Hawaii Part C FFY 2005 SPP/APR Response Table
Monitoring Priorities and
Indicators
1. Percent of infants and toddlers
with IFSPs who receive the
early intervention services on
their IFSPs in a timely manner.
[Compliance Indicator]
2. Percent of infants and toddlers
with IFSPs who primarily
receive early intervention
services in the home or
programs for typically
developing children.
[Results Indicator]
3. Percent of infants and toddlers
with IFSPs who demonstrate
improved:
A. Positive social-emotional
skills (including social
FFY 2005 SPP/APR Response Table
Status
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data
for this indicator are 69%. The
State did not meet its FFY 2005
target of 100%.
OSEP could not determine whether
the State made progress because the
State’s FFY 2004 data were based
on its previous definition of timely
services.
The State did not address timely
correction under this indicator.
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data
for this indicator are 81.1%. The
State met its FFY 2005 target of
74.5%.
Entry data provided.
OSEP Analysis/Next Steps
As requested in OSEP’s March 22, 2006 SPP response letter, the State included
the following in the February 1, 2007 APR:
(1) Confirmation its 30-day time period runs from parent consent;
(2) Data obtained using the updated timely standard; and
(3) The numbers used in its data calculations.
OSEP’s March 22, 2006 SPP response letter also required the State to include in
the February 1, 2007 APR data demonstrating compliance with the service
provision requirements in 34 CFR §§303.340(c), 303.342(e) and 303.344(f)(1).
The State’s FFY 2005 data indicate 69% compliance with these requirements.
The State must review its improvement activities and revise them, if appropriate,
to ensure they will enable the State to include data in the FFY 2006 APR, due
February 1, 2008 demonstrating compliance with the service provision
requirements in 34 CFR §§303.340(c), 303.342(e) and 303.344(f)(1).
The State met its target and OSEP appreciates the State’s efforts to improve
performance while monitoring to ensure compliance.
The State reported that it monitors IFSPs for natural environments requirements.
It is important that the State continue to monitor to ensure that IFSP teams make
individualized decisions regarding the settings in which infants and toddlers
receive early intervention services, in accordance Part C natural environment
requirements.
The State reported the required entry data and activities. The State must provide
progress data and improvement activities in the FFY 2006 APR, due February 1,
2008.
As requested in OSEP’s March 22, 2006 SPP response letter, the State clarified
data for this indicator is collected on a census rather than a sampling approach.
Page 1
 Monitoring Priorities and Status OSEP Analysis/Next Steps
Indicators

relationships);
B. Acquisition and use of
knowledge and skills
(including early language/
communication); and
C. Use of appropriate
behaviors to meet their
needs.
[Results Indicator; New]

4. Percent of families
participating in Part C who
report that early intervention
services have helped the
family:
A. Know their rights;
B. Effectively communicate
their children's needs; and
C. Help their children develop
and learn.
[Results Indicator; New]
The State reported baseline data for The State provided baseline data, targets and improvement activities and OSEP
this indicator are: accepts the SPP for this indicator.
4A. 78% The State’s FFY 2005 reported baseline data were collected between September
1, 2006 and November 11, 2006, which is beyond the FFY 2005 reporting
4B. 74%
period. In the FFY 2006 APR, due February 1, 2008, the State must provide
4C. 89% progress data from the FFY 2006 reporting period.
The State’s APR data were
collected beyond the FFY 2005
reporting period (see details in next
column).

5. Percent of infants and toddlers
birth to 1 with IFSPs compared
to:
A. Other States with similar
eligibility definitions; and
B. National data.
[Results Indicator]
The State’s FFY 2005 data for this The State reported slippage and OSEP looks forward to the State’s data
indicator under IDEA section 618 demonstrating improvement in performance in the FFY 2006 APR, due February
are 5.44%. These data represent 1, 2008.
slippage from the FFY 2004 data of
7%. The State did not meet its FFY
2005 target of 7.1%.

