Early Intervention Colorado
Child Outcomes
September 15, 2010
Agenda
Child Outcomes Informational Session
10:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.
10:00 a.m. – Noon
Welcome and Introductions
Background
Why Collect Data on Child Outcomes?
Discussion
Break (10 minutes)
The Three Child Outcomes
The Two Summary Statements
Child Outcomes Summary Form (COSF)
Noon – 1:00 p.m.
Lunch
1:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
OSEP Reporting Categories
Seven point rating scale
Break (10 minutes)
How Rating Scales Correspond to OSEP Reporting
Data Collection
Timelines
Questions
Background
ƒ Since 2005 the Child and Family Outcomes
measurement system in Colorado has been
known as Results Matter and is managed
through the Colorado Department of Education
(CDE).
ƒ Beginning in 2006 EI Colorado contracted with
CDE to conduct the activities associated with
Child Outcomes measurements for infants and
toddlers.
Background continued…
ƒ EI Colorado assumed responsibility for the
Family Outcomes measurements for infants and
toddlers in 2009/2010.
ƒ In May 2010, EI Colorado decided to end the
contractual arrangement with CDE as a cost
savings measure and implemented strategies to
manage the Child Outcomes system internally.
ƒ In June 2010 EI Colorado convened the Child
Outcomes Task Force.
Background continued…
ƒ EI Colorado remains committed to collecting and
reporting timely, valid, and reliable data.
ƒ EI Colorado plans to continue as an interagency
partner in the cross-systems child progress data
sharing initiatives.
Why Collect Data on Child
Outcomes?
Public Policy Context
ƒ Age of accountability.
ƒ Accountability increasingly means looking at
results, not just process.
ƒ Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) is
under increasing pressure to produce outcome
data on children participating in early intervention
and early childhood special education programs.
Why Collect Data on Child
Outcomes continued . . .
ƒ Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
ƒ Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)
ƒ Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
Why Collect Data on Child Outcomes
continued . . .
PART Results for Part C
ƒ Results not demonstrated
“While the program has met its goal relating to
the number of children served, it has not
collected information on how well the program
is doing to improve the educational and
developmental outcomes of infants and
toddlers served.”
Why Collect Data on Child
Outcomes continued . . .
IDEA
SEC. 616. <<NOTE: 20 USC 1416.>>
MONITORING, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, AND
ENFORCEMENT.
Federal and State Monitoring
(2) Focused monitoring.--The primary focus of
Federal and State monitoring activities described
in paragraph (1) shall be on–
(A) improving educational results and
functional outcomes for all children with
disabilities;
OSEP’s Response
ƒ Developed and implemented indicators.
ƒ Specific indicators addressing child and family
outcomes (Indicators C3 and C4).
ƒ Funded the Early Childhood Outcomes Center to
do research, make recommendations, and assist
states.
State and Local Program Context
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Identify strengths and areas for growth.
Document program effectiveness.
Identify areas for technical assistance.
Early Childhood Colorado Framework in Action.
Other future initiatives.
Additional funding possibilities?
Where the Outcomes Came From
OSEP:
ƒ Convened stakeholders to identify child and
family outcome areas and develop outcome
statements, and
ƒ Received input from state Part C and 619
coordinators, researchers, families,
administrators, and the general public.
Key Idea
The primary focus of Child Outcomes data
is to determine the percentage of
children that have improved.
Key Idea
All families have the right to know if early
intervention is working for their child and
if their child is making progress.
Challenges to Address
ƒ Three assessment tools with online data entry
which requires yearly subscription and archive
costs.
ƒ Viewed as separate activity from IFSP:
ƒ Providers rush to get “AEPS” done.
ƒ Some CCBs hire providers specifically for this
purpose.
ƒ Family participation in collection of Child
Outcome information is minimal.
ƒ In general, information garnered through the
ongoing assessment process is not viewed as
useful in informing or impacting services being
provided.
DISCUSSION
BREAK
Ten
Minutes
Understanding the
Three Child Outcomes
Three Child Outcomes
1. Children have positive social emotional skills
(including social relationships)
2. Children acquire and use knowledge and skills
(including early language/communication)
3. Children use appropriate behaviors to meet
their needs
Outcomes are Functional
Functional Outcomes:
ƒ Refer to behaviors that integrate skills across
domains.
