.5
2.8
2.6
2.3
2.3
1.7
1.4
1.4
1.0
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
Montgomery
Baltimore County
Prince George's
Baltimore City
Anne Arundel
Howard
Harford
Frederick
Carroll
Charles
Washington
Cecil
Saint Mary's
Calvert
Wicomico
Allegany
Queen Anne's
Worcester
Talbot
Caroline
Somerset
Dorchester
Garrett
Kent
*SEED School omitted from map (<1%).
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection
13
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Students with Disabilities as a percentage of
LEA total student count, SY 2021-2022
There are 8 LEAs that have a greater percentage of students
with disabilities as a percentage of total student population.
13.7
9.9
9.0
11.6
16.3
10.2
8.4
10.4
8.4
13.3
10.3
15.6
13.3
10.4
10.6
10.5
15.1
11.5
10.9
10.3
10.7
14.4
10.7
13.4
8% - 9.9%
10 - 11.9%
12% - 14.9%
> 15%
The Maryland
Students with
Disabilities
percentage is
12% for SY 2021-
2022.
16.3
15.6
15.1
14.4
13.7
13.4
13.3
13.3
11.6
11.5
10.9
10.7
10.7
10.6
10.5
10.4
10.4
10.3
10.3
10.2
9.9
9.0
8.4
8.4
Cecil
Kent
Somerset
Baltimore City
Allegany
Baltimore County
Harford
Montgomery
Carroll
Talbot
Washington
Anne Arundel
Worcester
Queen Anne's
Saint Mary's
Frederick
Prince George's
Wicomico
Howard
Charles
Calvert
Caroline
Garrett
Dorchester
*SEED School omitted from map (10.8%).
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection
14
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Change Over Time: SY 2018 to SY 2022
Students with Disabilities by LEA
Statewide, students with disabilities increased by 2.9%
from school year 2017-2018 as compared to 2021-2022.
-17.0
8.1
-8.7
5.5
6.1
-6.2
-14.5
6.0
-18.7
8.0
10.2
8.5
9.9
-7.0
-2.9
3.6
-3.7
9.6
8.9
-10.6
-5.3
-8.5
14.4
6.2
0 – 7.9% Increase
8 - 10% Increase
>10% increase
0.1 - 10% Decrease
>10% Decrease
Anne Arundel, 14.4
Howard, 10.2
Montgomery, 9.9
Talbot, 9.6
Washington, 8.9
Kent, 8.5
Calvert, 8.1
Harford, 8.0
Baltimore County, 6.2
Cecil, 6.1
Frederick, 6.0
Carroll, 5.5
Saint Mary's, 3.6
Queen Anne's, -2.9
Somerset, -3.7
Worcester, -5.3
Charles, -6.2
Prince George's, -7.0
Baltimore City, -8.5
Caroline, -8.7
Wicomico, -10.6
Dorchester, -14.5
Allegany, -17.0
Garrett, -18.7
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection
*SEED School omitted from map (-38.2%).
15
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Students with Disabilities by Race/Ethnicity, SY 2021-2022
Black/African American students disproportionately comprise the students with disabilities
population compared to other race/ethnicities.
39.7%
32.0%
19.1%
5.0%
3.8%
0.2%
0.1%
33.0%
33.5%
21.2%
5.1%
6.7%
0.3%
0.1%
0%
25%
50%
75%
Black/African
American
White Hispanic/Latino
of any race
Two or more
races
Asian American
Indian/Alaska
Native
Native Hawaiian
or Pacific
Islander
Students with Disabilites All Students
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection
16
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Trend: Students with Disabilities by Student Groups
Students with disabilities who are also English learners or economically disadvantaged have increased at simila
rates to their peers. The percentage of male students with disabilities continue to trend more than double that o
female students with disabilities.
10.6%
11.2%
11.6%
12.0%
10.0%
10.7%
11.1%
11.7%
0%
50%
100%
2019 2020 2021 2022
English Learner, Students
with Disabilities Trend
22.4%
22.6%
28.1%
27.2%
32.2%
32.6%
38.4%
36.9%
0%
50%
100%
2019 2020 2021 2022
Economically Disadvantaged,
Students with Disabilities Trend
Gap
9.7%
32.2%
32.3%
33.1%
32.5%
67.8%
67.7%
66.9%
67.5%
0%
50%
100%
2019 2020 2021 2022
Gender, Students with
Disabilities Trend
Female Male
Gap
17.5%
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection
17
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Trend: Students with Disabilities by Race/Ethnicity
3.4%
3.5%
3.6%
3.5%
3.8%
6.6%
6.7%
6.7%
6.8%
6.7%
0%
25%
50%
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Asian, Students with Disabilities Trend
Gap 2.9%
41.2%
40.9%
40.5%
40.8%
39.7%
33.8%
33.5%
33.1%
33.6%
33.0%
0%
25%
50%
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Black/African American, Students with Disabilities Trend
Gap
6.7%
16.5%
17.2%
17.9%
18.1%
19.1%
17.6%
18.5%
19.6%
20.1%
21.2%
0%
25%
50%
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Hispanic/Latino, Students with Disabilities Trend
Gap
2.1%
34.4%
33.6%
33.0%
32.4%
32.0%
37.1%
36.2%
35.4%
34.2%
33.5%
0%
25%
50%
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
White, Students with Disabilities Trend
Gap
1.5%
Data Source: MSDE Early Attendance Data Collection
18
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
19
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Trend: Students with Disabilities and Long-Term English
Learner Status, SY 2017-2021
Maryland long term English learners (LTEL) were almost 4 times more likely to be identified for special education
services than were English learners who were non-LTELs.
