IFSP Tools

The National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center, aka NECTAC, the Western Regional Resource Center, or WRRC and the Early Childhood Outcomes Center or ECO  have released a new training package. The training package, entitled "Developing High Quality, Functional IFSP Outcomes and IEP Goals" is available for use as is, or it is easily adapted for time, audience or content.

A few EIFA board members (and perhaps even a few EIFA members) participated on the webinar hosted by NECTAC to announce the new training package. The training package includes an editable PowerPoint presentation along with training script, discussion topics, video vignettes and group activities. This training package was a collaboration between three technical assistance centers in response to the needs of states, localities and early intervention providers in the field. As family members we want to make sure that family leaders are aware of these new tools available to professionals who support families.

NECTAC has segmented the training into 6 distinct sections, so that trainers can adapt the training for content, time frame or audience. While the training is designed to address both IFSPs and IEPs, it can easily be used for one group or the other. The six sections are as follows:

Section 1: Setting the Context  
Section 2: Functional Assessment 
Section 3: Integrating Functional Assessment and Outcome Measurement with IFSP Outcomes/IEP Goals  
Section 4: Functional, High Quality IFSP Outcomes and IEP Goals  
Section 5: IFSP Strategies to Meet Outcomes and IEP Objectives to Meet Goals  
Section 6: Applying the Information: Practical Learning Experience  

One of the activities that we've seen used is the place mat activity. This tabletop activity is designed to spur discussion about the quality, function and participatory nature of a series of IFSP outcomes and/or IEP goals. One of the presenters shared her experience using the package in her state. The presenter shared that while this training is geared towards practitioners each of her training sessions included family members. The presenter also shared that the number one request from participants was the opportunity to continue to share draft functional outcomes.

We'd like to hear what you think about these new tools!

Call-in Day for Convention on the rights of People with Disabilities

In our Washington Update we told you about upcoming US Senate vote to ratify held the treaty on the Rights of People with Disabilities.  We just received the following information from the US International Council on Disabilities: 

URGENT!  CALL TODAY!!

NATIONAL CALL DAY FOR THE

CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

Now that the Senate is back from recess, the disability community's momentum moving for U.S. ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is at an all-time high.

With no time to waste, it is vital that we join as a community and do our part to make sure the U.S. is a part of this international disability treaty.

Today, the Home School Legal Defense Association has activated mass meetings throughout the country in opposition to the CRPD. We must NOT let this group use the disability treaty as a tool to advance their unrelated political interests!

ACTION: We are only one floor vote away from a ratification victory in the U.S. Senate, but we need to join together to keep the disability community's voice loud and clear!

Make a quick call to both your senators today and let them know this is a disability issue and the disability community SUPPORTS the CRPD!

EXAMPLE MESSAGE: "Senator, I am a constituent from your state and I support the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The CRPD is in the United States' interests, protects our disabled citizens and veterans abroad, and honors the Americans with Disabilities Act. Vote YES to ratify the CRPD - it is important to the disability community."

CONTACT: Find both your Senators' contact information here!

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Note: You can tweet your senator as well! For Tweets, please remember to use #CRPD!

For more information on the CRPD please visit USICD's CRPD Updates Page

Results, results, results

Today's post is brought to you by Maureen Casey, and represent her thoughts, they do not necessarily represent those of EIFA.  We are sharing them as a way to begin a conversation about the Results Driven Accountability System under consideration by OSEP.

As the parent of one early intervention graduate and a former member of two ICCs, I agree with OSEP that we need to move beyond compliance.  That is to say--we need to continue to insure compliance and collect data that demonstrates compliance--but we need to begin drilling down further to look closely at RESULTS.  But how do we do that with these large state systems?

Current Results Indicators

Indicators 3 and 4 (Child and Family Outcomes) are a beginning.  They help us to see the trajectory of growth and development of children enrolled in early intervention.  Some of the family outcomes data can help to paint a picture of how families are experiencing early intervention.  However, I have to confess I like the NCSEAM approach to family outcomes.  Having spent a lot of time with Batya Elbaum, and learning about the methodological approach to the NCSEAM and then really digging into the data and working with family leaders to think about what the data says and how to use the data for system improvement I like the NCSEAM.  I wonder how many states are using that data, with materials like those developed by Jim Henson at MSRRC to go beyond the indicators?  

Going beyond the numbers

I think about how data doesn't always show the whole picture.  When I hear from families who say that yes, they participated in their child's IFSP meetings but can only identify child outcomes and no family outcomes in their IFSP, despite rich narratives that lend themselves to the development of functional family outcomes.  Or listening to discussions about natural environments which start from the premise that it is either the home or a center, and fail to really connect families of young children with disabilities with the normal and natural activities that other families of young children are involved in.

A word about ICCs

I am glad that OSEP is using their website to expand their reach and to utilize social media to collect comments.  However, ICCs, which are required to meet at least four times a year have a more formal schedule that the ED.gov blog.  Unfortunately, this means that ICCs don't have the opportunity to reflect and respond to the ED.gov blog questions.  I would encourage OSEP to create a special opportunity to engage these important stakeholders who have experience in analyzing both the data and the implementation of the system in their respective states.

