How to Read an IEP: Arizona
Understanding Present Levels of Performance and Measurable Annual Goals
Arizona IEP Guide: Present Levels of Academic Achievement & Functional Performance
What is the present levels section of an IEP?
This is one of the meatiest sections of the IEP! This is where the IEP team lists the students academic and functional levels of performance. This is where you start to get a sense of where the student is at– and this section sets up the goals. Like if a student has difficulty decoding, you would see it here– and then should see a goal about it later in the IEP.
Because IEPs are written on all areas of student need, present levels sections include information on the student’s physical, socioemotional, development, and communication baseline as well as on their academics. There is a lot of variation in how districts label the various parts of this section but in every single one you should learn about a student’s skills in reading, writing, mathematics, and their overall development. In most districts that means communication, motor skills, and socioemotional skills– but some districts jumble those together and so omit any areas where the student does not have a need. In California, that would have gotten you in trouble on a state audit but in New Hampshire it is pretty standard not to see anything about motor skills in an IEP– so there is some variation state by state.
Arizona, which combines this section with the student strengths, has a nice clean lay out for this section. Click read more to see how Arizona divided up this section in the sub-sections I talked about of communication, academics, and so on.
Now, take a look at this section of the IEP from the Fresno district in California. They too have a section for communication and motor skills, but academic and functional skills are one sub-section that also includes socioemotional stuff.
The IEP from Oregon has only two sub-boxes– one for academic performance and one for developmental and functional development. In NH (not shown), there are three boxes– one for academic performance, one for functional, and one for developmental– and no one really has a clue how to figure out what goes in the functional versus developmental boxes!
You can see that the amount of content in the boxes varies a lot as does their labels but somehow, every single IEP from every single district is trying to provide a holistic picture of the student’s skills.
The filled out examples on the left are helpful to look at to get a sense of how long this section can be– because when I say this is the meatiest section of the IEP, I mean it is the longest!
Where are the present levels in the IEP?
Typically, this is right after the student strengths section on the second or third page of the IEP. There are a few rebel districts that shift a lot of this information to the student goals section or hide it later in the IEP, but generally this is near the beginning of the IEP.
How do present levels sections of an IEP vary across states and districts?
Every single IEP has present levels of some form. They have to. Some include strengths in it, some don’t. Some divide them up by communication, academic, and so on. Some don’t. Some even put the present levels in the goals. But every district has them– and they should all cover similar content. The labels that districts use and the number of boxes does matter though– the boxes guide what folks write so you will see different emphases district to district with maybe a child’s motor present levels being addressed in one and glossed over in another based on whether there is a box that asks about motor skills specifically.
This IEP comes from Spedtrack. See the full IEP here.
Because the images are hard to read, a transcript is below.
Present Levels of Academic and Functional Performance (PLAAFP) §300.320(a)(1)
Clearly specify the student’s current level of performance in the following areas: academic, non-academic, social, and emotional. Include a clear description of how the student’s disability affects his/her involvement and progress in the general curriculum. Be sure to address any and all areas that are impacted by the student’s disability.
Academic Strengths and Needs:
Kyra is an 18 year old 11th grade student and reported with ADHD and OHI for social and emotional challenges. Medical information was requested by the team to rule out Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder and Depressive Disorder.
Kyra is a student whose cognitive variability ranging from mild to average levels; as significantly more visual than linguistic; with relative strengths in working memory; and with significant normative processing weaknesses in language processing, long term retrieval, visual processing, and processing speed.
Kyra is currently schooling at home due to COVID 19 and doing well with her classes with the exception being that she is failing Algebra 2. She is not checking in with her teachers as often as she should and not asking questions for Algebra 2 assistance. She passed all of her classes for the first semester; however, failed Algebra.
Functional Strengths and Needs:
Kyra has a difficult time communicating with her peers. She can be socially awkward and immature. Kyra struggles with organizing her thoughts while writing, and she forgets steps when using multi-step equations. Kyra demonstrates good time management and does get her assignments in on the due date; however, many times her assignments are incomplete. It is a challenge for Kyra to use critical thinking skills and this may lead to poor decision making.