ƒ Almost always involve multiple domains.
ƒ Emphasize how the child is able to carry out
meaningful behaviors in their natural
environment.
Outcomes are Functional continued . . .
Functional Outcomes:
ƒ Refer to things that are meaningful to the child in
the everyday context of everyday life.
ƒ Refer to an integrated series of behaviors or skills
that allow the child to accomplish important
everyday goals.
ƒ Are based on a child’s actual performance across
settings and situations.
Functional Outcomes are Not:
ƒ A single behavior.
ƒ Based on the child’s capacity to function in ideal
or unusual circumstances.
ƒ Discrete behaviors such as:
-knows 10 words
-stacks 3 blocks
- uses a pincer grasp
- says “Dad”
Children have Positive Social Emotional
Skills (including social relationships)
Involves:
ƒ Relating with other children
ƒ Relating with adults
ƒ For older children, following rules related to
groups or interacting with others
Includes:
ƒ Attachment/separation/autonomy
ƒ Expressing emotions and feelings
ƒ Learning rules and expectations
ƒ Social interactions and play
Children Acquire and Use Knowledge and
Skills (including early language and
communication)
Involves:
ƒ Thinking
ƒ Reasoning
ƒ Remembering
ƒ Problem solving
ƒ Using symbols and language
ƒ Understanding physical and social worlds
Includes:
ƒ Early concepts—symbols, pictures, numbers, classification,
spatial relationships
ƒ Imitation
ƒ Object permanence
ƒ Expressive language and communication
ƒ Early literacy
Children Use Appropriate Behaviors
to Meet Their Needs
Involves:
ƒ Taking care of basic needs
ƒ Getting from place to place
ƒ Using tools (e.g., fork, toothbrush, crayon)
ƒ In older children, contributing to their own health
and safety
Includes:
ƒ Integrating motor skills to complete tasks
ƒ Self-help skills (e.g., dressing, feeding,
grooming, toileting, household responsibility)
ƒ Acting on the world to get what one wants
Child Outcomes is Not:
AEPS OR ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT TOOL!
Two Summary Statements
Summary Statement 1: Of those infants and
toddlers who entered or exited early intervention
below age expectations in each Outcome, the
percent who substantially increased their rate of
growth by the time they turned 3 years of age or
exited the program.
How many children changed growth
trajectories during their time in the
program?
Two Summary Statements
continued . . .
Summary Statement 2: The percent of infants and
toddlers who were functioning within age
expectations in each Outcome by the time they
turned 3 years of age or exited the program.
How many children were functioning like
same aged peers when they left the
program?
The Child Outcomes Summary
Form (COSF)
What is the COSF?
The COSF utilizes a team process for reviewing child
assessment data from different sources culminating in the
‘rating’ of a child’s functioning on a scale of 1-7.
The COSF can be used:
1) When the State wants to use multiple sources of
information to describe a child’s functioning on each of the
Outcomes. The information may include one or more
norm-referenced or curriculum-based assessments, family
interview of child’s skills and behavior, progress notes of
therapists working with the child, observations by a
teacher or child care provider, or other sources.
2) When different assessments have been given to different
children across the State and the results need to be
placed on the same scale to be aggregated.
What is the COSF? continued . . .
Using the COSF does not require that programs
collect more data about children’s progress; it is a
mechanism that allows them to summarize
assessment information for federal reporting as
well as for their own purposes, such as for
accountability, program planning, and program
improvement.
The COSF . . .
ƒ Is not an assessment tool.
ƒ Uses information from assessment tools and
observations to get a global sense of how the
child is doing at one point in time.
Benefits of the COSF
ƒ Strengthens family participation and
understanding of the Child Outcomes process.
ƒ 41 states have adopted COSF, we can gain
insight and implementation ideas from their
experiences.
ƒ COSF process can be woven into the IFSP process
so there is a decrease in duplication of efforts.
ƒ Increases ability to utilize a broader array of
tools.
ƒ Strengthens team approach.
ƒ Cost savings.
What Will Be Different Using the
COSF?
