SPP Indicators B-7 and B-8: Overview and Results to Date for

the Florida Prekindergarten Program for Children with

Disabilities

PreK Coordinators MeetingOrlando, FL - May 6, 2010

Batya ElbaumUniversity of Miami

2

State Performance Plan

The current SPP began in FY 2005-06 and will remain in effect through FY 2010 - 2011

Each year, States must submit an Annual Performance Report to OSEP that reports on state-level progress on each indicator

Each year, LEA performance must be reported publicly

3

Critical features of the SPP

Valid and reliable data Report of baseline data Selection of targets Improvement or slippage Improvement activities

SPP/APR Part B Indicator #8

“Percent of parents with a child receiving special education services who report that schools facilitated parent involvement as a means of improving services and results for children with disabilities.”

Preschool parent survey items parents agree with most

People from preschool special education, including teachers and other service providers, are available to speak with me.

People from preschool special education treat me as an equal team member.

Preschool parent survey items parents agree with less

My recommendations are included on the IEP/IFSP.

I am part of the IEP/IFSP decision-making process.

Preschool parent survey items parents agree with a lot less

People from preschool special education explain what options parents have if they disagree with a decision made by the preschool special education program.

People from preschool special education give me options concerning my child’s services and supports.

Parent survey items parents agree with least

People from preschool special education give parents the help they may need, such as transportation, to play an active role in their child’s learning and development.

I have been asked for my opinion about how well preschool special education services are meeting my child’s needs.

How we get the percent on the indicator

We calculate a measure on the scale for each parent. We can display these in a graph that allows us to visualize the results for the group as a whole.

We apply the state-determined minimum standard of a measure of 600.

We count the number of parents with measures at or above 600 and divide by the number of parents who responded to the survey.

The result is the percent on the indicator.

Distribution of measures for parents of preschool children 2008-09

FL Results for B-8

Percent of SEPPS Measures at or above the Standard

Year Parents of Children in Grades

K-12

Parents of Preschool Children

2005-06 26.7% 39.8%

2006-07 29.0% 44.0%

2007-08 31.7% 46.3%

2008-09 31.7% 43.2%

Progress towards targets

Target

2008-09

Performance Met target?

47% of parents with a preschool child

receiving special education services report

that schools facilitate parent involvement as

a means of improving services and results for

children with disabilities.

43.2% No

38% of parents with a child in K-12 receiving

special education services report that

schools facilitate parent involvement as a

means of improving services and results for

children with disabilities.

31.7% No

Response rates Number of 2009 responses and

response rates (mailed survey) K-12: 8.9%; n = 13,369 PreK: 15.5% n = 3,479

Number of 2010 responses as of 4/15/10 (online + paper) K-12: 0-540; 14 districts > 100; n =

4,123 PreK: 0-67; 8 districts > 20; n =

593

Activities to boost response rates and facilitate parent involvement

Activities at the state level Activities at the district level Activities at the school level

SPP/APR Part B Indicator #7

“Percent of preschool children with IEPs who demonstrate improved: Positive social-emotional skills

(including social relationships); Acquisition and use of knowledge and

skills (including early language/ communication and early literacy); and

Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs.”

16

Child Outcomes Reporting Categories

For each outcome area we must report: A - % of children who did not improve functioning B - % of children who improved functioning but not

sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers

C - % of children who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it

D - % of children who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers

E - % of children who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers

Florida’s use of BDI-2 assessment data

Developmental status measured at program entry and program exit

A standard score of 78 or above (>-1.5 SD) is considered to represent a level of functioning that is “comparable to same-aged peers”

Florida’s use of BDI-2 assessment data

Indicator 7-A: Personal-Social domain

Indicator 7-B: Communication domain

Indicator 7-C: Adaptive domain

Summary statement #1 Of those preschool children who entered the

preschool program below age expectations in each Outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. (c+d/a+b+c+d) for each outcome category)

Outcome A: 66.2% Outcome B: 59.2% Outcome C: 59.9%

Summary statement #2 The percent of preschool children who

were functioning within age expectation in each Outcome by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. (d+e/a+b+c+d+e) for each outcome category)

Outcome A: 75.8% Outcome B: 52.8% Outcome C: 73.6%

21

Child Outcomes Reporting Requirements

Baseline data reported in February 2010 (reflecting assessments of children who exited in 2008-09)

State and school district outcomes will be publicly reported beginning in 2011, when we will report progress towards targets

TargetsFFY Measurable and Rigorous Target

2009 (2009-2010)

Summary Statement 1: Of those preschool children who entered the preschool program below age expectations in each Outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. Outcome A: 66.2% Outcome B: 59.2% Outcome C: 59.9% Summary Statement 2: The percent of preschool children who were functioning within age expectation in each Outcome by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. Outcome A: 75.8% Outcome B: 52.8% Outcome C: 73.6%

2010 (2010-2011)

Summary Statement 1: Of those preschool children who entered the preschool program below age expectations in each Outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. Outcome A: 66.3% Outcome B: 59.3% Outcome C: 60.0% Summary Statement 2: The percent of preschool children who were functioning within age expectation in each Outcome by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. Outcome A: 75.9% Outcome B: 52.9% Outcome C: 73.7%

Factors that may affect reported percentages on this indicator

Factors related to data collection Completeness of assessment data Reliability of assessment data

Accurate basals and cielings Proper administration of items Accurate scoring of items Accurate scoring of assessment domains Accurate data entry into Data Manager

Factors that may affect reported percentages on this indicator

Factors related to children and services Child’s time in program Type and severity of delay(s) on entry Type and intensity of services

provided

State efforts to ensure high-quality data while maximizing efficiency of the Child Outcomes Measurement System

BDI-2 trainings by Riverside staff BDI-2 Training-of-trainers Guidelines for use of BDI-2 Screening Test Permissible entry of raw scores (vs. item-

level data) into Data Manager, with Quality Assurance check

Ongoing conversations with Riverside to improve the Data Manager

NECTAC/ECO-sponsored BDI-2 workgroup