inquiring families want to know: engaging families in the outcome rating process
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTIONInquiring Families Want to Know: Engaging Families in the Outcome Rating Process. Hearing Family Stories Gaining Family Insight Involving Families Adapted from materials developed by Naomi Younggren, 2011. Presenters: Shannon Dunstan, ID Kathi Gillaspy, NECTAC/ECO Pam Miller, MD - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
ECO Longitudinal - OSEP Leadership Mtng
Inquiring Families Want to Know: Engaging Families in the Outcome Rating ProcessHearing Family StoriesGaining Family InsightInvolving FamiliesAdapted from materials developed by Naomi Younggren, 2011Kathi1Presenters:Shannon Dunstan, IDKathi Gillaspy, NECTAC/ECOPam Miller, MDJudy Swett, PACER/NECTACJennifer Zielinski, IDJennifer Barrett-Zitkus, IL
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference2Introduction of speakersWhos in the room?
Turn over to Judy2Hearing Family StoriesEmpower families to be active members of the IFSP/IEP team
Encourage them to share their thoughts and ideas with you
32012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes ConferenceNot a separate process its really empowering families to be active members of team by asking to hear their stories
Encouraging them may be some prompts that can be used to get the family talking. More specific and deliberate than just asking, hows it going??
Cant separate the COS work from the IFSP or IEP not just something do at the beginning or end of the year.
This begins with evaluation and assessment process; how you initiate the relationship with the family to help them feel empowered and informed. It sets the stage. Dont hide information (family outcomes)
Gathering information in regular meetings with a family about how they see their child making progress. Some of that comes about from talking about outcomes and the strategies developed to address the outcome, checking in with parents about it went, what worked/didnt worked.
Were assuming that this information is then kept as part of the progress monitoring
As having those regular conversations, are setting the stage for the COS and the rating it will be more natural. Strong relationships and regular communication allow families 3Gaining Family InsightSetting the stage so families take an active role in interactionListeningAsking good questionsAsk for feedback, invite comments/reactions42012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes ConferenceStarts at the initial contact and builds4Interviewing PointersWestby, Burda, & Metha, 2003Use open-ended questionsUse restating repeating the exact wordsSummarize and invite opportunities to correct Avoid back-to-back and compound questionsAvoid leading questionsCautiously use "why" questionsListen more than talk2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference55Parent RolesTeam Member Information Provider & ReceiverParticipant in the COS rating discussion
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference66Equal team member with same respect, collaboration and honest would any other
Highlight here that it is NOT accurate to assume that parents dont want or cant handle the information in the COS they WANT and KNOW information.
Remember Parent RolesShare EC Outcome Information Early & OftenInclude EC outcomes information in discussions about progress toward outcomes/goalsInclude Parents in the COS Rating Discussion
Share Information Early & Often
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference7Red represents all the opportunities throughout the process to share/have conversations about child and family outcomes7What We Should Expect from Family Involvement in the COS Rating?Yes! They can provide rich information about their childs functioning across settings and situation.
