Search

Part B, Section 619 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) authorizes additional preschool formula grants to states that are eligible for grants under Section 611 of Part B. States are eligible if they make Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) available to all children ages 3-5 with disabilities. While not mandatory, all states are currently providing IDEA services to preschool-aged children. This document provides materials as part of the process of orienting those new to the role as a Part B, Section 619 Coordinator and to the TA Center Network. There are guiding questions to apply this information to state and local contexts.

This briefing paper explores Infant and Early Childhood Mental Health (IECMH) policies and practices that state early intervention (Part C) programs may consider implementing to meet the social-emotional and mental health needs of infants and toddlers in the context of relationships with their parents and other caregivers.

Partnerships between the Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) program and Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) program can support and improve outcomes for children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) and their families. Collaboration between these programs is specified in the IDEA Part C Regulations 34 CFR §303.302(c)(ii)(J) and strengthened in P.L. 115-71, EHDI Act of 2017. This document briefly discusses related federal requirements, data sharing agreements between EHDI and Part C, the bridge between EDHI and IDEA, and data sharing resources. [This document was produced with the National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management (NCHAM) at Utah State University.]

To support states in improving educational results and functional outcomes for children with disabilities while ensuring compliance with Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) through state monitoring activities, a six-step inquiry process has been developed. The six steps describe a chronological process to assist states in selecting a focus area, collecting and using data to monitor this focus area, completing root cause analyses of the current performance, planning for and evaluating progress to resolve issues effectively, and implementing continuous and sustainable improvement. Since improving results and ensuring compliance is an ongoing process the six steps of inquiry should be used as an iterative cycle as infrastructure and practice improvements continue to be made. The six steps for improving results and compliance are outlined are outlined herein. This guide presents each step separately, providing a description of the step, activities to complete the step, the associated potential pitfalls, and relevant resources as available.

This document includes guidance, considerations, and resources for state staff and local practitioners who are determining Preschool Special Education eligibility remotely, due in part to COVID-19. To accomplish this, many states are now exploring a variety of approaches such as teleconference, videoconference, and sharing information and video synchronously and asynchronously. Effective state policies, procedures, and practices are important to appropriately identify children eligible for Part B Special Education services remotely. Part B IDEA regulations, that apply to preschoolers, define "evaluation" as "procedures used in accordance with §§300.304 through 300.311 to determine whether a child has a disability and the nature and extent of the special education and related services that the child needs." This document first presents associated tool table resources, and then the content is organized across five main sections. Each section includes considerations in the form of questions and suggestions. Resources also are embedded throughout the document, including links to: (1) regulations or materials; (2) best practices including Division for Early Childhood Recommended Practices (DEC RP); (3) examples of what best practice looks like or doesn't look like; and (4) cautions about potential problems.

This resource provides information about tools for planning and monitoring progress that can be administered remotely. These assessments rely on practitioner observations, interviews with, or questionnaires completed by a parent or caregiver to learn about the child's behavior and what the child knows and can do. Depending on what needs to be observed, practitioners also may be able to use videoconferencing or asynchronous videos of the child as part of the assessment process. In addition to supporting planning and tracking progress, the information provided by these tools can be helpful in determining whether the child is eligible for early intervention or preschool special education services although they are not norm-referenced and do not provide a standard score (e.g., percent delay). The table includes assessments for chieldren birth through five years old in which one or more domains can be administered by observation, interview, and/or parent/caregiver checklist. Many of these tools could be described as curriculum-based or criterion-referenced assessments. Assessments that are companions to a curriculum were included as long as use of the curriculum was not a requirement for use of the tool. Assessments focused largely on children's behavior in classrooms were not included. As noted in the table, some assessments were designed for use with a particular population, such as, children with visual and/or hearing loss or children with physical, cognitive, social, or emotional disabilities. The table provides a link to the website (or websites, when the tool is available from more than one source) where the tool can be obtained; the age range of the tool; the name of domains or content areas that have potential to be assessed remotely; the administration approach; language translations available; and additional details about the tool. Links are provided for tools that have been crossed walked to the three child outcomes used for state reporting to the Office of Special Education Programs.

