Issues and Strategies for Measuring Outcomes for Children with “Speech-Only’ Eligibility

1. Issues and Strategies for Measuring Outcomes for Children with “Speech-Only’ Eligibility Jim J Lesko, Ed.D. Delaware Department of Education jlesko@doe.k12.de.us

2. Assessment Framework for Children with Preschool Speech Delays • Delaware uses the Child Outcome Summary Form • Multiple sources of information/data are used to determine each child’s COSF rating • Approved list of measurement tools • Children with disabilities other than PSD assessed with comprehensive curriculum measure aligned with state EC guidelines • Measurement typically involves 2 or more on team

3. Assessment Framework for Children with Preschool Delays • Recognize that the SLP may be the only person that completes the ratings • In conjunction with parent information and possibly practitioner data • Emphasis on parent involvement as an important source of data on other areas of development • Emphasis on other care/education practitioners as an important source of data on other areas of development • New requirement of licensed early education center facilities to assess children annually • Approximately 67% of children under five in care • Measurement occurs at entry, every spring and exit

4. Challenges • Sheer numbers on caseloads • Authentic assessment parameters when only speech pathologist available • Lack of opportunity for comprehensive observation by pathologist only • “Expertise” area is speech and language

5. Process Framework for Outcome 1 and 3 • SLP will administer one of four possible assessment instruments to obtain pre/post developmental information • Assessment instruments fall into 2 categories • Parent [and/or Practitioner] Survey • Interview Measure • Therapist chooses either survey or interview measure

6. Approved Instruments • Outcome 1 and 3 Tools • Parent/Practitioner Surveys • Ages and Stages Questionnaire and • Ages and Stages Social/Emotional Quest. • Or Child Development Inventory • Interview Tools • Vineland Scales II • Adaptive Behavior Assessment System • Outcome 2 Tools • Appropriate speech assessment tools such as the Goldman Fristoe Test of Articulation, Language Samples

7. Process • The state has made the assumption that children identified as preschool speech delayed are not presenting developmental issues in other areas – hence the use of surveys and questionnaires • Focus is determining that all functional-developmental areas remain on target • We are also going with the assumption that parents and/or EC practitioners are fairly accurate reporters of their children’s development

8. Process • We have worked with SLPs to monitor the survey or interverview responses and identify when red flags are raised • When red flags occur the SLP refers the child/family for further investigation or develops a close monitoring plan • ie., child presents with red flag in behavior and child has severe articulation concern • ie. – child presents with red flag in language or motor and has moderate articulation concern

9. Process • Literacy levels of families is a concern with the surveys • Return rate of surveys is a concern • Few complaints from SLPs on the process seen as a success • Assessing children that are English language learners remains a concern