8.3 8.3 8.3
8.2
8.1
38.9
39.1
35.5 35.5
30.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Percent of Long Term English Learners identified as a Student with Disability
Non-LTEL LTEL
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Child Find Process
Concerns Identified BEFORE 3
rd
Birthday
Referral to the Maryland Infants and Toddlers Program
(MITP) to Determine Eligibility through Evaluation and
Assessment for Early Intervention Services
“Primary Referral Sources” Include -
(1) Hospitals, including prenatal and postnatal care facilities;
(2) Physicians;
(3) Parents, including parents of infants and toddlers;
(4) Child care programs and early learning programs;
(5) LEAs and schools;
(6) Public health facilities;
(7) Other public health or social service agencies;
(8) Other clinics and health care providers;
(9) Public agencies and staff in the child welfare system, including child protective service
and foster care;
(10) Homeless family shelters; and
(11) Domestic violence shelters and agencies.
Concerns Identified AT or AFTER 3
rd
Birthday
Referral to Child Find to Determine Eligibility through
Evaluation and Assessment for Special Education and
Related Services
Referral Sources Include –
(1) Parents;
(2) School Staff; and
(3) The Maryland Infants and Toddlers Program.
The early intervention program has 45 days from referral to determine eligibility, through
evaluation and assessments, and if determined eligible, develop an Individualized Family
Service Plan (IFSP)
The LEA has 90 days from referral to determine eligibility, through evaluation and
assessments, and if determined eligible, has an additional 30 days to develop an
Individualized Education Program (IEP)
20
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Outcome Data: State Preschool Child Data
The percentage of children (ages 3-K) who were functioning within age expectations in each outcome
by the time they exited the program by race (2020-2021) was highest for White students.
37.5%
46.9%
45.8%
55.2%
39.1%
37.6%
49.7%
56.0%
45.7%
53.2%
55.6%
62.7%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Black or African American Hispanic or Latino Two or More Races White
Social-Emotional Skills
Knowledge & Skills
Actions to Meet Needs
Data Source: State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report: Part B
21
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
22
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Outcome Data: Proficiency Trend, Elementary and Middle School
Maryland students have returned to pre-pandemic performance in English Language Arts in spring 2022. Students
improved in mathematics in spring 2022 as compared to Early Fall 2021 results.
6.9%
7.4%
8.4%
7.9%
10.5%
44.7%
45.9%
48.2%
34.4%
48.2%
0%
50%
100%
2017 2018 2019 2021 2022
Percent Proficient English Language Arts 3-8
7.2%
7.7%
8.0%
4.2%
6.3%
36.0%
37.5%
36.2%
17.5%
24.5%
0%
50%
100%
2017 2018 2019 2021 2022
Percent Proficient Mathematics 3-8
Gap
18.2
Gap
37.7
*Assessments for 2021 (SY 2020-2021) were shortened tests and were administered in Fall 2021. Preliminary SY 2021-2022 data as of January 3, 2022.
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
23
Outcome Data: Proficiency Trend, Algebra I and English 10
Maryland students have returned to pre-pandemic performance in English 10 in spring 2022 with smaller gains seen in
mathematics.
9.7%
7.2%
7.8%
19.4%
13.4%
53.7%
47.5%
48.1%
60.4%
57.9%
0%
50%
100%
2017 2018 2019 2021 2022
Percent Proficient English 10
8.2%
5.5%
4.4%
1.2%
2.5%
39.6%
34.7%
30.9%
7.5%
15.8%
0%
50%
100%
2017 2018 2019 2021 2022
Percent Proficient Algebra 1
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Gap 44.5
*Assessments for 2021 (SY 2020-2021) were shortened tests and were administered in Fall 2021. Preliminary SY 2021-2022 data as of January 3, 2022.
Gap 13.3
*
*
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Outcome Data: Alternate Assessment Proficiency
The Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program (MCAP) Spring 2022 Alternate Assessment* results
show the percentage of students demonstrating proficiency have not returned to outcomes from SY 2019.
35%
41%
14%
10%
13%
12%
0%
25%
50%
75%
English Language Arts Math
Grades 3-8
2019 2021 2022
n=4,381 n=3,796 n=4,118 n=4,373 n=3,759 n=4,116
64%
44%
15%
12%
23%
21%
0%
25%
50%
75%
English Language Arts Math
Grades 9-12
n=910 n=851 n=900 n=911 n=839 n=892
*Alternate Assessment administered to students with significant cognitive disabilities.
24
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Maryland Students with Disabilities in Career and Technical Education (CTE)
Students with disabilities as a percentage of high school, CTE, and Career Research and Development (CRD)
Enrollment, SY 2020-2021.
2018-2019
10.7%
9.4%
30.2%
0%
25%
50%
High
School
CTE CRD
N=259,692
N=114,478
N=8,232
2019-2020
10.7%
10.1%
32.9%
0%
25%
50%
High
School
CTE CRD
N=264,496
N=110,933
N=8,136
2020-2021
10.9%
10.6%
31.3%
0%
25%
50%
High
School
CTE CRD
N=265,787
N=122,519
N=9,128
Data Source: Maryland CTE Works: CTE Participant Enrollment
25
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
High School Completion: Students with Disabilities
by Race/Ethnicity, SY 2021-2022
Of the 5,605 students with disabilities completing high school in school year 2021-2022, 89.0%
graduated with a diploma and 11.0% graduated with a certificate (617).
Diploma, 89.0%
Black/African
American, 43.6%
White, 33.4%
Hispanic/Latino of any
race, 13.1%
Asian, 6.0%
Two or more races, 3.9%
Certificate,
11.0%
High School Completers,
SY 2021-2022
All Students
High School completion includes Diplomas, Certificates, and early college admission.