Behavioral Strengths and Needs:
Kyra is reported with diagnosed ADHD and to be taking medication.
01/13/2020 – Medical and emotional documentation from Kyra’s Dr. and Counselor from Central Behavioral Services was requested by the team.
Kyra qualifies as a student with Attention Deficit Disorder-Hyperactive Type (ADHD). She also has co-morbidity of Reactive Attachment Disorder. Due to her inability to self-regulate within the academic setting, This impedes progress without the support and services of special education. Due to this her ability to generalize on her academic performance and one on one testing in the classroom, her environment is greatly impaired. Her ability to self-soothe and regulate, as well as relate to others around her is a weak area for her.
Kyra is comfortable with sharing when she needs help when other students are bullying her. She knows that the bullying could lead to her anger coming out and she is well versed in seeking help before her anger escalates.
Kyra was in an in-patient treatment facility her freshman year due to anger problems that were mostly seen at home and not at school. She is also receiving weekly therapy for her anger. Again, Kyra does not display anger at school, and the few times she has asked to talk to her teacher or a counselor.
Records from in-patient treatment and Central Behavior have been requested; however, records have not been delivered at this time.
Independent Living Strengths and Needs:
Kyra was reported “at risk” for Activities of Daily Living from the BASC 3 Assessment and may need to follow up with a counselor or Vocational Rehabilitation Services for support with every day living skills.
Communication Strengths and Needs:
Kyra is comfortable with sharing when she needs help when other students are bullying her. She knows that the bullying could lead to her anger coming out and she is well versed in seeking help before her anger escalates.
Kyra does not reach out for assistance for her academics. However, she will accept assistance when it is noticed she is struggling.
Motor Skill Strengths and Needs:
Kyra also presents with fine motor integration skills at low average levels; and achieves commensurate with her visual spatial ability in all broad and individual special education qualifying areas measured.
Social/Emotional Strengths and Needs:
She does have a difficult time in social settings and understanding social cues. Kyra tends to laugh at inappropriate times and does not have many friends. When greeted with a hello, she responds with making an animal noise (this is something new this year). Also new this year is Kyra faking injuries, for example, she wore a scarf over her eye because she said that she had an eye injury. Many of last years issues have disappeared, such as, not getting to the restroom soon enough, asking for food all of the time, looking up inappropriate material on-line.
On the BASC-3 completed by the teacher, Kyra was reported with a Behavioral Symptom Index within “at risk” levels at school (T-Score, 62 – PR, 88), including Withdrawal as well as being clinical for Atypicality. She also was reported “at risk” for Internalizing Problems, including Depression and Somatization. Adaptively, the teacher reported Kyra to fall within the normal range.
On the BASC-3 completed by the parent, Kyra was reported with a Behavioral Symptom Index within “at risk” levels at home (T-Score, 63 – PR, 89). Kyra was reported clinical for Externalizing Problems, including Aggression and Conduct Problems as well as being “at risk” for Hyperactivity. On the BASC-3, both respondents report that Kyra is easily distracted, has a short attention span and trouble concentrating, upsets easily, and has poor self-control. Both also report that Kyra worries, prefers to play alone, and has some conduct concerns, including lying and sneaking around. At school, the teacher reports that Kyra responds inappropriately at times, such as making strange noises as well as babbling to self and laughing and seeking attention by acting hurt or self-harming when angered. The teacher adds that Kyra is over active, acts without thinking, and is sad appearing lonely. On the positive side, the teacher reports that Kyra is mannered, transitions well, is creative and resilient, communicates clearly, and tries to do well in school. At home, the mother reports that Kyra has conduct issues, including arguing when denied her own way, stealing, manipulating others, breaking rules, and disobeying.
She also is reported as overly emotional, labile in mood, and over reacting to stressful situations.