ƒ While an assessment tool will still be utilized to
collect information, a wider variety of tools will be
available.
ƒ A team process will be used to synthesize
information gathered about the child to
determine the rating within the 7-point scale.
ƒ The rating documented on the COSF will be
entered into the online Provider Database.
ƒ Child Outcome ratings will be entered at entry
and exit only.
To Optimally Utilize the COSF,
Providers Need to:
ƒ Have knowledge about the child’s functioning
across settings and situations.
ƒ Have a strong understanding of age-expected
child development.
ƒ Understand the content of the three Child
Outcomes.
ƒ Know how to use the rating scale.
ƒ Participate as a team.
ƒ Value and include family input.
ƒ Consider multiple sources of assessment
information such as: Observation, play-based
assessment, family interview, standardized tools.
Lunch
On your own
One hour
Methodology
What Colorado Reports:
OSEP Reporting Categories
Percentage of children who:
a. Did not improve functioning
b. Improved functioning, but not sufficient to
move nearer to functioning comparable to
same-aged peers
c. Improved functioning to a level nearer to sameaged peers, but did not reach it
d. Improved functioning to a level comparable to
same-aged peers
e. Maintained functioning at a level comparable to
same-aged peers
The OSEP Categories describe types of progress
children can make between entry and exit.
The Seven Point Rating Scale
a. To what extent does this child show age-appropriate
functioning, across a variety of settings and situations, on
this outcome?
7 – Completely
6 – Between completely and somewhat
5 – Somewhat
4 – Between somewhat and nearly
3 – Nearly
2 – Between nearly and not yet
1 – Not yet
b. (If Question a. has been answered at entry): Has the child
shown any new skills or behaviors related to positive socialemotional skills (including positive social relationships)
since the last outcomes summary?
Yes or No
7 – Completely
ƒ Child shows functioning expected for his or her
age in all or almost all everyday situations
that are part of the child’s life.
ƒ Functioning is considered appropriate for his
or her age.
ƒ No one has any concerns about the child’s
functioning in this outcome area.
6 – Between completely
and somewhat
ƒ Child’s functioning generally is considered
appropriate for his or her age but there are
some significant concerns about the child’s
functioning in this outcome area.
ƒ These concerns are substantial enough to
suggest monitoring or possible additional
support.
ƒ Although age-appropriate, the child’s functioning
may border on not keeping pace with age
expectations.
5 – Somewhat
ƒ Child shows functioning expected for his or her
age some of the time and/or in some
settings and situations.
ƒ Child’s functioning is a mix of age-appropriate
and not age-appropriate behaviors and skills.
ƒ Child’s functioning might be described as like that
of a slightly younger child.
4 – Between somewhat
and nearly
ƒ Child shows occasional age-appropriate
functioning across settings and situations.
ƒ More functioning is not age-appropriate than
age-appropriate.
3 – Nearly
ƒ Child does not yet show functioning expected of a
child of his or her age in any situation.
ƒ Child uses immediate foundational skills, most
or all of the time across settings and situations.
ƒ Immediate foundational skills are the skills upon
which to build age-appropriate functioning.
ƒ Functioning might be described as like that of a
younger child.
2 – Between nearly and not yet
ƒ Child occasionally uses immediate
foundational skills across settings and
situations.
ƒ More functioning reflects skills that are not
immediate foundational than are immediate
foundational.
1 – Not yet
ƒ Child does not yet show functioning expected of a
child his or her age in any situation.
ƒ Child’s functioning does not yet include
immediate foundational skills upon which to build
age-appropriate functioning.
ƒ Child’s functioning reflects skills that
developmentally come before immediate
foundational skills.
ƒ Child’s functioning might be described as like that
of a much younger child.
Decision Tree
BREAK
Ten
Minutes
How We Get from the Seven Point
Scale to the Reporting Categories
ƒ The OSEP categories describe types of
progress children can make between entry
and exit.
ƒ Two scores or ratings (entry and exit) are
needed to calculate what OSEP category
(a,b,c,d,e) describes a child’s progress.