What say you?

How do we collect data that show the need for improvement on these very real and important results?   What do you think?  How is your state approaching results?  

OSEP Plans for Results Driven Accountability System

As OSEP staff begins to identify ways to move the accountability system from compliance to results, OSEP has used the ED.gov blog to post question about different aspects of the accountability system.  The third question, posted by OSEP on September 4, 2012 to the ed.gov blog is below:

RDA Question #3:
 
“The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires the U.S. Department of Education and states to focus on improving educational results and functional outcomes for infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities, as well as to ensure that programs meet IDEA requirements. As the department refocuses its accountability efforts, which IDEA requirements do you see as being most closely related to improved educational results and functional outcomes for infants, toddlers, children and youth with disabilities?” (emphasis added)

The EIFA board wants to insure that families are engaged and involved in the process.   It is important that we know which of the current Annual Performance Report (APR) indicators are compliance indicators and which are what are known as Results indicators.  You can visit the NECTAC.org website for an analysis of the 2012 APR indicators.  The opportunity to comment ends on September 14, 2012.

Compliance vs. Results

Briefly, the compliance indicators look at whether or not children were evaluated within 45 days of referral, received services in a timely manner and whether or not the state collected relevant data on those timelines and monitored the activities and data collection methods of those they contract with to provide early intervention services.  On the other hand, the results indicators are designed to generate and collect data that look at the outcomes of children and their families.   Indicator 3 looks at child outcomes or the percent of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who demonstrate improved:

(a) Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships);

(b) Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/communication); 

and

(c) Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs.

Indicator 4 measures the percent of families participating in Part C who report that early intervention services have helped the family:

(a) Know their rights;

(b) Effectively communicate their children's needs, and

(c) Help their children develop and learn.

As involved family leaders, EIFA members know that the ECO Center, in coordination with NECTAC and OSEP developed methods to measure, collect and analyze valid and reliable data that can demonstrate both the efficacy of early intervention and the impact it has on the lives of young children with disabilities and their families.  How do you think this data can be better used to improve outcomes?  Are there ways in which states and OSEP could better 

Washington Update

As part of EIFA’s collaboration with the IDEA Infant Toddler’s Coordinators Association (ITCA), the EIFA Board participates in what we call a bimonthly Washington Update with Maureen Greer and Sharon Walsh.  Below we would like to share a summary of our most recent call.  We will also have separate blog postings that talk at more length about each topic.

OSEP Plans for Results Accountability System

As OSEP staff moves from a compliance-driven system to one that also includes a closer look at results  they are seeking comments from stakeholders regarding how best to accomplish this task. On September 4, 2012, OSEP posted a third question on this issue. You can visit the blog, review past questions and comments and post your own comments.

EIFA wants to encourage our members to bring these questions to their ICCs. It is important that families and other ICC members participate in this process and share their thoughts, concerns and questions about how the system can insure positive outcomes for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families. EIFA will make every effort to share the questions as they are posted, through our Facebook page and to discuss the questions on our blog. Additionally, please see our related post on this question.

Sequestration

If you attended the IDEA Leadership Conference this year or last, you will have heard Sharon  Walsh discuss the issue of sequestration and its potential impact on Part C of IDEA.   In 2011, the United States was rapidly approaching our debt ceiling.  Congress created a bipartisan Super Committee to tackle the nation’s debt, which was unable to come up with solutions to the nation’s debt problems.   Unless Congress acts on its own, on January 1, 2013, sequestration or automatic spending cuts for both the Domestic and Defense spheres will go into effect. 

While no official action is being taken by Congress on addressing the nation’s debt, there are many discussions—some are trying to gauge how cuts will impact programs, while others are trying stave off any and all cuts to their preferred programs. It is important to remember that the reason that both Domestic and Defense Discretionary programs were included in the automatic cuts was to insure a bipartisan concern with the impact of spending cuts and to bring both sides to the table to develop alternative approaches.  Earlier this summer Senator Harkin issued this report on how sequestration might affect Domestic programs. A December 2011study found that investing $1 billion in health care or education creates significantly more jobs within the U.S. economy than spending $1 billion on the military. According to the Harkin report almost 27,000 fewer children will be served by early intervention across the country if the sequestration cuts go into effect.

Ratification of the United Nations Treaty on the Rights of People with Disabilities

The Senate held a hearing earlier this month to begin the process of ratifying the treaty on the Rights of People with Disabilities.  Initially this seemed to be an easy treaty to ratify, however, surprisingly a group of people, representing for the most part homeschoolers, has opposed the treaty citing concerns with their ability to homeschool and issues related to policies on abortion and sex education.  Unfortunately, this group has been able to slow down the ratification of this important treaty.  The U.S. International Council on Disabilities encourages family members of people with disabilities to contact their US Senators to ask for them to publicly express their support and willingness to vote yes.  See the website for the list of Senators who are on record supporting the convention.