MaybeThey will know whether their child is showing age expected skills.2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference88MaybeBut with prompts, can help them understand what IS typical, and where their child is right now.How Families Can HelpThey know their child best. As a partner on the team they can provide information about how their child: Gets along with family and friends Manages feelings Tries to do new things Communicates new ideas Tries to be independent Seeks help when needed2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference99You can't handle the truth!* Families can handle the truthWe need to be able to share information with them openly and honestly
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference10* Col. Jessup, A Few Good Men102012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference11Genuinely engage families in the entire process, appreciate their strengths, and reach agreement with them about their child.-Naomi Younggren11 Talking with Families about Child Outcomes Illinois Early Intervention Training Program
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference1212Illinois 25 Point of Entries (Child and Family Connections)Designated Service Coordinator Model (450)Vender Model Provider Base (5,000)
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference1313Introduction of Child and Family Outcomes 1414
Service Coordinator Overload1515Illinois EI Training Program Shift 2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference1616
Online Trainings1717Online TrainingsSystem Overview Online Understanding the Illinois Child Outcomes Process Online Training The Impact of Early Intervention on Families Online Training
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference1818
Face to Face TrainingSystem Overview Follow-Up Face to FaceOutcomes in Action Follow-Up EI Sponsored TrainingsEI InstitutesEI Cohorts
Provider Forums and LIC MeetingsLocal Provider MeetingsLocal Interagency Meetings 2020
21 (19,622 Active IFSPs)21Direct Opportunities for Family Support on Child OutcomesReferral Intake (Routines Based Interview )IFSP Meetings (Decision Tree)Monthly ContactExit
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference2222ResourcesECO Outcomes Video ECO Center WebsiteDecision TreeEI Training IFSP VideoIllinois Training Newsletter and Web SiteIllinois Early Intervention ClearinghouseProject Enhance
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference23Enhance Comparison with Child Assessments Study, we will compare information about childrens progress that is collected in different ways. We will examine the relationship between the summary rating process the program uses when the child starts and stops receiving services with the scores and progress documented in a formal assessment of the child. The assessment tools are the Battelle Developmental Inventory (BDI-2) and Vineland Scales of Adaptive Behavior (Vineland-II). Assessments will be given to children near program entry and program exit, around the same time as when teams decide on summary ratings. he Team Decision-Making Study, we will use videos of the childs team discussing how a child is doing to learn how teams describe a childs functioning and summarize it with a rating. We will investigate the discussion process the childs program uses to decide upon the appropriate rating. We will examine who is involved in the discussion, how long it takes, what evidence people describe, and how they use that information to decide on a rating. In the Record Review Study, we will look at information from a childs records. We will explore how the child was doing when he or she entered the program and the progress the child is making. We will investigate the agreement between the rating, the information documented on the rating form itself, and other information in the childs record, such as progress notes or practitioner observations. 23
Embedding the ECO Process into Early Childhood IEPsAs the Early Childhood Coordinator, I have also been working to evaluate our States Early Childhood Outcomes and Early Childhood IEPs. The Office of Special Education Program has a mandate that each state have accurate and timely reporting around Early Childhood Outcome.24
During the last two years, I have worked to evaluate the Early Childhood Outcome Indicator 7 data and processes for the State. I started by visiting over 75% of all developmental preschool programs, reviewing the Child Outcome Summary Forms for accurate reporting processes, cross walking the students entered into the State Early Childhood Outcome data system and students reported on District December 1 Counts, and facilitated a statewide survey regarding Idahos current ECO process. What I found was disheartening.25
During the 2010/2011 school year, Idaho under-represented students reported on December 1 and students reported in the Early Childhood Data system by over 1000 students.
I then looked at the State required Child Outcome Summary Forms, over a two year period for minimal compliance. To meet minimal compliance the current Child Outcome Summary Form must have included 6 components:It was completed as a team process, andParent input was documented, andAn observation or interview was conducted and that information was reported on the form, andAn Anchor Assessment was completed, andStudents present level of performance was documented in regard to age appropriate skills, immediate foundational skills, and foundational skills, andThe rating matched the information that was provided.
Parent involvement was documented less than 32%Documented age appropriate, immediate, and foundational skills less than 26% Students ECO rating matched information provided less than 10%Overall minimal criteria for accurate reporting less than 3% of the time
This information is based on a cross section of preschool IEPs reviewed during Child Count Verification during 2011 and 2012
As you can see the result put our Federal Reporting scores into question. Something had to change.27
A statewide survey was conducted and sent to all developmental preschool teachers and special education directors from around the state to get their input on the new process. The responses did not align with what was being seen in practice.