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander and American Indian/Alaska Native students with disabilities who graduated with a Special Education certificate data are suppressed due to small population.
26
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
27
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Cohort Graduation Rates
For students with disabilities, 69.3% graduated within 4 years and 73.0% graduated within 5 years. Although these
rates have both trended up, there continues to be a gap in comparison to all students.
66.8%
65.8%
68.5%
68.1%
69.3%
87.1%
86.9%
86.7%
87.2%
86.3%
0%
50%
100%
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Four-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
88.9% 88.9%
88.3%
89.0%
71.3%
70.8%
73.0% 73.0%
0%
50%
100%
2018 2019 2020 2021
Five-Year Cohort Graduation Rate
4-Year
Rate Gap
17
5-Year
Rate Gap
16%
Data Source: Maryland Report Card
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
13.9%
12.7%
10.3%
10.2%
10.8%
8.4% 8.4%
8.3%
7.4%
8.3%
0%
10%
20%
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Cohort Dropout Rate
Data Source: Maryland Report Card
Gap 2.5
Dropout rates for students with disabilities increased in school year 2021-2022 compared to
the prior year; however, the gap in comparison to all students decreased.
28
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
College Enrollment for Students with Disabilities
Fewer students without disabilities from the class of 2020 enrolled in college within twelve months of
graduating from high school in comparison to their peers.
63% of Students without Disabilities
35% of Students with Disabilities
Data Source: Maryland Report Card, National Student Clearinghouse
29
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Postsecondary Outcomes for Students with Disabilities
23.4%
22.7%
26.5%
28.0%
26.5%
24.9%
26.8%
31.2%
35.4%
38.6%
32.6%
35.3%
31.4%
36.9%
3.3%
1.2%
1.4%
2.8%
0.3%
1.5%
6.8%
11.5%
10.7%
5.0%
38.5%
27.1%
23.1%
32.9%
35.3%
43.4%
34.8%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-22
Higher Education Competitively Employed Other Education/Training Program Other Employment No engagement
N = 6,917
N = 6,927 N = 6,377 N = 6,703 N = 6,742N = 6,837
Data Source: Maryland Longitudinal Data System Center (MLDSC), Division of Early Intervention and Special Education Services (DEI/SES), Department of Rehabilitation Services (DORS)
N = 6,656
30
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Postsecondary Outcomes by LEA
Percentage of Students with Disabilities Enrolled in Higher Education or Competitively Employed
within One Year of Leaving School.
68%
67%
63%
62%
54%
67%
70%
69%
57%
72%
76%
71%
60%
68%
74%
49%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Percentage of SWD
2017-2018 2021-2022
*LEAs having less than 1% Students with Disabilities excluded.
Data Source: Maryland CTE Works: CTE Participant Enrollment
31
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Maryland Postsecondary Outcomes
Percentage of students with disabilities by postsecondary outcome within one year of
graduating high school.
A: Enrolled in Higher Education
B: Enrolled in Higher Education or
Competitively Employed
C: Enrolled in Higher Education or in Some
Other Postsecondary Education or Training
Program or Competitively Employed or in
Some Other Employment
Data Source: State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report: Part B
23.5%
22.7%
26.5%
28.0%
26.5%
24.9%
26.8%
54.6%
58.1%
65.1%
60.6%
61.9%
67.0%
63.3%
61.5%
72.9%
76.9%
67.1%
64.7%
67.8%
65.1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
Percentage of Students with Disabilities
32
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Significant Disproportionality
Addressing significantly disproportionate representation of racial/ethnic
groups in special education
1. Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA)
2. Division of Early Intervention and
Spec
ial Education Services
3. What Makes Maryland Unique?
4. COVID-19 and Compensatory
Ed
ucation/Recovery Services
5. Dispute Resolution: Rights of Families
6. Students with Disabilities
Dem
ographic and Outcome Data
7. Significant Disproportionality
8. Maryland Initiatives
33
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Significant Disproportionality
Equity in Special Education
Revised Federal Regulations for Useful Comparisons Across States
• Provisions to monitor racial disproportionality in identification
and placement were first introduced as part of IDEA 1997
• Those provisions were strengthened in IDEA 2004 (added
di
sciplinary removal and made interventions mandatory,
including reservation of federal funds)
• This has been a priority for the federal government and
Ma
ryland, with impacts in both general education and special
education
• In 2013, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported
that a
bout 2% of all State districts used IDEA funds to provide
coordinated early intervening services (CEIS)
• The way states defined significant disproportionality made
iden
tification unlikely; comparison and oversight difficult
34
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Significant Disproportionality
Stakeholder Engagement
Workgroups to Determine State Methodology
Advocacy
Groups
Parents
Leadership
School
Staff
Specialty
Organizations
• Maryland State Board of Education
• Local School System Superintendents
• Deputy & Assistant State Superintendents
• Local Directors of Special Education
• Preschool Directors
• Disability Rights Maryland (DRM)
• Advocates for Children & Youth
• Juvenile Services Education System
• National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
• American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
• Maryland Coalition for Inclusive Education (MCIE)
• Institutes of Higher Education (IHE)
• Maryland Association of Nonprofit Special Education Facilities (MANSEF)
• Parents/Families
• Pathfinders for Autism
• Decoding Dyslexia
• The ARC Northern Chesapeake Region
• Maryland Coalition of Families
• Department of Juvenile Services
• Department of Human Services
• The Seed School of Maryland
• Developmental Disabilities Council
• Department of Rehabilitative Services
• Maryland State Education Association
• Homeless Education & Neglected and Delinquent Student Specialist