FFY 2005 SPP/APR Response Table Page 2

 Monitoring Priorities and
Indicators
6. Percent of infants and toddlers
birth to 3 with IFSPs compared
to:
A. Other States with similar
eligibility definitions; and
B. National data.
[Results Indicator]
7. Percent of eligible infants and
toddlers with IFSPs for whom
an evaluation and assessment
and an initial IFSP meeting
were conducted within Part C’s
45-day timeline.
[Compliance Indicator]
8A. Percent of all children exiting
Part C who received timely
transition planning to support
the child’s transition to
preschool and other appropriate
community services by their
third birthday including:
FFY 2005 SPP/APR Response Table
Status
The State’s FFY 2005 data for this
indicator under IDEA section 618
are 6.71%. These data represent
slippage from the FFY 2004 data of
7.3%. The State did not meet its
FFY 2005 target of 7.3%.
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data
for this indicator are 98%. The
State’s data were collected beyond
the FFY 2005 reporting period (see
details in next column).
The State did not meet its FFY 2005
target of 100% during FFY 2005.
However, in its January 4, 2007
Progress Report under its FFY 2006
Part C Grant Special Conditions,
the State provided detailed data and
analysis for the six month period
from June 2006 through November
2006 indicating compliance with
the 45-day timeline requirements of
this indicator.
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data
for this indicator are 86% (see
details in next column). These data
represent progress from the FFY
2004 data of 41%.
The State did not meet its FFY 2005
OSEP Analysis/Next Steps
The State reported slippage and OSEP looks forward to the State’s data
demonstrating improvement in performance in the FFY 2006 APR, due February
1, 2008.
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data were collected from July 2006 – September
2006. In its January 4, 2007 Progress Report under its FFY 2006 Part C Grant
Special Conditions, the State provided detailed data and analysis for the six
month period from June 2006 through November 2006 indicating compliance
with the 45-day timeline requirements in 34 CFR §§303.321(e)(2), 303.322(e)(1)
and 303.342(a).
OSEP appreciates the State’s efforts and looks forward to reviewing FFY 2006
data in the FFY 2006 APR, due February 1, 2008, that continue to demonstrate
compliance with the 45-day timeline requirements in 34 CFR §§303.321(e)(2),
303.322(e)(1) and 303.342(a).
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data were collected from July 2006 – September
2006. In its January 4, 2007 Progress Report under its FFY 2006 Part C Grant
Special Conditions, the State provided detailed data and analysis for the six
month period from June 2006 through November 2006 indicating compliance
and correction of all noncompliance findings regarding the IFSP transition
planning requirements in 34 CFR §§303.148(b)(4) and 303.344(h).
Page 3
 Monitoring Priorities and
Indicators
A. IFSPs with transition steps
and services;
[Compliance Indicator]
8B. Percent of all children exiting
Part C who received timely
transition planning to support
the child’s transition to
preschool and other appropriate
community services by their
third birthday including:
B. Notification to LEA, if
child potentially eligible for
Part B; and
[Compliance Indicator]
FFY 2005 SPP/APR Response Table
Status
target of 100% during FFY 2005.
The State provided additional FFY
2006 data in its January 4, 2007
Progress Report under its FFY 2006
Part C Grant Special Conditions
indicating compliance with the
IFSP transition planning
requirements of this indicator and
correction of findings.
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data
for this indicator are 94% (see
details in next column).
The State did not meet its FFY 2005
target of 100% during FFY 2005.
The State provided additional FFY
2006 data in its January 4, 2007
Progress Report under its FFY 2006
Part C Grant Special Conditions
indicating compliance with the LEA
notification requirements of this
indicator and correction of findings.
OSEP Analysis/Next Steps
The State must review its improvement activities and revise them, if appropriate,
to ensure they will enable the State to include FFY 2006 data in the FFY 2006
APR, due February 1, 2008, that demonstrate compliance with 34 CFR
§§303.148(b)(4) and 303.344(h).
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data were collected from July 2006 – September
2006. In its January 4, 2007 Progress Report under its FFY 2006 Part C Grant
Special Conditions, the State provided detailed data and analysis for the six
month period from June 2006 through November 2006 indicating compliance
and correction of all noncompliance findings regarding the LEA notification
requirements in 34 CFR §303.148(b)(1).
In its FFY 2005 APR, the State indicated that consent is required for LEA
notification. It is unclear whether the State has adopted an opt-out policy under
IDEA section 637(a)(9), 34 CFR §303.148(b)(1), and OSEP's 2004 Letter to
Elder. In the FFY 2006 APR, due February 1, 2008, the State must clarify
whether it has adopted such an opt-out policy and exclude from its calculations
(in both the numerator and denominator) for Indicator 8B, but provide a
numerical count of those children whose parents elected to opt out. In addition,
the State must ensure that such a policy is included in the State’s FFY 2007 Part
C grant application if it has not been previously provided to OSEP. If the State
has not adopted such a policy, then LEAs must be notified of the child’s name,
date of birth, and parent contact information as required by IDEA section
637(a)(9) and 34 CFR §303.148(b)(1).
The State must review its improvement activities and revise them, if appropriate,
to ensure they will enable the State to include FFY 2006 data in the FFY 2006
APR, due February 1, 2008, that demonstrate compliance with 34 CFR
§303.148(b)(1).
Page 4
 Monitoring Priorities and
Indicators
8C. Percent of all children exiting
Part C who received timely
transition planning to support
the child’s transition to
preschool and other appropriate
community services by their
third birthday including:
C. Transition conference, if
child potentially eligible for
Part B.
[Compliance Indicator]
9. General supervision system
(including monitoring,
complaints, hearings, etc.)
identifies and corrects
noncompliance as soon as
possible but in no case later
than one year from
identification.
[Compliance Indicator]
FFY 2005 SPP/APR Response Table
Status
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data
for this indicator are 94% (see
details in next column). These data
represent progress from the FFY
2004 data of 41%.
The State did not meet its FFY 2005
target of 100% during FFY 2005.
The State provided additional FFY
2006 data in its January 4, 2007
Progress Report under its FFY 2006
Part C Grant Special Conditions
indicating compliance with the
timely transition conference
requirements of this indicator and
correction of findings.
The State’s FFY 2005 data for this
indicator are 97%. These data
represent progress from the FFY
2004 data of 57%.
The State did not meet its FFY 2005
target of 100% during FFY 2005.
The State provided additional FFY
2006 data in its January 4, 2007
Progress Report under its FFY 2006
Part C Grant Special Conditions
indicating correction of most, but
not all, findings.
OSEP Analysis/Next Steps
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data were collected from July 2006 – September
2006. In its January 4, 2007 Progress Report under its FFY 2006 Part C Grant
Special Conditions, the State provided detailed data and analysis for the six
month period from June 2006 through November 2006 indicating compliance
and correction of all noncompliance findings regarding timely transition
conference requirements in 34 CFR §303.148(b)(2)(i) (as amended by IDEA
section 637(a)(9)).
The State must review its improvement activities and revise them, if appropriate,
to ensure they will enable the State to include FFY 2006 data in the FFY 2006
APR, due February 1, 2008, that demonstrate compliance with the timely
transition conference requirements in 34 CFR §303.148(b)(2)(i) (as amended by
IDEA section 637(a)(9)).
The State revised its FFY 2004 baseline data for this indicator in its SPP and
OSEP accepts the revision.
OSEP’s March 20, 2006 SPP response letter required the State to include in the
February 1, 2007 APR documentation that the State ensured the correction of
identified noncompliance, as soon as possible, but in no case later than one year
from identification. The State provided data for this indicator indicating 97%,
and OSEP appreciates the State’s efforts. In its January 4, 2007 Progress Report
under its FFY 2006 Part C Grant Special Conditions, the State indicated it had
corrected most (97%), but not all findings.
OSEP looks forward to reviewing data in the FFY 2006 APR, due February 1,
2008, that demonstrate compliance with the requirements in IDEA sections
616(a), 635(a)(10) and 642 and 34 CFR §303.501(b). In its response to Indicator
9 in the FFY 2006 APR due February 1, 2008, the State must continue to
disaggregate by APR indicator the status of timely correction of the
noncompliance findings identified by the State during FFY 2005. In addition,
the State must, in responding to Indicator 1, specifically identify and address the
Page 5
 Monitoring Priorities and Status OSEP Analysis/Next Steps
Indicators