70% of Respondents were ECSE teachers55% have been working 10 or more years84% respondents ECOs was one of their primary responsibilities57% were initially trained by SDE 33% received training by a college or not at all
28Side by Side ComparisonSurvey Response70% proficient or expert
64% and 59% used team at entrance and exit
88% collected AA, IF, and F
71% used the decision treePractice Evidence3% met minimal compliance
77% and 86% used team process at entrance and exit
26% in 2012 and 20% in 2011 AA, IF and F documentedRating matched Evidence provided 10% 2012 and 8%In reviewing the documentation and the survey responses there was discrepancy. What respondents thought they were doing and what was found in factual reporting were:
70% of respondents felt they were proficient or expert at completing the ECO process yet only about 3% of the Outcomes were completed with minimal compliance
64% use a team process to determine entrance and 59% at exit The sampling did show a high percentage of team process with 77% documenting a team process 2012 and 86% in 2011, however the expectation is 100% utilize a team process
88% collect data on the AA, IF and F during assessment and observations only 26% noted AA, IF, and F on the COSF-R form in 2012 and only 20% in 2011 and 35% and 29% respectively reported an observation or interview on their COSF-R form.
71% use the decision tree Only 10% in 2012 and 8% in 2011 did the QA get the same score based on the information provided.
29Paperwork, just another formmore work not related to services providedjust what the state says to donot relevant, not a useful toolmore time, not enough time to process paper ECO areas are very broad in comparison to IEP goalsteam does not want to take the time so do it alonenot valued by the teamto subjectiveprogram will not change if ECOs goes awaytakes time away from teaching
current practice lacks, not a true picture of childprogress with most challenging students is not reflective in ECO reportingoutcomes do not reflect minimal growth of severe studentsdata is more important for developing goals and intervention then reporting outcomeseasier to see growth in IEP but not on an anchor assessmentRedundanttakes time way from kids; more meetings that takes time away from studentsEarly Childhood Outcomes are NOT Meaningful30unrealistic to get every parent to give inputnot parent friendlytoo long, too many stepsdo difficult to sit with family and develop IEP and fill out ECOs informationmakes families really sad to hear skills child is lackingtoo much grief for parentsdo not understand the need for ECO documentECO is only used to gather information and functional outcomes come out of the IEP as a team processCOSF forms takes a lot more prodding of parents for informationdifficult for parents to answer the question what are my childs strengths, hard for parents to articulate concernshow much parent input do we needparents dont know how to make sense of their child in regard to educationparent is not a valuable member until parent teacher conferencesgathering information from parents is good but not actuate for goal outcome without extensive observationsTeachers thoughts regarding Parent Input31So What to Do?
Change our perception to emphasize how the ECO process can promote quality programs and growth for childrenChange how we look at the whole childChange and give value to how we look at outcomes for childrenChange in attitudeChange, change, change.32
In cooperation with the National Early Child Outcome Center, Other State 619 Coordinators, School Districts from across the State, Special Education Directors, and Consulting Teachers new preschool IEP/ECO forms were developed, piloted, and modified based on input. THIS REQUIRES EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS TO DO NO ADDITIONAL PAPERWORK. Rather than completing two sets of paperwork, the ECO requirements have ben embedding into our state IEP form. 33Partnering with Parents
34Parent TrainingandInformation CenterPartner with Idaho State Department of Education
Educate, train and provide information to parents
Ensure parent involvement
Parent participation in decision making and planning
www.idahotc.comFind the following on the ITC:Online Learning CommunityEarly ChildhoodeGuidelinesEarly Childhood OutcomesTransitionsIEPsBest PracticeLeast Restrictive Environment
Housed at: Center on Disabilities and Human Development, University of Idaho
36Contact Information:Shannon DunstanEarly Childhood & Interagency CoordinatorIdaho State Department of Education Division of Student Achievement and School ImprovementDivision of Special Education(208) [email protected]
37Engaging Families in the Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process: A Framework
38Engaging Families in the Child Outcomes Summary Process:Video Resource
39http://marylandlearninglinks.org/1169539Engaging Families in the Child Outcomes Summary Process: Video Viewing Guide
4040Engaging Families:Locally Developed Resources
42Online COS Tutorial: Bringing It All Together
4343Questions?Thank you for coming!www.the-eco-center.org