35
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
36
Significant Disproportionality
Significant Disproportionality Methodology
COMAR 13A.05.02.04
Adopted May 22, 2018
Based on race (all races) and ethnicity in any of the following 14 categories:
• Identification
• Placement
• Disciplinary Removals
o As a student with a disability o Inside Regular Education < 40% o Out-of-school suspensions/expulsions 10 days or
o With a particular disability o Inside separate schools/residential facilities fewer
Categories
o Intellectual Disability o Out-of-school suspensions/expulsions > 10 days
of Analysis
o Specific Learning Disability o In-school suspensions 10 days or fewer
o Emotional Disability o In-school suspensions 10 days or fewer > 10 days
o Speech and Language Disability o Total disciplinary removals, including removals by
o Other Health Impaired school personnel to and interim alternative
o Autism education setting (IAES) and removals by hearing
officer
Population
• Ages 3-5: Identification and Disciplinary Removals • Ages 6-21: Identification, Placement, and Disciplinary Removals
Method Federal-Driven
Minimum cell size (numerator/students in identified group)
Methodology
• Risk Ratio
• 5
Threshold State-Driven
Minimum N-size (denominator/students in population)
• 2.0
• 20
Not identify an LEA until the LEA has exceeded the threshold for 2 prior consecutive years
Flexibility
AND
Options
Not identify an LEA if the LEA has demonstrated reasonable progress
• 0.15 for risk ratios 2.0 – 4.0
• 0.50 for risk ratios above 4.0
Review policies, procedures, and practices • Reserve 15% of Part B (611 and 619) fund allocation for comprehensive coordinated early
Response to
• Require LEA to report on any revisions intervening services (CCEIS)
• Submit CCEIS plan to MSDE
Identification
• Focus: Root cause(s) of disproportionality
• Population: Students with and
without disabilities
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
37
Significant Disproportionality
Categories of Analysis Matrix
98 Potential Areas of Significant Disproportionality
Category Race/Ethnicity
ASIAN BLACK AFRICAN AMERICAN
NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER
PACIFIC ISLANDER
HISPANIC/
LATINO
TWO OR MORE
RACES
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
NATIVE WHITE
ASIAN
BLACK OR AFRICAN
AMERICAN
NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER
PACIFIC ISLANDER
HISPANIC/
LATINO
TWO OR MORE
RACES
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
NATIVE WHITE
tion
BLACK OR AFRICAN NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER HISPANIC/ TWO OR MORE AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
ASIAN AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDER LATINO RACES NATIVE WHITE
ntifica
ASIAN
BLACK OR AFRICAN
AMERICAN
NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER
PACIFIC ISLANDER
HISPANIC/
LATINO
TWO OR MORE
RACES
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
NATIVE WHITE
Ide
BLACK OR AFRICAN NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER HISPANIC/ TWO OR MORE AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
ASIAN AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDER LATINO RACES NATIVE WHITE
BLACK OR AFRICAN NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER HISPANIC/ TWO OR MORE AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
ASIAN AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDER LATINO RACES NATIVE WHITE
ASIAN
BLACK OR AFRICAN
AMERICAN
NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER
PACIFIC ISLANDER
HISPANIC/
LATINO
TWO OR MORE
RACES
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
NATIVE WHITE
nt
ASIAN
BLACK OR AFRICAN
AMERICAN
NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER
PACIFIC ISLANDER
HISPANIC/
LATINO
TWO OR MORE
RACES
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
NATIVE WHITE
Placeme
BLACK OR AFRICAN NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER HISPANIC/ TWO OR MORE AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
ASIAN AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDER LATINO RACES NATIVE WHITE
al
-of-School Suspension:
ASIAN
BLACK OR AFRICAN
AMERICAN
NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER
PACIFIC ISLANDER
HISPANIC/
LATINO
TWO OR MORE
RACES
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
NATIVE WHITE
emoR v
-of-School Suspension:
ASIAN
BLACK OR AFRICAN
AMERICAN
NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER
PACIFIC ISLANDER
HISPANIC/
LATINO
TWO OR MORE
RACES
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
NATIVE WHITE
aryDiscip in
-School Suspension: Less
ASIAN
BLACK OR AFRICAN
AMERICAN
NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER
PACIFIC ISLANDER
HISPANIC/
LATINO
TWO OR MORE
RACES
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
NATIVE WHITE
l
-School Suspension: BLACK OR AFRICAN NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER HISPANIC/ TWO OR MORE AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
ASIAN AMERICAN PACIFIC ISLANDER LATINO RACES NATIVE WHITE
ASIAN
BLACK OR AFRICAN
AMERICAN
NATIVE HAWAIIAN or OTHER
PACIFIC ISLANDER
HISPANIC/
LATINO
TWO OR MORE
RACES
AMERICAN INDIAN OR ALASKA
NATIVE WHITE
9 4=n oitacifintdeI
tnem
4
ec
= 1
alP
5 3 =lavomeR yranilpicsiD
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
38
Significant Disproportionality
LEA 1 Scenario: Over-Identification for Intellectual Disability
(ID) by Race
Year 1
30 Black students with ID in
LEA 1
100 total Black students in
LEA 1
=
30
100
= 0.30
100 non-Black students with
ID in LEA 1
1,000 total non-Black
students in LEA 1
=
100
1,000
= 0.10
Risk Ratio:
0.30
0.10
= 3.0
Black students are 3 times more likely to be
identified as having an intellectual disability than
their non-Black peers in LEA 1
Year 2
27 Black students with ID in
LEA 1
100 total Black students in
LEA 1
=
27
100
= 0.27
100 non-Black students with
ID in LEA 1
1,000 total non-Black
students in LEA 1
=
100
1,000
= 0.10
Risk Ratio:
0.27
0.10
= 2.7
Black students are 2.7 times more likely to be
identified as having an intellectual disability than
their non-Black peers in LEA 1
LEA 1 Significant
Disproportionality Determination
Was LEA 1 disproportionate (RR over 2.0) for
two consecutive years?
