State officials outline full waiver plan to address federal 1% cap on alternate assessments

State education officials on the state Special Education Advisory Council described the Indiana Department of EducationOffice of Special Education(SEA/OSE) submission of a full waiver application to the federal cap that limits alternate-assessment participation to 1% of valid test takers.

"It is a 1% federal cap on alternate assessment participation," said Melissa Cabalto of the SEA technical-assistance team, who presented the agencyupdate and the waiver materials. Cabalto said the waiver requires three components: evidence of meaningful progress (data), a meaningful-effort plan (the stateand LEAsaction steps), and a timeline for accountability. The state has moved from seeking an extension to filing the complete waiver application after a prior denial, she said.

Cabalto described six action steps the SEA has included in the plan: creation of a cross-divisional team to coordinate communication and guidance; a review and expansion of training materials for IEP teams and parents; clearer public communication and information access; proactive collection of participation evidence and monitoring data; updated monitoring procedures; and requirements for LEA assurances and post-window justifications.

Cabalto emphasized distinctions between assurances and justifications: an assurance is the LEAstatement that required training and procedures are in place; a justification is evidence after verified testing that explains why particular students were assessed on the alternate assessment.

Council members pressed staff on how the 1% metric affects local decisions. "It should always be what's the best outcome for the student," Cabalto said, adding that assessment placement is a case-conference committee decision and should not be presented to families as a system-driven quota. Council members reiterated that local teams, not the state, must make individualized assessment decisions.

Members also asked whether a few outlying LEAs drive the statewide percentage. Cabalto said EDFacts reporting places Indiana at about 1.25% but that state-adjusted figures that exclude certain nonpublic students are closer to roughly 1.09% (figure presented as approximate). She warned that differences in subject-level calculations (ELA, math, science), valid-test counts, and grade-span conventions—especially in science—can produce confusing LEA estimates and stressed the need for consistent data practices.

The council discussed consequences and remedies: the federal enforcement tool addresses administrative Title funds, not special-education funding, and state directors reported not seeing sanctions applied in practice. Several members urged legislative review of the alternate-diploma rules, saying that the diploma's availability appears to have increased alternate-assessment placement in some districts as a route to postsecondary employment.

Cabalto and other SEA staff said the waiver is intended to produce better documentation and support for LEAs (training, monitoring, and TA), not to supplant local decision-making. The state will use LEA assurances and detailed justifications to inform federal conversations and to target technical assistance where monitoring indicates noncompliance.

Next steps: the SEA is collecting additional LEA materials, finalizing the waiver packet (the action-plan portion begins around page 16 of the posted waiver document), and will continue outreach and office hours to explain diploma distinctions, participation guidance, and the justification process. The council will receive updates and the waiver will proceed through the federal review process.