Information Provided by Parents:
Per Parent (last year’s IEP): At home, it was mentioned that Kyra used a knife to self harm on her neck and the scar was visible; threatening her mother and leaving bruises on her (according to her mother.) Her mother also reported that Kyra steals from her.
Kyra is 18 and responded with her needs. She wants and needs assistance and support for finding a job and independent living skills. She is uncertain about a career but has researched many different careers in floral design, modeling, animal caretaker, and construction. Kyra is taking a construction class and is making good grades in that class.
Classroom-Based Information and Observation:
English 11 – Kyra is doing fine but does much better when she attends in-person. She gets lost doing on-line assignments and she turns in her work but it is usually incomplete.
History – She does well but needs to show quality over quantity.
W. History – Kyra needs to turn on her completed work more often for a better grade.
Algebra 2 – Behind on assignments and has 7 missing assignments. Her final exam grade should bring her up to passing the class.
Observational Information Provided by Special Education Teacher and/or Related Services Provider:
Kyra has had a difficult year due to COVID and schooling. She has been learning from home and this has set her work quality back. She turns in her work, but it is not completed assignments and she is not asking questions from home for extra assistance. She made good grades and was able to keep up when she was in school and in-person.
Kyra needs to meet with Rehabilitation Services to assist her with living skills; job and food assistance. Kyra may need to continue seeing a counselor for depression and anger issues. She does very well with consistency and direction.
IEP: Kyra Hart (1/6/21 – 1/5/22)
Page 3 of 10
The present levels section should tell you what a student can do right now. That includes in reading. What level of text can they read? How is their decoding, fluency, comprehension? For areas where the student is working at grade level this might be as short as, “Juan is decoding and understanding tests at grade level according to classroom assessments.” Similarly, you should get useful information about the students’ knowledge of and skills in mathematics and writing. This should not just be test scores. It should be information that makes sense to a parent or a general education teacher. Jargon is a red flag. Often jargon and numbers means the case manager didn’t actually do assessments for the annual IEP– the numbers are often years out of date and a way to hide that no new assessments were done.
This section should also include more than academics. For example, there needs to be something in here about the student’s socioemotional well being and behaviors. If there are no concerns, awesome– it should say that. But in today’s world, how many kids with IEPs or kids in general are really totally fine? Not shy, not anxious, not disorganized at all? This section needs to include that information too– you want a complete picture of the student. If you don’t see that, then that’s a red flag.
Present levels also should include communication and motor skills information. If a student has concerns in these areas, those sections should be filled in by a SLP or OT or PT or APE teacher. If there are statements about concerns on any of those areas, that student should have services in those areas. If they don’t, that’s a red flag. If a student is in 5th grade and wiping out going down the stairs on the regular and that isn’t in the IEP, you want to know if a PT has screened the student. This is an area where you know you student/child– are all concerns reflected here and linked to services and goals? Or at least acknowledged with a note that there was a screening done?
Broadly, you need to see that all information in the present levels is current, intelligible to humans (not just numbers and jargon), reflective of the teams’ concerns, and linked to both goals and services. If there are a lot of concerns, you expect to see a lot of goals and services. If there aren’t a ton, then you expect to see that student on their own a lot in general education being successful.
What is it?
This is one of the meatiest sections of the IEP! This is where the IEP team lists the students academic and functional levels of performance. This is where you start to get a sense of where the student is at– and this section sets up the goals. Like if a student has difficulty decoding, you would see it here– and then should see a goal about it later in the IEP.
Because IEPs are written on all areas of student need, present levels sections include information on the student’s physical, socioemotional, development, and communication baseline as well as on their academics. There is a lot of variation in how districts label the various parts of this section but in every single one you should learn about a student’s skills in reading, writing, mathematics, and their overall development. In most districts that means communication, motor skills, and socioemotional skills– but some districts jumble those together and so omit any areas where the student does not have a need. In California, that would have gotten you in trouble on a state audit but in New Hampshire it is pretty standard not to see anything about motor skills in an IEP– so there is some variation state by state.