Year 1 – 3.0
Year 2 – 2.7
Was RR for Year 1 between 2.0 and 4.0?
Did LEA 1 make reasonable progress (0.15)
between Year 1 and Year 2?
• RR 3.0 – RR 2.7 = 0.30
• 0.30 >0.15
REASONABLE PROGRESS WAS MADE
Determination:
NOT SIGNIFICANTLY DISPROPORTIONATE
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
39
Significant Disproportionality
LEA 2 Scenario: Over-Identification for Emotional Disability
(ED) by Race
Year 1
30 Black students with
emotional disabilities (ED)
100 total Black students
=
30
100
= 0.30
100 non-Black students with
ED
1,000 total non-Black
students
=
100
1,000
= 0.10
Risk Ratio:
0.30
0.10
= 3.0
Black students are 3.0 times more likely to be
identified as having an intellectual disability than
their non-Black peers in LEA 1
Year 2
29 Black students with ED
100 total Black students
=
29
100
= 0.29
100 non-Black students with
ED
1,000 total non-Black
students
=
100
1,000
= 0.10
0.29
0.10
= 2.9
Black students are 2.9 times more likely to be
identified as having an intellectual disability than
their non-Black peers in LEA 1
LEA 2 Significant
Disproportionality Determination
Was LEA 2 disproportionate (RR over 2.0) for
two consecutive years?
Year 1 – 3.0
Year 2 – 2.9
Was RR for Year 1 between 2.0 and 4.0?
Did LEA 2 make reasonable progress (0.15)
between year 1 and year 2?
• RR 3.0 – RR 2.9 = 0.10
• 0.10 < 0.15
REASONABLE PROGRESS WAS NOT MADE
Determination:
SIGNIFICANTLY DISPROPORTIONATE
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Significant Disproportionality
IDEA Required Response
IDEA Required
Response
MSDE/LEA Examines Policies,
Practices, and Procedures
• Examine for bias, misalignment, and consistency
of implementation
• Revise for equitable implementation
• Publish status of significant disproportionality and
changes made to policies, practices, procedures
MSDE Assigns Comprehensive
Coordinated Early Intervening
Services (CCEIS) to System
Reserve 15% of Part B 611
and/or Part B 619
Passthrough Funds
System Range of Reserve: $76,000 to $5.3
million
Develop, Implement, and
Evaluate CCEIS Plan
• Local System Implementation Team
• Categories of Analysis
• Programmatic Self-Assessment with
Root Cause Analysis
• Planned Response Actions
• LEA Superintendent Signature
40
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
41
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Baltimore County Public Schools Under Comprehensive Coordinated
Early Intervening Services Process for 2022-2023 School Year
Determination of
Significant
Disproportionality
Systemic
Improvement
Process
Self-Assessment
Targeted Action
Planning
MSDE Review and
Technical
Assistance
Implementation
Identification and
Notification of
Significant
Disproportionality
Determination
• MSDE applied the
State’s methodology to
create a local profile
• MSDE identified BCPS
for significant
disproportionality in the
identification of
Intellectual Disability
among Black students
• MSDE shared
determination notices,
including the mandatory
15% reservation, at TA
webinar
• BCPS leadership
determined distribution
of allocation
Identification of a
Systemic Improvement
Process Led by a Local
Implementation Team
• BCPS established an
inclusive team of
stakeholders
committed to positive
change, shared
decision-making, plan
implementation and
progress monitoring
• BCPS Local
Implementation Team
and MSDE
collaborated to
identify planning
actions and systemic
awareness
Commitment to Self-
Assessment Inclusive of
Reflective Data Analysis
and Solution-Finding
• MSDE provided Self-
Assessment Tools,
resources, and
examples of key data
considerations for local
use
• BCPS engaged in a
process to identify
disparate policy and
practice factors
impacting Black
students identified as
Intellectually Disabled
• BCPS identified root
cause factors with
proposed intervening
actions
Development of
Targeted Action
Planning Aligned with
Root Cause Factors
• BCPS identified specific
actions, intervening
supports and capacity
building activities
needed to mitigate the
root causes of
significant
disproportionality
• BCPS focused on
responsive actions to
increase equity with
changes to local system
policies, procedures,
and practices
• MSDE TA emphasized
sustainability and
problem-solving
processes
Implementation with
Fidelity Demonstrating
Programmatic and
Fiscal Responsibility
• BCPS initiated a plan
for the continuous
review, reflection, and
reassessment of plan,
actions, data, and
progress
• MSDE provided
regularly scheduled
technical assistance to
assist local
implementation team
efforts
• BCPS submitted
required reporting as a
component of
implementation
Utilization of a
Differentiated Review
and Technical
Assistance Model for
Plan Approval
• MSDE used a leveled
system of plan review,
feedback, and
technical assistance
• MSDE provided
feedback and guidance
including targeted and
focused supports from
the Division team and
a National Expert
• BCPS collaborated with
MSDE to refine plan
outcomes, goals and
benchmarks, and
budget to address
systemic change
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
42
Students with Disabilities Demographic and Outcome Data
Baltimore County Public Schools CCEIS Process in Action
Self-Assessment
Targeted Action
Planning
Root Cause Factors
• African-American/Black Students were 2.32 times more likely to be identified as having an intellectual disability than students in any other
racial/ethnic group
• Inconsistent implementation of pre-referral processes including Multitiered System of Supports (MTSS) and assessment procedures
• Inconsistent practices related to eligibility determination and placement determination
• Inconsistent access to early intervention supports and continuum of services available to diverse student populations across the district
• 58% of all students identified as having an intellectual disability are African-American/Black Students
• Examination of eligibility determination trends across racial/ethnic groups and school settings for patterns indicative of implicit/explicit
bias
• Identified that many of the African-American/Black Students identified as having an intellectual disability were transfers. 72% of those
students enrolled during the time period of 7/1/21-5/22/22 were determined eligible by neighboring LEAs
Improvement Actions
• System-wide implementation of the Eligibility Determination Guidance Document and Intellectual Disability Worksheet
• Required professional learning related to BCPS Student Support Teams (SSTs) and IEP Team processes, procedures, and practices
• Identification of pre-referral processes including MTSS, early intervention supports, and continuum of supports at targeted school sites
having disproportionate numbers of African-American/Black Students identified as having intellectual disability