noncompliance identified in this table under that indicator.

10. Percent of signed written The State did not receive any signed The State did not receive any signed written complaints during the FFY 2005
complaints with reports issued written complaints during the reporting period.
that were resolved within 60- reporting period.
day timeline or a timeline
extended for exceptional
circumstances with respect to a
particular complaint.
[Compliance Indicator]

11. Percent of fully adjudicated due The State did not receive any due The State did not receive any due process hearing requests during the FFY 2005
process hearing requests that process hearing requests during the reporting period.
were fully adjudicated within reporting period.
the applicable timeline.
[Compliance Indicator]

12. Percent of hearing requests that Not applicable. The State has adopted Part C due process procedures.
went to resolution sessions that
were resolved through
resolution session settlement
agreements (applicable if Part
B due process procedures are
adopted).
[Results Indicator; New]

13. Percent of mediations held that No mediations requested. The State is not required to provide its targets or improvement activities until
resulted in mediation any FFY in which 10 or more mediations were conducted.
agreements.
[Results Indicator]

14. State reported data (618 and The State’s FFY 2005 data for this OSEP’s March 22, 2006 SPP response letter instructed the State to reconsider the

FFY 2005 SPP/APR Response Table Page 6

 Monitoring Priorities and
Indicators
State Performance Plan and
Annual Performance Report)
are timely and accurate.
[Compliance Indicator]
FFY 2005 SPP/APR Response Table
Status OSEP Analysis/Next Steps
indicator are 97%. baseline data provided for Indicator 14 of the SPP and provide accurate data and
include improvement activities, in the FFY 2005 APR, due February 1, 2007.
The State did not meet its FFY 2005
The State revised its baseline data for this indicator in its SPP and OSEP accepts
target of 100%.
that revision.
The State’s FFY 2005 reported data were not collected within the required
reporting period for Indicators 7, 8A, 8B and 8C. However, the updated data
were collected in response to Special Conditions imposed on Hawaii’s Part C
FFY 2006 Part C grant. In the FFY 2006 APR, due February 1, 2008, the State
must provide FFY 2006 data from the FFY 2006 reporting period.
OSEP looks forward to reviewing data in the FFY 2006 APR, due February 1,
2008, that demonstrate compliance with the data collection requirements in
IDEA sections 616, 618, and 642, and 34 CFR §§303.176 and 303.540.
Page 7