1 / 52

OSEP Initiatives on Early Childhood Outcomes

OSEP Initiatives on Early Childhood Outcomes. Kathy Hebbeler Early Childhood Outcomes Center SRI International. Presented at ECEA-SCASS Meeting Savannah, Georgia October, 2010. Topics. What state are required to report State approaches Most recent data

efuru
Download Presentation

OSEP Initiatives on Early Childhood Outcomes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OSEP Initiatives on Early Childhood Outcomes Kathy Hebbeler Early Childhood Outcomes Center SRI International Presented at ECEA-SCASS Meeting Savannah, Georgia October, 2010

  2. Topics • What state are required to report • State approaches • Most recent data • Child Outcomes Measurement Framework Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  3. Reporting Requirement for Early Intervention and Preschool Special Education Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  4. Why does the federal government want data on child outcomes? • Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) • Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  5. Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) passed in 1993 • Requires goals and indicators be established for IDEA • Indicators and data collection for school age population included data on outcomes • Previously, for early childhood data had been collected on: • Number of children served (Part C) • Settings (both Part C and 619

  6. OSEP: PART evaluation results (2002) • 130 programs examined in 2002; 50% programs had no performance data • Programs looking at inputs, not results • Part C and Section 619 • No long-term child outcome goals or data • Department of Education needs to develop a strategy to collect annual performance data in a timely manner Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  7. IDEA 2004 SEC. 616. <<NOTE: 20 USC 1416.>> MONITORING, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT. ``(a) Federal and State Monitoring.….. (2) Focused monitoring.--The primary focus of Federal and State monitoring activities described in paragraph (1) shall be on-- (A) improving educational results and functional outcomes for all children with disabilities;

  8. OSEP Reporting Requirements: Child Outcomes • Positive social emotional skills (including positive social relationships) • Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/ communication and early literacy) • Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs

  9. What States Report:OSEP Reporting Categories Percentage of children who: a. Did not improve functioning b. Improved functioning, but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers c. Improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it d. Improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers e. Maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers 3 outcomes x 5 “measures” = 15 numbers

  10. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  11. Reporting details • Progress for all children who exited between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2010 • Stayed in the program at least 6 months • Data will be reported to OSEP in February 2011 • Data reported for the first time for children who exited in 07-08 year. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  12. The Summary Statements • Of those children who entered the program below age expectations in each outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 3 [6] years of age or exited the program. • The percent of children who were functioning within age expectations in each outcome by the time they turned 3 [6] years of age or exited the program.

  13. Formula for SS 1 (c+d)/(a+b+c+d) 13

  14. Formula for SS 2 (d+e)/(a+b+c+d+e)

  15. State approaches Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  16. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  17. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  18. State Approaches to Measuring Child Outcomes

  19. Child Outcomes Rating Form (COSF) • 7-point rating scale with defined criteria for each point • Criteria describe child’s functioning relative to same aged peers • Child’s team uses multiple sources of information to assign rating • Rating assigned at program entry and program exit Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  20. The State Data for ‘08-’09 Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  21. N=66,000

  22. N=113,700

  23. Early Childhood Outcomes Center A Framework and Self Assessment for Building a Child Outcomes Measurement System

  24. Purpose of the Framework • Provide a common language for ECO and other TA providers to use in discussing COMSs with states. • Provide a organizing structure of categorizing resources and state examples related to implementation of a COMS. • Serve as the organizing structure for the self assessment Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  25. Framework and Self-Assessment • Framework • Set of components and quality indicators • Provides the structure for the self-assessment • Self-assessment • Scale that provides criteria for levels of implementation within each quality indicator • Rating assigned based on level of implementation within each indicator Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  26. Process for Framework Development • Built off what we had learned from ECO work with states and previous ECO conceptual framework • Literature review • Repeated discussion and review internally and with 7 Partner States

  27. Framework Partner States

  28. COMSFramework Components Purpose Analysis Data Collection and Trans-mission Reporting Using Data Cross-system Coordination Evaluation Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  29. COMSFramework Components Purpose The state has effective procedures for collecting, storing, and transmitting data to the state. Analysis Data Collection and Trans-mission Reporting Using Data Cross-system Coordination Evaluation Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  30. COMSFramework Components Purpose State coordinates child outcomes measurement and data use across EC systems. Analysis Data Collection and Trans-mission Reporting Using Data Cross-system Coordination Evaluation Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  31. Quality Indicator • Provides additional detail as to what constitutes quality implementation of the component. • 18 quality indicators across the 7 components Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  32. Quality Indicators for Data Collection and Transmission 2. Data collection procedures are carried out efficiently and effectively. 3. Providers, supervisors, and others involved in data collection have the required knowledge, skills, and commitment. 4. State's method for entering, transmitting, and storing data is effective and efficient. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  33. Structure of Self Assessment • Components (7) = Major areas of framework • Quality Indicators (18 total) = Statements of basic requirements of a quality COMS • Elements (number varies with each indicator) = Define what constitutes high quality on the Quality Indicator. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  34. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  35. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  36. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  37. The Scale for the Quality Indicators Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  38. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  39. Recommended State Approach for Using the Self Assessment • Complete the entire self assessment. • Identify the component(s) and quality indicators to address first. • Develop action plan to improve the related elements. • Implement improvement activities. • Re-assess status and identify “next step” priorities at regular intervals Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  40. Is and Isn’t • Is a comprehensive resource to alert states to all the pieces that need to be in place to have a well functioning COMS • Is not a cookbook or roadmap with each step in the process spelled out. • Way too many decisions! Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  41. Where would a state start? Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  42. Packaging • Entire tool will exist online • Live link from each element to a “back up” section • Profile will be filled automatically based on the QI pages • Will develop a version with live links to the back up and profile that will operate off line. • Version that can be printed off as a manual. Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  43. Next steps for ECO • Populate the COMS framework with resources related to the components • Revise the self assessment based on feedback • Develop a framework for a Family Outcomes Measurement System Early Childhood Outcomes Center

  44. System for Producing Good Child and Family Outcomes • Prof’l Development • Preservice • Inservice Evidence Based Practice Good outcomes for children and families High quality services and supports for children 0-5 and their families Good Federal policies and programs Good State policies and programs Good Local policies and programs Strong Leadership Adequate funding Information infrastructure

More Related