• Implementation of mandatory 60-day IEP Team reviews for students entering BCPS with an intellectual disability determination
• Cross divisional collaboration: Psychological Services, Special Education, Equity and Cultural Proficiency, and Student Support Services
for increase systemic awareness and leadership support (co-development, co-implementation, and co-evaluation
• System-wide implementation of a Self-Monitoring Process with automatic notifications relative to IEP Team decision-making related to
intellectual disability determinations
• Professional learning and coaching specific to MTSS to inform awareness, prevention and effective evidence-based supports
• Fidelity checks for implementation of identified processes, procedures, and practices
• System-wide monitoring of pre-referral and referral trends across racial/ethnic groups and school setting to target specific professional
learning needs relative to the impact of potential bias
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
43
Significant Disproportionality
State Significant Disproportionality
LEAs can be determined significantly disproportionate in three overarching categories: identification,
placement, and discipline. State trends in disproportionality over the past three years are included below.
2020 Data
(SY 2017 & SY 2018)
Identification by
Disability
5
Discipline
4
Placement
0
7
1
0
0
2021 Data
(SY 2018 & SY 2019)
Identification by
Disability
4
Placement
0
Discipline
5
5 0
1
1
2022 Data
(SY 2019 & SY 2020)
Identification by
Disability
11
Placement
0
Discipline
2
1
3
0
1
Data Source: Significant Disproportionality Profiles
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
44
Significant Disproportionality
State Significant Disproportionality
Over the past four years, Maryland has been significantly disproportionate in the identification of
Black/African American students as intellectually and emotionally disabled and the out of school
suspension and sum disciplinary total of Black/African American students.
2.64
2.17
2.06
4.12
2.00
2.67
2.15
2.02
4.05
2.00
2.79
2.06
2.80
4.24
2.07
2.81
2.11
0.75
0.66
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Intellectual Disability Emotional Disability OSS ≤ 10 Days OSS > 10 Days Sum Disciplinary Total
Risk Ratio
2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021
Data Source: Significant Disproportionality Profiles
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
45
Significant Disproportionality
Identification: Intellectual Disability
Maryland has been significantly disproportionate in the identification of Black/African American
students as having an intellectual disability for the past four years; three LEAs have been significantly
disproportionate in this area for three of those four years.
2.64
2.67
2.79
2.81
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
Risk Ratio
Data Source: Significant Disproportionality Profiles
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
46
Significant Disproportionality
Identification: Emotional Disability
Maryland has been significantly disproportionate in the identification of Black/African American students as having an emotional
disability for the past four years; two LEAs have been significantly disproportionate in this area for all four years.
2.17
2.15
2.06
2.11
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Risk Ratio
Data Source: Significant Disproportionality Profiles
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
47
Significant Disproportionality
Discipline: Out of School Suspension ≤ 10 Days
Maryland has been significantly disproportionate in the out of school suspension (ten days or less) of Black/African American
students for two of the past four years; three LEAs have been significantly disproportionate in this area for three years.
2.06
2.02
2.80
0.75
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Risk Ratio
Data Source: Significant Disproportionality Profiles
* Virtual Instruction
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
8
Significant Disproportionality
Discipline: Out of School Suspension > 10 Days
Maryland has been significantly disproportionate in the out of school suspension (greater than 10 days) of Black/African
American students for two of the past four years; One LEA has been significantly disproportionate in this area for three years.
4.12
4.05
4.24
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
Risk Ratio
Data Source: Significant Disproportionality Profiles
* Virtual Instruction
4
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
49
Significant Disproportionality
Discipline: Sum Disciplinary Total
Maryland has been significantly disproportionate in sum disciplinary total for Black/African American students for two of the past
four years; two LEAs have been significantly disproportionate in this area for three years.
2.00 2.00
2.07
0.66
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Risk Ratio
Data Source: Significant Disproportionality Profiles
* Virtual Instruction
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Significant Disproportionality
MSDE’s Ongoing Response to Significant Disproportionality
Current Response
• Capacity building
o Equity specialists (1.5 FTE)
o National expert
o Regional liaison teams
o Cross-d
ivisional general and special education teams
• Data-informed decision making
o Required use of Maryland Online IEP (MOIEP) significant
disproportionality reporting tool (twice annually)
• Identify trends at the state-, syst
em-, school-, and
student-level
o Required use of local self-as
sessment tool to conduct root
cause analysis
• Accountability
o Approved system Comprehensive Coordinated Early
Intervening Services (CCEIS) plans
o Semi-annual and final programmatic and financial
p
rogress reporting
o Cyclical subrecipient fiscal monitoring
Response Moving Forward
Superintendent Charge
• Develop a robust, comprehensive statewide plan to
identify and address disproportionality across all systems
and demographic groups
• Convene a workgroup focused on addressing the
o
v
eridentification of Black/African American students with
intellectual disabilities to provide recommendations for
systemic change
o A guidance resource for school psychologists and IEP
ch
airs will be released by summer 2023
o Technical assistance sessions will be offered
• Implement an elevated response, including grant-m
a
king,
to address over-identification, restricted placement, and
disparate disciplinary removal of underserved students,
including required corrective action
50
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
The disproportionality in identification of Black/African-American students has not changed over the
past few years.