This list of tools was compiled to assist states and programs with identifying assessments that can be administered when the assessor cannot be in the room with the child. Those using this resource are encouraged to review the recent presentations about applying assessment principles to evaluation for eligibility remotely for Part C and Part B Preschool. The table in this resource includes norm-referenced tools for children birth through five years old with one or more domains that can be administered by observation, interview, and/or parent/caregiver checklist. The table provides a link to the website where the tool can be obtained, information about the age range of the tool, the name of domains or content areas that have potential to be gathered remotely, the administration approach, language translations available, and additional details about scoring, classifications, or use.

This list of tools was compiled to assist states and programs with identifying assessments that can be administered when the assessor cannot be in the room with the child. This is a list of screening tools that can be completed remotely when the practitioner cannot be in the room with the child. Screening tools assess the possibility of a disability or delay and whether more extensive assessment may be necessary. These tools can be administered through parent/caregiver questionnaires, through interview, and/or by observation of the child without the administration of direct, structured tasks. These tools include screeners that provide information in multiple domains as well as screeners that focus on one specific area such as speech or motor development. The table provided that organizes the list, presents a link to the website where the screening tool can be obtained and, when available, free downloads to the screener. The table also indicates the age range of the tool; areas possible to screen remotely; the administration approach; language translations available; and additional details about administration time if available.

This document supports high-quality Child Outcomes Summary (COS) ratings by helping teams connect their observations of children's functional skills and behaviors with three child outcomes: (1) Positive Social-Emotional Skills; (2) Acquisition and Use of Knowledge and Skills; and (3) Use of Appropriate Behaviors to Meet Needs. Effectively aligning functional skills and outcomes will help Part C early intervention and Part B, Section 619 preschool special education program teams improve their outcome measurement. By making connections between provider and caregiver observations with the three child outcomes, it becomes increasingly natural for teams to identify a child's functional skills, align those skills to the three child outcomes, and determine an accurate and consistent Child Outcomes Summary (COS) rating.

The goal of early intervention and early childhood special education is to enable young children with disabilities to be active and successful participants during their early childhood years and in the future. Child outcomes are the benefits that children and families experience as a result of early intervention or early childhood special education services. This document helps teams think about measuring a child's use and integration of functional skills to participate in their everyday routines. This resource will help teams further their understanding of the following questions: (1) What makes a skill functional?; (2) How does context help align functional skills with each of the three outcomes?; and (3) How do teams assess functional skills?

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) funds programs providing services designed to assist children with a range of delays and disabilities in achieving individualized developmental and functional goals. There are two types of programs. Part C Early Intervention is for children ages birth-2, and Part B Preschool is for children ages 3-5. States report data annually to the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) in the U.S. Department of Education on three child outcomes for Part C and Part B Preschool programs: (1) Social relationships, which includes getting along with other children and relating well with adults; (2) Use of knowledge and skills, which refers to thinking, reasoning, problem-solving, and early literacy and math skills; and (3) Taking action to meet needs, which includes feeding, dressing, self-care, and following rules related to health and safety. For Part C Early Intervention, a comparison of national averages from FFY 2020 to FFY 2021 showed some decreases in outcomes with an equal number of outcomes unchanged. For Part B Preschool, there was a decrease in the percent of children making greater than expected progress and exiting at age expectations in Social Relationships from FFY 2020 to FFY 2021. State Part C and Part B, Section 619 annual performance reports provided key reasons for declines, including impacts of COVID-19, other data quality issues, and changes to state data collection methods. Further analyses, particularly at the state and local level, are needed to understand trends.

The Local Child Outcomes Measurement System (L-COMS) is a framework developed by ECTA and DaSy that identifies 7 key components of a high-quality child outcomes measurement system at the local level. The following resources were developed for local Part C and Part B 619/Preschool programs to evaluate their systems and to encourage and support efforts to improve those systems. "Local program," as used throughout these documents, refers to a local/regional early intervention services program or a local educational agency or school district. (1) Local Child Outcomes Measurement System (L-COMS) -- describes the framework's 7 components, 13 quality indicators and their associated elements of quality; (2) L-COMS Self-Assessment -- an Excel-based tool that provides a structure for local programs to record the current status of their child outcomes measurement system on the 13 quality indicators and associated elements, and to set priorities for improvement; and (3) L-COMS Guide -- contains general guidance for using the self-assessment tool. The L-COMS was designed to apply to all local programs regardless of their specific child outcomes measurement approach.