Arizona, which combines this section with the student strengths, has a nice clean lay out for this section. Click read more to see how Arizona divided up this section in the sub-sections I talked about of communication, academics, and so on.
Now, take a look at this section of the IEP from the Fresno district in California. They too have a section for communication and motor skills, but academic and functional skills are one sub-section that also includes socioemotional stuff.
The IEP from Oregon has only two sub-boxes– one for academic performance and one for developmental and functional development. In NH (not shown), there are three boxes– one for academic performance, one for functional, and one for developmental– and no one really has a clue how to figure out what goes in the functional versus developmental boxes!
You can see that the amount of content in the boxes varies a lot as does their labels but somehow, every single IEP from every single district is trying to provide a holistic picture of the student’s skills.
The filled out examples on the left are helpful to look at to get a sense of how long this section can be– because when I say this is the meatiest section of the IEP, I mean it is the longest!
Where is it?
Typically, this is right after the student strengths section on the second or third page of the IEP. There are a few rebel districts that shift a lot of this information to the student goals section or hide it later in the IEP, but generally this is near the beginning of the IEP.
What should I look for?
Anyone who has spent time on this site can tell that I am OBSESSED with high-quality present levels– so check out the pages on them! Here is the short version of a LOOONG rant. You need to see information about what a student CAN not can’t do. You should see clear, easy to understand descriptions of a student’s skills across the key domains of academics (reading, writing, and mathematics because that is how special education rolls), communication, development (which fine, I guess sort of, can include motor skills), and socioemotional skills. Note that in New Hampshire and some other states where the boxes are jumbled, you might not see all of this information– the team might only have in academic information and information about any other needs of the student.
How does it vary district to district?
Every single IEP has present levels of some form. They have to. Some include strengths in it, some don’t. Some divide them up by communication, academic, and so on. Some don’t. Some even put the present levels in the goals. But every district has them– and they should all cover similar content. The labels that districts use and the number of boxes does matter though– the boxes guide what folks write so you will see different emphases district to district with maybe a child’s motor present levels being addressed in one and glossed over in another based on whether there is a box that asks about motor skills specifically.
What does it look like?
IEPs on the left have been provided by states, districts, or advocacy groups as training IEPs and have been filled out. The IEPs in the middle and on the right are blank. Note that a particular district in a state might use a really different IEP format– these are just to give you a sense of what the IEP might look like.
Also, I was able to find blanks or demo IEPs from every state/region except D.C., Wisconsin, South Carolina, Hawaii, Alaska, and Alabama. If you know of any blank or demo IEPs from those states, please email admin@spedhelper.org! And if you know of more current IEPs from any of these areas, that would be great. Some are pretty old!
Arizona
This IEP comes from Spedtrack. See the full IEP here.
Fresno, California
This IEP comes from San Joaquin College of Law. See the full IEP here.
San Diego, California
This IEP comes from Voices for Children. See the full IEP here.
Idaho
Note that Idaho has the PLOP/PLAAFPs in the goals– so there are different PLOP sections for each goal area. I edited this to take out the goal language– but there are goals in the real document
This IEP comes from the Idaho Training Clearinghouse. See the full IEP here.
Indiana
This IEP comes from the Ripley Ohio Dearborn school district. See the full IEP here.
Louisiana
So Louisiana puts their PLOP/PLAAFP in the goals– but they have this extra section at the beginning called student information that also has a lot of the information for a PLOP. First part of the screenshot is what they are calling the PLOP, the second part is from the first page– but I thought it was worth including here too.
This IEP comes from the Morehouse Parish school district. See the full IEP here.
Maine
Not going to lie. I had to read this IEP a few times to understand what they were doing with their PLOP. Basically, Maine has divided their IEP into academic needs and all other needs. So there is a present levels, statement of need, and goals for academics and then a present levels, statement of need, and goals for everything else, like behavior or speech. It’s pretty unique so that took a few reads to figure out. This is stitched together because I am trying to only have the PLOPs here– but in Maine there are also goals for each of these.