Identification of Students over Time
Significant Disproportionality
58.1%
58.7%
58.0%
50.9%
51.8%
50.5%
33.1%
33.5%
33.0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2020 2021 2022
Disability Identification Rates of
Black/African-American Students
Intellectual Disability Emotional Disability Enrollment
Black/African-American
students are 33% of the
state’s student
population but over half
of the students identified
for intellectual and
emotional disabilities.
51
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Categories of LEAs
Majority
Black/African-American:
At least 50% Black/African-
American students
Significant Disproportionality
Diverse
No race/ethnicity group more
than 50% of students
Majority White
More than 50%
White students
Allegany
Calvert
Caroline
Carroll
Cecil
Frederick
Garrett
Harford
Kent
Queen Anne’s
Saint Mary’s
Washington
Worcester
Anne
Arundel
Baltimore
County
Dorchester
Howard
Montgomery
Somerset
Wicomico
Baltimore City
Charles
Prince George’s
52
Significant Disproportionality
Intellectual Disability Identification Rates
Black/African-American students were overidentified for an intellectual disability in every LEA but
one in 2021-2022.
Black/African-American Proportions of Enrollment and Identification for an Intellectual Disability by
LEA Category, 2022
Black/African-American
Enrollment
2
Black/African-American ID
rate
2
State 33% 58%
Majority Black/African-American LEAs 61% 80%
Diverse LEAs 28% 44%
Majority White LEAs 14% 20%
Not Majority Black/African-American LEAs
1
23% 35%
1
Combination of Diverse LEAs and Majority White LEAs
2
ID rate is the proportion of identified students that were Black/African-American.
53
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Significant Disproportionality
54
Emotional Disability Identification Rates
Black/African-American students were overidentified for an emotional disability in two-thirds of
LEAs in 2021-2022.
Black/African-American Proportions of Enrollment and Identification for an Intellectual Disability by
LEA Category, 2022
1
Combination of Diverse LEAs and Majority White LEAs
2
ID rate is the proportion of identified students to all students.
3
Risk ratio is calculated as the Black/African-American ID rate divided by the non-Black/African-American ID rate. A risk ratio equal to 1 indicates no disproportionality.
Black/African-American
Enrollment
2
Black/African-American ID
rate
2
State 33% 51%
Majority Black/African-American LEAs 61% 83%
Diverse LEAs 28% 41%
Majority White LEAs 14% 18%
Not Majority Black/African-American LEAs
1
23% 33%
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
55
Significant Disproportionality
The Reducing Overidentification in Special Education Grant Program
• The $3 million ROSE program is designed to seed
resources for up to three local education agencies
(LEAs) to mitigate the effects of pandemic learning
loss on persistently underperforming students who
risk being misidentified for special education
services due to their race, sex, gender, home
language, and/or income status.
• The program also connects to and supports
Blueprint implementation efforts associated with
special education policies, processes, and
practices.
• Application release – March 1; Application due –
May 16.
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
56
Significant Disproportionality
The Reducing Overidentification in Special Education Grant Program
The program requires applicants to address all six required focus areas for the ROSE grant program:
• Conduct an analysis of data to determine where overidentification of students as intellectually and/or
emotionally disabled based on race, sex, gender, home language, and income status exists;
• Develop and implement a professional learning plan that aligns to the root causes for overidentification;
• Develop and maintain equitable policies, processes, and practices that mitigate and eliminate
opportunities for overidentification;
• Create or strengthen pre-referral processes that precede a student's referral for assessment to special
education;
• Ensure systems and structures for family engagement support and effective communication; and
• Grant activities should complement, strengthen, and align to any existing Comprehensive Coordinated
Early Intervening Services (CEIS) programs
Selected applicants will partner with a single, national leader awarded by MSDE for program implementation.
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
1. Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA)
2. Division of Early Intervention and
Sp
ecial Education Services
3. What Makes Maryland Unique?
4. COVID-1
9 and Compensatory
Education/Recovery Services
5. Dispute Resolution: Rights of Families
6. Students with Disabilities
D
emographic and Outcome Data
7. Significant Disproportionality
8. Maryland Initiatives
Maryland Initiatives
Moving Maryland forward through strategic initiatives aimed at narrowing the
gap
57
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Maryland Initiatives
Grow Your Own
• Annual cohorts of 2 – 9 participants
• 2 - 3 year program
• Ongoing since 2013
• Participants are educators,
psychologists, and other professionals
• 8 participating LEAs
• Graduate certificate from Johns
Hopkins University School of Education
• Practicum experiences in educational
setting
• Collaboration with Behavior Steering
Committee to develop resources
• 50% tuition support
• 3 year service commitment in Maryland
Grant Funding: Maryland Elevates
Board Certified Behavior
Analysts (BCBAs)
• Cohort of 15
• 2 year program
• Began Fall 2021
• Participants are certified teachers
• 9 participating LEAs
• Master’s degree from Louisiana Tech
• Supervised practicum with the LEA
• Mentoring, community of practice,
experiential learning and engagement
with the blind community
• 100% tuition support
• 3 year service commitment in Maryland
Grant Funding: Maryland Elevates
and National Federation of the Blind
Teachers of the Visually
Impaired (TVI)
• 2 cohorts of 16
• 2 year program
• Began Fall 2022
• Participants are certified teachers
• Frederick County Public Schools staff
• Master’s degree from Mount St. Mary’s
University
• Supervised practicum in specialized
afterschool/summer program.
