State Snapshots of Promising Practices by SPP/APR Indicator

Iowa Part C, along with their early childhood partners and support from ECTA, DaSy, and others, have designed and implemented a new data system with promising functionality to enhance the capacity of the state and local staff to integrate the child outcomes measurement across key IFSP processes. Iowa's comprehensive and integrated data system has specifically been designed to:

• Yield more complete and high-quality child outcomes data
• Improve practitioner understanding of the connection between outcomes measurement and IFSP development and implementation
• Generate more functional IFSP outcomes

One clever mechanism built into the system allows users to tag information about a child's functioning collected during the initial evaluation and assessment, for instance, with a particular outcome area. There is a built-in decision-making process for IFSP/COS teams to determine a child's rating for each outcome area using information that has been tagged and compiled about a child's functioning. The system then connects the appropriate functional skills to prompts for creating functional outcomes by populating IFSP forms based on these inputs, allowing teams to be more efficient and thorough.

South Dakota's early intervention staff have been making the case for measuring child and family outcomes and using child outcomes data to improve program effectiveness at the state and local levels. In consultation with DaSy and ECTA, SD EI included their Interagency Coordinating Council (ICC) members and local program administrators in identifying and sharing key child outcomes data analysis including disaggregation, pattern-checking, and crosstabulation with other data.

SD EI strengthened their culture of data use by creating opportunities and resources to foster a deeper understanding of these data and how they could be meaningfully applied. Additionally, they have a promising strategy to build and sustain this effort by making prioritized reports regularly available, supporting analysis at the local level, and involving the broader early childhood system by regularly presenting on this topic at the State's annual early childhood conference.

Illinois has prioritized family engagement efforts to ensure that data gathering activities better represent family voices, emphasizing those that are historically under-represented. As part of their plan to strengthen family engagement, the state accepted an invitation to receive TA support for improved family outcomes. Strategies employed included:

1. Creating webinars for families and providers to raise awareness of rights, services and supports available to strengthen child and family outcomes;
2. Publishing an article about the survey for the Parent Training and Information Center (PTI) newsletter; and
3. Documenting their survey processes, and examining potential biases and inequities introduced throughout the survey process which may affect the survey results

As a result of these efforts, the return rate for family outcomes survey responses more closely matches the distribution rates across demographic groups. Consequently, data-based decision-making is more informative with a wider spectrum of family voices represented.

New York has identified concerns that the state's family outcomes data was not representative and therefore, improvement strategies may not reflect the needs of the population. With African American and Hispanic families being under-represented, State staff wanted greater insight into geographic and demographic trends related to a family's experience in the Part C program. The overall goal is to improve all parents' experience within the Early Intervention Program. Through an intensive TA process, New York instituted several process improvements, including developing an infographic and brochure to explain the importance of the survey in a way that is motivational to families, as well as a video vignette to further support family engagement efforts.

The Texas Part C team wanted to empower local programs to use family outcome data to inform program improvements. Working with DaSy TA staff, the TX-C team (including state staff and local program leaders), decided to create local program-level data dashboards. The draft dashboards depicted family survey response rates and scoring by family demographic characteristics and other selected variables. Following the pilot, the team successfully launched the dashboards statewide, including guidance documents to help program leaders utilize the data in a continuous improvement (Look! Think! Act!) process.

New Hampshire has focused and amplified the intersection of effective early childhood transition and family engagement. For the past 15 years, the New Hampshire Parent Information Center has been a funded partner in C to B transition. Throughout this process, there has been equal representation between families, providers, and Part C and Part B, Section 619 voices. This began when the State Advisory Group defined potentially eligible and continued as they developed interagency agreements with families as part of the team.

Similarly, New Hampshire has developed key resources to support effective and seamless transition, including the Race 2K TA Center that facilitates the development and implementation of 10 Regional Interagency Agreements for early childhood transitions, and Who's Doing What in Early Childhood Transitions, an online module that shares information on the transition process with early intervention and preschool special education staff.