This IEP comes from Lives in the Balance. See the full IEP here.
Minnesota
This IEP comes from the Minnesota Valley school district. See the full IEP here.
Mississippi
This IEP comes from the Mississippi Department of Education. See the full IEP here.
Missouri
This IEP comes from the Missouri Department of Education. See the full IEP here.
New Jersey
This IEP comes from the Gloucester County school district. See the full IEP here.
North Carolina
This IEP comes from the North Carolina department of public instruction. See the full IEP here.
Oregon
This IEP comes from the Oregon Department of Education. See the full IEP here.
Pennsylvania
This IEP comes from the Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance department. See the full IEP here.
Tennessee
This IEP comes from the Tennessee Department of Education. See the full IEP here.
Washington
This IEP comes from the Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. See the full IEP here.
Arkansas
This IEP comes from the Arkansas division of elementary and secondary education. See the full IEP here.
Colorado
This IEP comes from the Colorado department of education. See the full IEP here.
Connecticut
This IEP comes from the Connecticut department of education. See the full IEP here.
Delaware
Delaware continues to be an outlier. They call PLOP/PLAAFPS PLEPs! Also they are under goals, not a separate section.
This IEP comes from the Delaware department of education. See the full IEP here.
Florida
This Palm Beach IEP comes from the state’s guardian ad litem office. See the full IEP here.
Georgia
This IEP comes from the Georgia department of education. See the full IEP here.
Iowa
Note that Iowa has a section named present levels that has a mixture of concerns, strengths, and special factors– but the actual narrative is hidden under individual annual goals.
This IEP comes from the Iowa department of education. See the full IEP here.
Kansas
I put in several of the present levels section for Kansas above. In addition to these, there are present levels for motor skills and problem-solving creativity. Interestingly, these are not the goals– goals come later! There are just really, really long and detailed present levels for Kansas.
This IEP comes from the Kansas Department of Education. See the full IEP here.
Kentucky
This IEP comes from the Kentucky Department of Education. See the full IEP here.
Maryland
This IEP comes from the Maryland state department of education. See the full IEP here.
Massachusetts
This IEP comes from the Massachusetts department of education. See the full IEP here.
Michigan
This IEP comes from the Macomb Intermediate School District. See the full IEP here.
Montana
This IEP comes from the Montana Office of Public Instruction. See the full IEP here.
Nebraska
This IEP comes from the Nebraska Department of Education. See the full IEP here.
Nevada
This IEP comes from the Nevada Department of Health & Human Services Aging and Disability Services Division. See the full IEP here.
New Hampshire
This IEP comes from the New Hampshire Department of Education. See the full IEP here.
New Mexico
New Mexico has a traditional PLOP/PLAAFP above and also more details on similar content earlier in the IEP, below.
This IEP comes from the New Mexico Public Education Department. See the full IEP here.
New York
This IEP comes from the Rochester City School District. See the full IEP here.
North Dakota
This IEP comes from the North Dakota brain injury network. See the full IEP here.
Ohio
Ohio has present levels under goals– and also, see below, a check box later in the IEP.
This IEP comes from the educational service center of northeast Ohio. See the full IEP here.
Oklahoma
This IEP comes from the Oklahoma state department of education. See the full IEP here.
Rhode Island
This IEP comes from the Rhode Island state department of education. See the full IEP here.
South Dakota
This IEP comes from the South Dakota department of education. See the full IEP here.
Texas
This IEP comes from the Texas education agency. See the full IEP here.
Vermont
This IEP comes from the Vermont agency of education. See the full IEP here.
Virginia
This IEP comes from the William and Mary school of education. See the full IEP here.
West Virginia
West Virginia has a PLOP/PLAAFP section and a second section with assessment results.
This IEP comes from the West Virginia department of education. See the full IEP here.
Wyoming
This IEP comes from the Wyoming department of education. See the full IEP here.
Arizona IEP Guide: Measurable Annual Goals
What are the annual goals in an IEP?