Part C IDEA regulations define "evaluation" as "the procedures used by qualified personnel to determine a child's initial and continuing eligibility..." and "assessment" as "ongoing procedures used by qualified personnel to identify the child's unique strengths and needs and the early intervention services appropriate to meet those needs..." As a result of COVID-19, many states are having to determine a child's eligibility for Part C services remotely using a variety of approaches such as teleconference, videoconference, and sharing information and video synchronously and asynchronously. Therefore, effective state policies, procedures, and practices are important to appropriately identify children eligible for Part C services. This document provides guidance, considerations, and resources for state staff and local practitioners who are determining Part C eligibility remotely. It first presents associated tool table resources, and then the content is organized across five main sections. Each section includes considerations in the form of questions and suggestions: (1) Consider System and State Policies; (2) Plan for Remote Eligibility Determination; (3) Collect Data Remotely; and (4) Analyze and Take Action. A list of resources is also included.

This report includes guidance, considerations, and resources for state staff and local practitioners who are determining Part C eligibility remotely. As a result of COVID-19, many states are having to determine a child's eligibility for Part C services remotely using a variety of approaches such as teleconference, videoconference, and sharing information and video synchronously and asynchronously. Therefore, effective state policies, procedures, and practices are important to appropriately identify children eligible for Part C services. This document first includes background information about associated tool table resources and then the content is organized across three main sections. The first section of the document addresses big picture system-wide considerations. The second section includes practice strategies and considerations related to the planning, collecting information, and analyzing findings and taking action related to the process of remotely determining a child's eligibility for early intervention. The third section includes information about related resources.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) funds programs providing services designed to assist children with a range of delays and disabilities in achieving individualized developmental and functional goals. There are two types of programs. Part C Early Intervention is for children ages birth-2, and Part B Preschool is for children ages 3-5. States report data annually to the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) in the U.S. Department of Education on three child outcomes for Part C and Part B Preschool programs: (1) Social Relationships; (2) Use of Knowledge and Skills; and (3) Taking Action to Meet Needs. For Part C Early Intervention, a comparison of national averages from FFY 2019 to FFY 2020 showed increases in some outcomes and decreases in others. For Part B Preschool, there was no change in the percent of children exiting at age expectations in Social Relationships from FFY 2019 to FFY 2020, and a decrease in national averages in all other outcomes. State Part C and Part B, Section 619 annual performance reports provided key reasons for declines, including impacts of COVID-19, other data quality issues, and changes to state data collection methods. Further analyses, particularly at the state and local level, are needed to understand trends.

This training activity was created to support participants' understanding of the criteria needed to develop and write high quality, participation-based Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) outcomes. The term "functional" is often used to describe what outcomes ought to be, yet many providers struggle to define what makes an outcome "functional." Still others struggle with making outcomes meet the criteria set forth in regulations, as well as have meaning for families. Reviews of existing resources developed by national experts provided a framework for considering IFSP outcomes to determine if the outcomes are high quality and support the child's participation in everyday routines and activities. The key to supporting the development of high quality, participation-based outcomes is creating a clear and deliberate link between every step of the IFSP process, beginning with interactions with the family during initial contacts and referral through the development of the IFSP, and beyond. Critical to this process is the fundamental belief that children learn best through their participation in everyday activities and routines with familiar people. Also critical to this process are three important skills for providers: (1) The ability to understand how to gather information from families throughout the process; (2) The ability to conduct a functional assessment that gives a clear picture of the child's abilities and needs in the child's natural, everyday settings, activities and routines, and; (3) The ability to use the information to develop outcomes. Throughout the process of gathering information from families, special attention should be paid to the information the family shares about what's working well for them, as well as what is challenging. When paired with the provider's knowledge of early development and functional assessment occurring in multiple situations and settings, and over time, information from families provides all that is needed to develop high quality, participation based outcomes. The Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center reviewed expert-generated resources and identified six key criteria that define IFSP Outcomes as high quality and participation based are detailed. When the child's contextual information is available (e.g., assessment information, the child's IFSP), the following IFSP outcome criteria should also be evaluated: (1) The outcome is based on the family's priorities and concerns; and (2) The outcome describes both the child's strengths and needs based on the information from the initial evaluation and ongoing assessment. An IFSP Outcomes Rating Activity is provided with activity instructions. An Alternate activity is also included. Appended are: (1) Criteria Defining High Quality, Participation-Based IFSP Outcomes; (2) IFSP Outcome Cards; (3) IFSP Outcomes Placemat (4) Answer Key to Rating IFSP Outcomes (5) Worksheet for Rating IFSP Outcomes; and (6) References. [This training activity was written with support from Dathan Rush, M'Lisa Shelden, Debbie Cate and Megan Vinh. ECTA Center is one of 45 centers in the Technical Assistance and Dissemination Network (TA&D Network) funded by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP).]