OSEP Reporting Categories
Refresher
Percentage of children who:
a. Did not improve functioning
b. Improved functioning, but not sufficient to
move nearer to functioning comparable to
same-aged peers
c. Improved functioning to a level nearer to sameaged peers, but did not reach it
d. Improved functioning to a level comparable to
same-aged peers
e. Maintained functioning at a level comparable to
same-aged peers
How Ratings on the COSF
Correspond to Reporting Categories
e. % of children who
maintain functioning
at a level comparable
to same-aged peers
ƒ Rated 6 or 7 at
entry;
AND
ƒ Rated 6 or 7 at exit
Entry
Exit
Entry
Exit
How Ratings on the COSF
Correspond continued . . .
d. % of children who
improve functioning to
reach a level
comparable to sameaged peers
ƒ Rated 5 or lower at
entry;
AND
ƒ Rated 6 or 7 at exit
Entry
Exit
How Ratings on the COSF
Correspond continued . . .
c. % of children who
improved functioning
to a level nearer to
same aged peers, but
did not reach it
ƒ Rated higher at exit
than entry;
AND
ƒ Rated 5 or below at
exit
Entry
Exit
Entry
Exit
How Ratings on the COSF
Correspond continued . . .
b. % of children who
improved functioning,
but not sufficient to
move nearer to same
aged peers
ƒ Rated 5 or lower at
entry;
AND
ƒ Rated the same or
lower at exit;
AND
ƒ “Yes” on the progress
question (b)
Entry
Exit
Entry
Exit
Entry
Exit
How Ratings on the COSF
Correspond continued . . .
a. % of children who
did not improve
functioning
ƒ Rated lower at exit
than entry;
OR
ƒ Rated 1 at both entry
and exit;
AND
ƒ “No” on the progress
question (b)
Entry
Exit
Entry
Exit
Data Collection
ƒ Entry data collected within eight to ten weeks of
entering early intervention.
ƒ Exit data collected within 90 days of child’s exit
from early intervention.
ƒ Data entered into Provider Database.
ƒ Data extracted by EI Colorado for OSEP
reporting.
Best Practices
Goal: High quality services for children and
families that will lead to good outcomes
COSF activities are compatible with:
ƒ The ability to combine data from multiple
sources.
ƒ Transdisciplinary service models.
ƒ Functional behaviors.
ƒ The incorporation of universal design.
ƒ The idea that all skills are interrelated and not
solely domains-based.
Implementation Timelines
September 22, 2010-11:301:00
Pre-COSF session TA Call for those
attending upcoming trainings
October 5,2010
Pueblo COSF Training (Providers)
October 7,2010
Grand Junction COSF Training (Providers)
November 9, 10, 11, 2010
Metro Area Training (Providers)
November 2010
Ongoing TA support from ECO
Early Winter
Third round of state-wide provider COSF
Training
May 31, 2011
All Staff and contractors trained in the COSF
Resources
www.zerotothree.org
www.ExpectMore.gov
www.the-eco-center.org
Age Expected Child Development Resources from the Early Childhood
Outcomes Center: http://www.fpg.unc.edu/%7EECO/assets/pdfs/Ageexpected_child_dev_9-5-07.pdf
Child Development
Brazelton, T.B., & Sparrow, J.D (2006). Touchpoints: Birth to Three: Your
child’s emotional and behavioral development. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo
Press.
Caplan, T., & Caplan, F. (1995). The first twelve months of life: Your baby’s
growth month by month. New York: Bantam Books.
Caplan, F. (1982). The second twelve months of life: Your baby’s growth
month by month. New York: Bantam Books
Greenspan, S. & Greenspan, N.T. (1994). First feelings: Milestones in the
emotional development of your baby and child. New York: Viking.
Lowman, D.L. (2007) Amazing Babies: An Overview of Development from
Birth to Thirty-Six Months. Virginia: Partnership for People with
Disabilities, Virginia Commonwealth University.
Shelov, S.P., & Hannemann, R.E (2004). Caring for your baby and young
child: Birth to age five. New York: Bantam Books, Inc.
Questions???
THANK YOU VERY MUCH
HOSTED BY:
DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES RESOURCE
CENTER
SNACKS COMPLIMENTS OF:
IMAGINE!
DEVELOPMENTAL PATHWAYS