SSIP Overview: State Experiences with Stakeholder Engagement

1. SSIP Overview: State Experiences with Stakeholder Engagement Part C/619 State Accountability Priority Area March 6, 2014

2. State Interagency Coordinating Council SICC Strategic Plan and State System Improvement Process (SSIP) Brenda Sharp

3. Stakeholder involvement in EarlySteps l Louisiana SICC+ Lead Agency + Stakeholders = Louisiana Part C

4. Beginning the SSIP discussion Opportunities for Input: • Review the Proposed SSIP • Discussions with SERRC • July 2013 presentation to SICC on proposed APR/SSIP • SICC voted to host a retreat to begin planning for the SSIP Where to Start?

5. September 2013 Retreat • The Louisiana ICC Strategic Plan • Reengage stakeholders in looking for a focus for system improvement Potential Indicator C11: Reviewing the Requirements

6. Assemble • SSIP Planning: SICC Member and Stakeholders gather to discuss Indicator 11 • Align State Initiatives • Look at other state early childhood initiatives align/overlap • Review Data • Review available data: APR, Early Childhood Redesign, Strategic Plan and OCDD Transformation Plan • Create Workgroups • What do we need to gather that we don't have? Look for trends and areas for improvement. SICC/Lead Agency SSIP Planning Retreat

7. Stakeholder Involvement in Hawaii Part C SSIP Stacy Kong

8. Hawaii’s Process for Stakeholder Involvement • Worked with a broad stakeholder group • Identified a small state team • Next step is to identify a small stakeholder group

9. Hawaii’s Broad Stakeholder Group • ICC Members • Dept. of Health Admin • Care Coordinators • Direct Service Providers • Quality Assurance Staff • Data staff • Personnel training staff • Contracted Providers • Dept. of Human Services • Dept. of Education • 619 Coordinators • Community Members • Head Start (HS)/Early HS • Parent Training

10. Hawaii’s Broad Stakeholder Process • Discussed with large group: • Overview of SSIP process • Data graphs • Small group discussion around indicators 3 and 4 to: • Identify potential focus areas • Identify other data needs

11. Next Steps around Stakeholder Involvement • Identify a small stakeholder group to support and complete the SSIP work with HI’s State Team. • Convene another broad stakeholder meeting in May to identify a focus area.

12. SSIP Overview: Phase I Tools and Resources Part C/619 State Accountability Priority Area March 6, 2014

13. Example: SSIP Phase I Activity and Timeline Chart

14. Example: SSIP Phase I Activity and Timeline Chart

15. SSIP Phase I Roadmap

16. SSIP Phase I Roadmap: Purpose • Based on draft SPP/APR package • Helps states: • Keep in mind the various SSIP activities that need completion for submission with the FFY 2013 SPP/APR • Understand key information about each SSIP activity • Plan and implement SSIP activities

17. SSIP Phase I Roadmap “Which way you ought to go depends on where you want to get to...” ― Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland

18. Roadmap Content • Each roadmap activity includes a description: • Brief highlights (purpose and what’s included) • Things to consider (e.g. potential questions) • Examples, where applicable • Potential tools and resources

19. Get Started What’s included: • Forming State Team • Identifying flow of activities and timelines • Engaging stakeholders • Inform broad group of SSIP • Consider using small small group to assist with data and infrastructure analysis

20. Get Started Considerations related to stakeholder engagement in SSIP activities - Examples: • When should stakeholders be included in the process? • Who will be included as a stakeholder? Will different stakeholders be included at different points in the process? • How will stakeholders be included in the process?

21. Conduct Broad Analyses • Includes broad data and infrastructure analyses • Questions to guide analyses - examples: • How do the percent of children exiting Part C functioning within age expectation in Positive Social Emotional skills in the state compare to other states? • Have there been statewide increases in the percentage of families reporting that the program has helped them help their child develop and learn? • What system components impact on low performance in the state?

