Target Setting Guide: Indicators C9 and C10

Indicator-specific guidance is provided separately for results indicators where target setting is required, including C9 and C10-Dispute Resolution. There are eight sections that support target setting for this indicator. This indicator specific guidance is intended to be used as a companion to the general guidance.

Indicators C9 and C10: Dispute Resolution

Indicator C9: Percent of hearing requests that went to resolution sessions that were resolved through resolution session settlement agreements.

This indicator is applicable to a Part C lead agency only if Part B due process procedures under section 615 of the IDEA are adopted. This indicator is not applicable to a state that has adopted Part C due process procedures under section 639 of the IDEA.

OSEP’s longstanding position is that in the case of resolution sessions, targets should not drive a specific outcome and targets should not influence agreements made within resolution sessions. Therefore, the FFY 2025 target does not need to show improvement over baseline for Indicator C9. No specific threshold is required.

Therefore, states are not required to establish baseline or targets if the number of resolution sessions is less than 10. In a reporting period when the number of resolution sessions reaches 10 or greater, the state must develop a baseline and targets and report them in the corresponding SPP/APR. States may express their targets in a range (e.g., 75–85%).

Data for this indicator are prepopulated in the SPP/APR each year based on data submitted in the previous November under section 618 Table 4 of the IDEA through the IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey in the EDFacts Metadata and Process System (EMAPS). If the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the state’s 618 data, states must explain.

Indicator C10: Percent of mediations held that resulted in mediation agreements.

OSEP’s longstanding position in the case of mediations is that targets should not drive a specific outcome. Targets should not influence agreements made within mediation sessions. Therefore, the FFY 2025 target does not need to show improvement over baseline for Indicator C10. No specific threshold is required.

Therefore, states are not required to establish a baseline or targets if the number of mediations is less than 10. In a reporting period when the number of mediations reaches 10 or greater, the state must develop a baseline and targets and report them in the corresponding SPP/APR. The consensus among mediation practitioners is that 75–85% is a reasonable rate of mediations that result in agreements and is consistent with national mediation success-rate data. States may express their targets in a range (e.g., 75–85%).

Data for this indicator are prepopulated in the SPP/APR each year based on data submitted in the previous November under section 618 Table 4 of the IDEA through the IDEA Part C Dispute Resolution Survey in the EDFacts Metadata and Process System (EMAPS). If the data reported in this indicator are not the same as the state’s 618 data, states must explain.