Our state's child outcomes numbers are lower than last year's. Does this mean our state'sprogram quality has decreased? Possibly but not necessarily. Interpreting year-to-yearchange in statewide child outcomes data requires understanding the possible reasons for fluctuations. This brief is designed to help stakeholders learn what questions to ask to understand year-to-year changes in child outcomes data.

This guidance document is designed to support state and local technical assistance (TA) providers in implementing effective professional development (PD) on the Child Outcomes Summary (COS) process with early intervention and early childhood special education practitioners. This document provides an overview of national resources and materials that are available to support COS training and TA and how they might be incorporated into ongoing PD.

The State Family Outcomes Measurement System Framework (S-FOMS) is a framework originally developed by the Early Childhood Outcomes Center that identifies seven key components of a high-quality family outcomes measurement system at the state level. The seven components are: (1) Purpose; (2) Data collection and transmission; (3) Analysis; (4) Reporting; (5) Using data; (6) Evaluation; and (7) Cross-system coordination. The framework is intended to assist states in developing a measurement system that captures various aspects of family outcomes and experiences, such as the benefits that families receive from program participation, family satisfaction with services, perceived helpfulness of the services, and family involvement with the service delivery system. The S-FOMS applies to all state programs regardless of their specific family outcomes measurement approach. [For the "State Family Outcomes Measurement System Framework," see ED586280.]

The State Family Outcomes Measurement System Framework (S-FOMS) is a framework originally developed by the Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) Center that identifies seven key components of a high-quality family outcomes measurement system at the state level. This document contains background information about the framework's seven components, 15 quality indicators, and their associated elements of quality. The framework is intended to assist states in developing a measurement system that captures various aspects of family outcomes and experiences, such as the benefits that families receive from program participation, family satisfaction with services, perceived helpfulness of the services, and family involvement with the service delivery system. The S-FOMS and two related resources were developed for state Part C and Part B 619/Preschool programs to evaluate and improve their family outcomes measurement system. The ECO Center had developed the original Family Outcomes Measurement Framework (FOMS) in 2011 for state use. It was renamed the S-FOMS in November 2017 to align the naming convention with a similar framework for child outcomes, the State Child Outcomes Measurement System (S-COMS) framework.

The Local Child Outcomes Measurement System (L-COMS) is a framework that identifies seven key components of a high-quality child outcomes measurement system at the local level. The L-COMS framework was designed to apply to all local programs regardless of their specific child outcomes measurement approach. Development of the L-COMS originated with the Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center/Center for IDEA Early Childhood Data Systems (ECTA/DaSy) technical assistance cohort on child outcomes data quality. Several states were interested in a product that would help support the improvement of child outcomes measurement systems at the local level. It was derived from the Child Outcomes Measurement System (COMS), a similar framework developed by the Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) Center in 2011 for state use. ECTA and DaSy staff developed a draft of the L-COMS, using the COMS to identify comparable quality indicators and elements that could be used as is or revised to make applicable to the local level. Staff from several states then reviewed and piloted it at the local level and provided input.