22. Conduct Broad Analyses • Tools and resources – Infrastructure examples: • NCRRC SWOT Analyses: State Infrastructure • ECTA Systems Framework http://www.ectacenter.org/sysframe/ For documents not available on the web, contact your RRC state liaison

23. Conduct Broad Analyses • Data Tool - Example • SSIP Child Outcomes Broad Data Analyses Template http://ectacenter.org/~docs/eco/SSIP_child_outcomes_broad_data_analysis_template_FINAL.docx

24. Identify Focus/Results • Primary concern or Potential Focus for Improvement/Measurable Results • Considerations - examples: • Does the broad data and infrastructure analyses substantiate the potential focus for improvement? • Are there initiatives in the state related to this potential focus for improvement? Is the Part C/619 program connected to them? • Do you anticipate having leadership support around this focus area?

25. Identify Focus/Results • Tool – Example: • NERRC Review of State Context: Considerations in Identifying Measureable Result for Students/Children with Disabilities as Focus for SSIP

26. Conduct In-depth Analyses • In-depth data and infrastructure analyses related to primary concern/potential focus • Suggested steps for completing in-depth data analyses • Potential questions for in-depth infrastructure analyses • Which policies/procedures support practices that will lead to or impact improved outcomes for young children with disabilities in our selected focus for improvement? • Do we have sufficient funds to provide supports in building capacity of LEA/EIS programs to scale and sustain implementation of evidence-based practices? • Are there fiscal resources that could be leveraged to support the implementation improvement strategies?

27. Conduct In-depth Analyses • Tools and resources – examples: • Initiative Inventory for SSIP • Analyzing Child Outcomes Data for Program Improvement: A Guidance Table http://ectacenter.org/~pdfs/eco/AnalyzingChildOutcomesData-GuidanceTable.pdf For documents not available on the web, contact your RRC state liaison

28. Local Contributing Factor Tools http://ectacenter.org/~docs/eco/ECO-C3-B7-LCFT.docx http://ectacenter.org/~docs/topics/gensup/14-ContributingFactor-Results_Final_28Mar12.doc

29. Refine Focus/Results • In-depth analyses leads to refinement of Focus for Improvement/Measureable Results • Examples of Focus/Measureable Results: • Improving social emotional outcomes for children with disabilities • Improving literacy for children living in poverty • Improving families’ ability to help their child develop and learn

30. Refine Focus/Results • Considerations for a “good” Focus/Results – Examples: • What resources are already committed or could be leveraged for this focus? • Does the system have adequate capacity to support improvements in this focus area? • Will this focus make a significant impact on results? • Will change in practices and beginning improvement in child and family outcomes be able to be achieved in 2-4 years? • Tool – example: • SSIP Focus for Improvement Worksheet

31. Identify Improvement Strategies • Considerations: • Does the strategy focus on changing practice or address barriers such as infrastructure issues? • Is the strategy based on evidence-based solutions? • Will the strategy build local capacity to improve results? • Tools and Resources - Example • NIRN-SISEP Adapted Hexagon Tool • DEC Recommended Practices http://www.decrecpractices.org/input.asp For documents not available on the web, contact your RRC state liaison

32. Develop Theory of Action • Synthesis of information of information gathered • Simple “if-then” statement: If we conduct data analysis to determine area in which state will focus for improvement then we identify and implement strategies to build LEAs/EIS program’s capacity then we will improve performance in the area needing improvement and the identified result for children with disabilities. • Information on using a graphic or Logic Model

33. Develop/Review APR • Drafting SSIP in FFY 2013 SPP/APR - considerations: • Determine who is responsible for drafting • Identify who needs to review and/or approve • Creating a timeline for drafts to be submitted, reviews to be completed, and approval obtained • Review SPP/APR, obtaining stakeholder input

34. The END!SPP/APR Submission – February 2015

35. Contact Information Cornelia Taylor, ECTA/DaSy cornelia.taylor@sri.com Christina Kasprzak, ECTA Christina.Kasprzak@unc.edu Grace Kelley, SERRC Gkelley3@cox.net Anne Lucas, WRRC/ECTA Anne.Lucas@unc.edu Megan Vinh, WRRC Mvinh@uregon.edu Stacy Kong, Hawaii Part C Stacy.Kong@doh.hawaii.gov Brenda Sharp, Louisiana Part C brenda.sharp@la.gov

36. Thank you for your attention! This is the second half of the first webinar in a series on SSIP presented in 2014. Resources related to this call and other presentations in the series are available at the following URL: http://ectacenter.org/~calls/2014/ssip/ssip.asp IDEA DATA CENTER