Early Childhood Transition APR Indicators and National Trends Kathy T. Whaley, NECTAC Presentation for the session on “Trends and highlights from the 2007-2008 Annual Performance Reports “ OSEP National Early Childhood Conference December 8, 2009

Effective General Supervision Part C Indicator C8 - Effective Transition Indicator #8: Percent of all children exiting Part C who received timely transition planning to support the child’s transition to preschool and other appropriate community services by their third birthday including: A) IFSPs with transition steps and services B) Notification to LEA, if child potentially eligible for Part B C) Transition conference, if child potentially eligible for Part B.

IDEA Regulatory Basis for Indicator IFSPs with transition steps and services, regulations specify that “The IFSP must include the steps to be taken to support the transition of the child, in accordance with 303.148” [303.344(h)]. Notification to LEA, if child potentially eligible for Part B, Part C regulations specify that the Lead Agency will "Notify the local education agency for the area in which the child resides that the child will shortly reach the age of eligibility for preschool services under Part B" [303.148(b)(1)]. Transition conference, if child potentially eligible for Part B, Part C regulations specify that “In the case of child who may be eligible for preschool services under Part B of the Act, with the approval of the family of the child, [the lead agency will] convene a conference among the lead agency, the family, and the local educational agency” [303.148(b)(2)(i)].

Overall Trends Across Sub-indicators More states report higher rates of compliance in notifying LEAs of potentially eligible children (8B) and documenting transition steps within the IFSP (8A) than for holding transition conferences (8C) More states report full and substantial compliance regarding Notification to LEA (8B) All states reported data on all sub indicators.

Full and Substantial Compliance Percentage of states at full or substantial compliance: C8A – 70% - 19 states at 100%, 20 states at 95-99% (39 states) C8B – 80 % - 32 states at 100%, 13 states at 95-99% (45 states) C8C – 55 % - 13 states at 100%, 18 states at 95-99% (31 states)

Progress 07-08 IFSP Steps (8A) – 31 states made progress (10 maintained 100%) Notification (8B) – 22 states made progress (23 maintained 100%) Conference (8C) – 34 states made progress (5 maintained 100%)

Progress attributed to: Clarification of policies, specific training/TA Improved monitoring/data processes to include sub indicator requirements Revised IFSP forms 8B Improved data sharing procedures and data entry accuracy; Systematized notification protocols; increased frequency of reports Improved local collaboration Targeted training of Service Coordinator/Data Managers 8C Utilization of focused monitoring/improved data collection Training/TA and policy clarification Collaboration between agencies

Slippage 07-08 IFSPs with Transition Steps/Services (N=12) Notification to LEA (N=9) Transition Conference (N=13) Reasons given: Inaccurate or changing data systems/sources Issues of data entry and reporting IFSPs needed elements and instructions for documenting transition Unclear policies Staff shortages, increasing caseloads, staff turnover

National Issues – Part C Transition Conference Difficulty scheduling the meeting with required participants Late referrals to the system Clarifying role and level of participation by LEA Clarifying policies for timeline requirements Differentiating between referral and LEA notification policies

National Issues – Part C Data Capacity Inability to report on all sub-indicators (Progress!) Missing required data elements such as the ability to identify exceptional family circumstances causing delays in conference timelines Accuracy of data entry Ability to generate reports to assist with data verification as part of monitoring Data sharing with Part B and processes for notification

Themes Improving data collection, record keeping, data analysis and data sharing Clarifying policies and aligning the consistency of policies across C and 619 Improving communication and collaboration across Part C and 619 Training and TA linked to monitoring and correction of non-compliance, often cross-agency. Collaborative and joint training efforts with Part B, Section 619

Effective General Supervision Part B Indicator B12 - Effective Transition INDICATOR #12: Percent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3 and who are found eligible for Part B, and who have an IEP developed and implemented by their third birthday.

IDEA Regulatory Basis for Indicator IDEA specifies that, in order for a state to be eligible for a grant under Part B, it must have policies and procedures that ensure that, “Children participating in early intervention programs assisted under Part C, and who will participate in preschool programs assisted under this part [Part B] experience a smooth and effective transition to those preschool programs in a manner consistent with 637(a)(9). By the third birthday of such a child an individualized education program has been developed and is being implemented for the child” [Section 612 (a)(9)].

Overall Trends Across Indicator States show steady progress by national average of reported data Baseline 72% FFY 06-07 84% FFY 07-08 92% Changes to data systems decreased performance for some states but considered more accurate

Progress and Slippage 34 States reported progress 6 States reported slippage (4 at 95% or higher) 4 States – unable to calculate* 9 states reported no change in performance (all performing at 95% or higher) *(One state did not provide 06-07 data. Data not considered valid and reliable for three states)

Full and Substantial Compliance Full Compliance 06-07 N= 5 States 07-08 N=10 States Substantial Compliance 06-07 N= 14 States 07-08 N= 19 States 29 States Reporting Substantial Compliance or higher as compared to 19 States in prior reporting period

The NA2 States Fourteen Made Progress

Progress Attributed To: Improvements of Data Collection and Analysis Processes (#1) Training, TA and Policy Clarification (#2) Improved Collaboration with Part C and other entities (#3) Improvements to monitoring processes and other factors (31 out of 34 states provided an explanation for progress)

Slippage Attributed to: Most states reporting slippage reported performance above 95% Only 4 out of 6 provided explanation Presence of specific LEAs in monitoring cycle, moving from a monitoring approach to statewide reporting Difficulty in conducting timely evaluations Staffing capacity Late referrals from Part C

National Issues – Part B Data Capacity Inability to report on all measurement components and requirements (Much Better!) Missing required data elements such as the range of days beyond the third birthday when eligibility was determined and the IEP developed. (Much Better!) difficulty determining Measurement D which describes the number of children for whom parent refusal to provide consent caused delays in evaluation or initial services. (Still An Issue!)

National Issues – Part B Data Capacity inability to merge and share data systems with Part C for verification of 618 exit data assignment of student identifiers implementing new automated or Web-based systems Greatly Improved but Still An Issue…..

National Issues – Part B Coordination/Collaboration Late referrals from Part C that created delays in timelines for determining eligibility Late referrals to Part C Delays in scheduling meetings and conferences Delays in conducting initial evaluations Data sharing

National Issues – Part B Policy and Procedures Child find and Part C notification procedures Part C referral Timelines for initial evaluations, eligibility determination, and implementation of IEPs, Summer birthdays Family and Life Issues

Themes Better data! Better monitoring of compliance requirements MOUs and improved collaboration with Part C Clarified policies and guidance Collaborative training and TA Inconsistencies across states in policies regarding reasons for delay Delays in initial evaluation Late referrals

Lessons Learned….. Knowing each others program mission and responsibilities Knowing each other - Effective Personal Relationships Data is crucial but may not tell the whole story about quality practices Don’t rest on your laurels – maintenance Make transition someone’s job Start earlier to allow for the unforeseen

Transition TA Resources National Early Childhood Transition Initiative http://www.nectac.org/topics/transition/ectransitionta.asp National Early Childhood Transition Center http://www.hdi.uky.edu/NECTC/Home.aspx NECTAC Resource Collection on Transition from Part C to Preschool http://www.nectac.org/topics/transition/transition.asp SPP/APR Calendar: Technical Assistance Related to SPP Indicators and Determinations http://spp-apr-calendar.rrfcnetwork.org/techassistance.html