• Mentorship and collaboration
opportunities
• 100% tuition support and stipend for
practicum
• 2 year service commitment in FCPS
Special Education Teachers and
Board Certified Behavior Analysts
(BCBAs)
Grant Funding: Maryland Leads
58
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Maryland Initiatives
State Personnel Development Grant (SPDG)
WHAT:
A competitive grant to provide focus on narrowing the gap and improving mathematics
proficiency and social-emotional competency for elementary children with disabilities.
Highlights:
• $5.5 million over 5 years
• Grant period: October 1, 2021 – Se
pt. 30, 2026
• One of 3 states competitively awarded funding in 2021-22
• One of 20 states recipients across 50 State Departments of Education
WHY:
Individual Student Math Proficiency & Social-Emotional Competence
• Disaggregated by Race and Disability Label
• Growth over time (Math and SEL)
• Gap with All Students
Fidelity of Implementation/Teacher Knowledge & Skills
• Mathematics SDI
• Social-Emotional Learning
• Implementation of Teacher Learning & Coaching
Demonstration Sites for Replication
District/School Implementation
University Personnel Preparation
WHO:
Baltimore County
• Mars Estates Elementary
• Scotts Branch Elementary
Partners
• Maryland Coalition for Inclusive Education
• Towson University
National Experts
• Professional Learning: Dr. Thomas Guskey
• Mathematics: Dr. Jenny Root, Dr. Paul Riccomini, Dr. Emily Bouck
• Social-Emotional Learning: Dr. Douglas Fisher
Howard County
• Hanover Hill Elementary
• Jeffers Hill Elementary
59
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Maryland Initiatives
Blueprint: Prekindergarten for Students with Disabilities
Program Current Description Funding
Prekindergarten Expansion
Grants Program (Prior Funding)
§7-101.2
Private and public providers may apply for a grant to provide full-day, high-
quality prekindergarten for 3-year-olds and 4-year-olds from families with incomes
at 300% FPL or below. Children with disabilities and English learners are eligible
regardless of income. There is no cost to the families nor the District.
The FY2023 budget includes
$26,644,000.
Grantees receive $13,000 per pupil
Maryland State
Prekindergarten Program (State
Share)
§5-229
§7-1A-01 to §7-1A-09
This program provides funding to LEAs based on prior year enrollment of 3-year-olds and
4-year-olds in full-day, high-quality prekindergarten. Private providers may apply for a
grant.
• Prior year enrollment is based on the count of Tier I children (at 300% FPL or below)
and Tier II (between 300%-600% FPL) (to be phased FY 2025)
• SWD who do NOT meet income requirements will not be counted as a part of prior
year enrollment
The FY2023 budget includes $144
million.
Funding begins at $10,094 per pupil
in FY2023 and rises to $19,526 per
pupil by FY2030, with increases for
inflation thereafter.
Current § 7-1A-01 Definition Proposed Expanded Definition
(i) “Tier I child: means a child:
(1) Who is 3 or 4 years old;
(2) Whose family income is less than or equal to 300% of the federal
poverty level; and
(3) Whose family chooses to enroll the child in a full-day prekindergarten.
(i) “Tier I child: means a child:
(1) Who is 3 or 4 years old;
(2) Whose family income is less than or equal to 300% of the federal
poverty level;
(3) Children with disabilities, regardless of income;
(4) Children from homes in which English is not the primary spoken
language, regardless of income; and
(5) Children experiencing homelessness, regardless of income; and
(6) Whose family chooses to enroll the child in a full-day prekindergarten.
60
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Maryland Initiatives
Blueprint: Funding for Students with Disabilities
61
Maryland’s Blueprint formula provides for Special Education funding each year that is the product
of a per-pupil amount and the number of “enrolled in a public school in the prior fiscal year who
required special education services as defined in the federal Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act” (5-225).
• The exact per-pupil amount each year is determined by the statutory Special Education funding weight,
where a weight is a proportion that is subsequently multiplied by a dollar amount, in this case the
target per-pupil foundation amount.
• The amount of the weight is identified in law and, overall, increases over time – in FY 23 the weight is
86%; In FY 33 and beyond, the weight is 146%.
• The FY 23 per-pupil amount is $7,147 ($8,310 * 100%); the FY 33 per-pupil amount is $18,053 ($12,365
* 146%).
In FY 23, the calculated per-pupil amount for Special Education students is $7,147
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
62
02.
28.2023
Special Education Minimum School Funding in Statute
Maryland’s Blueprint law does not restrict Special Education fund usage but does require LEAs to
ensure at least 75% of Special Education funds are allocated to the schools to directly support and
serve eligible students.
• Title 5, section 234 of the Maryland Education article requires that each LEA distribute “at least 75% of the per
pupil amount applicable to…the special education program under § 5–225…multiplied by the school enrollment
for the applicable program”.
• § § 5–234 and 5–406 require LEAs to demonstrate and report, via a new statewide finance and data system, that
funds have been allocated/budgeted and subsequently spent in accordance with the provisions of the law.
Required § 5–234 reporting begins in FY 25.
• State Special Education funding under Blueprint, governed by Md. Code, Education § 5-225 further states:
• Each school shall use the funds provided under this section to provide the services required by each student's
individualized education program or 504 plans.
• MSDE will provide additional accountability through annually sampling and auditing reported spending to ensure
reported spending matches supporting documentation.
Maryland Initiatives
| Maryland State Board of Education/Students with Disabilities
02.28.2023
Questions?
63