North Carolina has focused on effective collaborative partnerships between Part C EI and Part B, Section 619 preschool programs. Recently, NC has revised Guiding Practices for Early Childhood Transition. This guide provides an outline of activities, timelines, and recommended practices to facilitate a child's seamless transition from North Carolina IDEA Part C EI program to the Part B, Section 619 preschool program.

North Carolina also revised the Early Childhood Transitions in North Carolina: A Parent's Guide to the Infant-Toddler and Preschool Programs. This document was developed to support families when discussing the transition process and includes information on the difference between Part C early intervention and Part B, Section 619 preschool special education program.

To support local implementation, North Carolina has also developed a Local Catchment Area Transition (CAT) Plan that can be used to ensure consistent transition practices and procedures between a Part C early intervention lead agency and Part B, Section 619 preschool local educational agency.

All of these documents and resources underscore the importance of engaging in effective collaborative partnership from all programs to ensure a seamless transition for children with disabilities and their families.

In South Carolina, Early Childhood Special Education leaders recently have undertaken promising practices to improve child outcomes data collection, data quality, and systems change for better data quality and usefulness (Indicator 7) with support from the Center for Early Childhood Data Systems (DaSy Center) and Early Childhood Technical Assistance (ECTA) staff. After recognizing variability in how districts train and support staff with the Child Outcomes Summary (COS) process, state leaders engaged with TA center staff to embed the national COS Process Online Module and the Child Outcomes Summary Knowledge Check (COS-KC) in their learning management system to create a COS course.

The course includes state-specific guidance about why child outcomes data are collected, how they are used, and what to expect in the COS process. Local special education directors designate who completes the COS course and COS-KC. At the same time, early childhood leaders in SC used resources on pattern checking for data quality and worked on recommended changes to the early childhood performance factor for district determinations. As part of the data dive, a graduate student intern generated data reports for use by state TA providers for each district showing COS data at entry, exit, and over time.

DaSy and ECTA TA staff worked with state staff and state TA providers to understand and interpret district data patterns so that they could meet with districts needing extra support to dig into unexpected data, ask questions about root causes, and together plan activities to strengthen child outcomes knowledge, data collection, and data quality.

South Carolina's many promising practices, including clear guidance, more accessible professional learning opportunities, an available COS-KC, and support with COS data pattern review, have been implemented in advance of planned changes to the state's focus on COS data as part of district determinations. While South Carolina recognizes that it will take time before these activities result in practice changes that improve child outcomes data quality, the state's activities show a lot of promising practices for future growth in this area.

Colorado's preschool special education team has prioritized the local use of child outcomes data to improve program effectiveness and strengthen family engagement. Through TA consultation with ECTA and DaSy, Colorado collaborated with LEAs to identify critical questions that LEAs will use their data to answer around key drivers for positive outcomes. As part of this process, Colorado worked with LEAs to draft a consistent vision for data use at the local level.

Colorado has strengthened engagement with local leaders through this process and has been modeling the use of these data to answer these questions at the state level. Additionally, the State and partners such as the PEAK Parent center, have focused on leveraging this shift to a culture of data use to improve the information available for and communications with parents by local systems.

Improving Child Outcomes in Colorado

1. Vision:
   • We work together on data relevant to children and families that promotes inclusion and shows progress in routines.
   • Data culture is part of the fabric of what we do, data helps us tell the story.
2. Critical Question: What do families report help their child develop and learn?
3. Critical Question: How do outcomes for children differ between service-delivery models (structure and practices)?
4. Critical Question: What is the quality of the Early Childhood program where young children receive special education services?

Figure: Improving Child Outcomes in Colorado (Text Description)

A venn diagram of three circular elements:

• Service Delivery Model
• Families
• Program Quality

Each element overlaps with the other two. All three overlap in the center as Positive Outcomes:

• Unique needs of children (overlap between Service Delivery Models, Families)
• Inclusive Environments (overlap between Families, Program Quality)
• Funded Programs (overlap between Program Quality, Service Delivery Models)

The numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4—referring to the vision and critical questions—are arrayed clockwise around the diagram.