The Self-Assessment Comparison (SAC) Tool is for state Part C and Section 619/Preschool programs to use to assess changes in the implementation of one or more components of the ECTA System Framework and/or subcomponenets of the DaSy Data System Framework. It is a companion to the ECTA/DaSy Framework Self-Assessment. Key features of the SAC are that it: (1) provides a way to compare self-assessment ratings across different points in time for one or more components or subcomponents; (2) calculates and displays changes in the Quality Indicator (QI) ratings and the Elements of Quality (EQ) ratings across up to three time points; and (3) summarizes valuable information to help states assess changes to various aspects of ECTA system or DaSy data system infrastructure, which can be used as part of a State System Improvement Plan evaluation. States are encouraged to use both the self-assessment and the SAC Tool as part of an improvement planning process of assessing the status of their system, developing a plan for improvement, implementing the plan, and reassessing the system to monitor progress. When used as part of such an ongoing process, reassessment enables states to monitor and document progress on building a high-quality system. This document provides an overview of the suggested self-assessment process, information on where to get assistance with completing the self-assessment, instructions for using SAC, instructions for saving and printing the results of the SAC tool and hints for using the tool.

This 2016 document is designed to provide state Part C staff with guidance on using fiscal data to analyze and revise their allocation methodology. Allocation methodology is the process -- including practices, strategies, procedures, and policies -- used by Part C state staff to equitably distribute funds to meet the needs of the system, including the children and families served. "Revised Funding Formula Four Year Plan" is appended.

This roadmap provides a description of the activities involved in the development of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) (SPP/APR Indicators C11 and B17) due to the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) on April 1, 2015. The roadmap is intended to support states with completing Phase I of the SSIP process. This document provides information about the activities of Phase I of the SSIP process and provides more detailed information related to: (1) purpose of each activity; (2) goal of each activity; (3) process/how to information for completing the activity; (4) considerations for completing the activity; and (5) places to engage stakeholders. Questions to consider are provided to help states with planning and implementing, and links to existing resources to support the development of the SSIP are included. This document was designed using the metaphor of a roadmap to help guide states through the various activities of Phase I of the SSIP. It is important to note that the completion of SSIP activities is not necessarily linear. States may need to revisit previously completed activities and decisions.

States and technical assistance centers have asked the Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes (CEELO) for guidance on establishing and maintaining a peer learning community (PLC). This document is designed to delineate the steps to establish and sustain a Peer Learning Community (PLC). It begins with a definition of a PLC and then presents the steps to take to establish a PLC. A list of resources is also provided.

Parents of young children who are in early intervention (EI) or early childhood special education (ECSE) programs want to be sure these services are helping their children develop and learn. These services are designed to make the most of each child's potential as well as to strengthen the family's ability to help their child. This report asks how parents can know if their child's early intervention or special education program is meeting his or her needs. The report advises parents that one way to learn more about their young child's progress is through three "child outcomes" that are measured for every child in the United States who participates in an early intervention or early childhood special education program. These outcomes will help parents know how well their child is developing and participating in activities at home, at school, and in the community. In addition to helping parents measure their child's individual progress, these outcomes are also used to measure how well their child's early intervention or early childhood special education program is serving all children who are enrolled. This handout will help parents understand and meaningfully participate in the outcome measurement process for their child's program. The following outcomes developed by the U.S. Department of Education are used by all early intervention and early childhood special education programs to measure young children's progress. While Individual Family Service plan (IFSP) outcomes and Individualized Education Program (IEP) goals are written specifically for "your" child, these three child outcomes are the same for everyone. They include: (1) gaining positive social emotional skills, including social relation ships; (2) learning and using new knowledge and skills; and (3) Using appropriate behaviors to meet their needs. These three child outcomes focus on what your child can do in his or her everyday routines and activities. By looking at how well your child is doing in each of the three areas, parents can determine what he or she needs in order to become more involved in the family's activities. The information gathered about each child will also help parents develop individual outcomes and goals for each child's Individual Family Service Plan (IFSP). [This report was developed by the National Parent Technical Assistance Center at PACER Center in collaboration with The Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center (ECTA).]