This is one of the most, if not the most, important part of the IEP. This is where the IEP team lays out what the student will be working on with special education support over the next year. Generally, the goals written by the special education teacher fall into the reading, writing, math, and socioemotional buckets. So you might see a goal for reading comprehension, one for multivariable equations, and one for work completion or managing frustration. Related service providers, like speech and language pathologists or counselors, will also write their own goals so there might also be goals from them on communication, self-regulation, or other skills. Generally, looking at a student’s goals gives you the best sense of where the student is and the biggest thing the team thinks they need to work on.
Each goal will have two key parts– the goal itself, which should be measurable and easy to understand– and a baseline which says where a student is now. You might also see benchmarks, also known as objectives. These are ways to break down the goal for monitoring at report card intervals. Fun fact, if you didn’t know– special education teachers are responsible for reporting on each student’s progress towards each goal at report card intervals. So when you do report card (or they do, depending on the school), they are also writing narratives on every single goal. That’s one of the main reasons that special education teachers work to keep goals to a minimum– don’t assume that all of a student’s needs are covered by their goals. Instead, assume that the goals are the biggest needs and the special education teacher was refusing to do bonus paperwork for the lesser needs. In line with this, a lot of goals will also tell you how the parent will be notified of progress. Regardless of language, assume that when the report card goes home, parents are supposed to also get a goals’ progress narrative.
Where are the annual goals found in an IEP?
Goals are always after the present levels. In some districts, they are the last things in the IEPs. In others, they are in the middle, but they are always after the present levels.
How do goals vary across states and districts?
Every single district will have measurable annual goals and baselines. Some districts split up the baselines, like listing an academic and functional baseline. Some don’t. Some list the quarterly benchmarks in the IEP. Some don’t. Some districts use goal writing tools that write weird, generic goals. Some don’t. But because IEP goals are the heart of an IEP, every single district will have them– and will have the goal and the baseline in separate boxes.
This IEP comes from Spedtrack. See the full IEP here.
Because the images can be hard to read, a transcript is below.
Measurable Annual Goals, Benchmarks or Short-term Objectives (§300.320(a)(2))
*Measurable annual goals should ensure the student’s access to the general curriculum. Annual goals that meet other education needs and support measurable postsecondary goals can also be included. Ensure that benchmarks or short-term objectives are included for any student who qualifies to take the alternate assessment.
Area:
Measurable Annual Goal #1
By the end of her senior year, Kyra will write an essay addressing a writing prompt and achieving an 80% on her rubric.
How will progress toward meeting the annual goal be measured?
This will be measured by a graded writing rubric.
Progress toward Annual Goals (§300.320(a)(3))
Describe how parent(s) will be notified of student’s progress towards measurable annual IEP goals. This should, at minimum, be at least as often as general education peers are notified of their academic progress.
Progress will be reported to the parent(s)/guardian(s): Quarterly
Mastery Criteria Level:
Baseline:
IEP: Kyra Hart (1/6/21 – 1/5/22)
Page 5 of 10
Area:
Measurable Annual Goal #2
By the end of her Senior year, Kyra will solve and achieve a 70% on graphing linear equations.
How will progress toward meeting the annual goal be measured?
This will be measured by worksheets; tests; and quizzes.
Progress toward Annual Goals (§300.320(a)(3))
Describe how parent(s) will be notified of student’s progress towards measurable annual IEP goals. This should, at minimum, be at least as often as general education peers are notified of their academic progress.
Progress will be reported to the parent(s)/guardian(s): Quarterly
Mastery Criteria Level:
Baseline:
So the big focus of this entire website is on how to write strong goals– that means that if you want a detailed answer to this question, click on the goals tab! But the short answer is that you want to see goals that make sense. You know your student or child. What are their biggest areas of need? IEP goals don’t cover everything– but whatever you think are the most pressing issues need to be in the goals. You also should see language that makes sense. You need to be able to read these and immediately know what the student needs to do and what they can do now. The goals drive special education supports so if they don’t make sense, it is likely the services your student/child receives won’t either.
