National Call on Public Reporting of Local Child Outcomes Data NECTAC/ECO June 11, 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Target Setting for Child Outcomes Conference Call October 30,
Advertisements

Building a national system to measure child and family outcomes from early intervention Early Childhood Outcomes Center International Society on Early.
Researchers as Partners with State Part C and Preschool Special Education Agencies in Collecting Data on Child Outcomes Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI International.
Indicator 7 Child Outcomes MAKING SENSE OF THE DATA June
Presented at: Annual Conference of the American Evaluation Association Anaheim, CA - November 3, 2011 Performance Management in Action: A National System.
Update on Child Outcomes for Early Childhood Special Education Lynne Kahn ECO at UNC The Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) Center The National Association.
2011 OSEP Leadership Mega Conference Collaboration to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career 2.0 The Results are In: Using Early Childhood Outcome Data.
Early Childhood Outcomes ECO Institute Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI Robin Rooney ECO at FPG Prepared for the Office of Early Learning and School Readiness.
1 Measuring Child Outcomes: State of the Nation. 2 Learning objective: To gain new information about the national picture regarding measuring child outcomes.
Highs and Lows on the Road to High Quality Data American Evaluation Association Anaheim, CA November, 2011 Kathy Hebbeler and Lynne Kahn ECO at SRI International.
CHILD OUTCOMES BASELINE AND TARGETS FOR INDICATOR 7 ON THE STATE PERFORMANCE PLAN State Advisory Panel for Exceptional Children November 12, 2009 January.
The Results are In! Child Outcomes for OSEP EI and ECSE Programs Donna Spiker Early Childhood Outcomes Center at SRI International October 13, 2011 (CCSSO-SCASS.
Update on Part C Child Outcomes Lynne Kahn ECO at UNC The Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) Center June 2011 Kathy Hebbeler ECO at SRI International.
The Results are In: Using Early Childhood Outcome Data Kathy Hebbeler Early Childhood Outcomes Center at SRI International August, 2011.
Presented at Division for Early Childhood National Harbor, Maryland November, Child Outcomes: What We Are Learning from National, State, and Local.
Updates on APR Reporting for Early Childhood Outcomes (Indicators C-3 and B-7) Western Regional Resource Center APR Clinic 2010 November 1-3, 2010 San.
Child Outcomes Data July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009.
Considerations for Establishing Baseline and Setting Targets for Indicators C3 and B7 Kathy Hebbeler, Lynne Kahn, Christina Kasprzak ECO/NECTAC June 16,
Early Childhood Outcomes Center Using the Child Outcomes Summary Form February 2007.
The Current Status of States' Early Childhood Outcome Measurement Systems Kathy Hebbeler, SRI International Lynne Kahn, FPG Child Dev Inst October 17,
Target Setting For Indicator #7 Child Outcomes WDPI Stakeholder Group December 16, 2009 Ruth Chvojicek Statewide Child Outcomes Coordinator 1 OSEP Child.
State Performance Plan: A Two-Way Street Ruth Ryder Larry Wexler Division of Monitoring and State Improvement Planning.
Child Outcomes Data Analysis Workshop Abby Winer, ECTA, DaSy Kathy Hebbeler, ECTA, DaSy Kathi Gillaspy, ECTA, DaSy September 8, 2014 Improving Data, Improving.
Noel Cole, Coordinator Michigan Department of Education, Office of Early Childhood Education and Family Services.
SPP Indicators B-7 and B-8: Overview and Results to Date for the Florida Prekindergarten Program for Children with Disabilities PreK Coordinators Meeting.
School Performance Framework Sponsored by The Colorado Department of Education Summer 2010 Version 1.3.
Child Outcomes: Understanding the Requirements in order to Set Targets Presentation to the Virginia Interagency Coordination Council Infant &
Module 5 Understanding the Age-Expected Child Development, Developmental Trajectories and Progress Every day, we are honored to take action that inspires.
Early Childhood Outcomes Center1 Using Data for Program Improvement Christina Kasprzak, NECTAC/ECO Ann Bailey, NCRRC July 2010.
Overview to Measuring Early Childhood Outcomes Ruth Littlefield, NH Department of Education Lynne Kahn, FPG Child Dev Inst November 16,
1 Measuring Child Outcomes: State of the Nation. 2 Learning objective: To gain new information about the national picture regarding measuring child outcomes.
PREVIEW: STATE CHILD OUTCOMES DATA QUALITY PROFILES National Webinar February 2014.
2012 OSEP Leadership Conference Leading Together to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career Child Outcomes for Early Intervention and Preschool Special Education:
Using COS Data to Inform Program Improvement at All Levels Every day, we are honored to take action that inspires the world to discover, love and nurture.
Understanding and Using Early Childhood Outcome (ECO) Data for Program Improvement Kansas Division for Early Childhood Annual Conference Feb. 23rd 2012.
Using COS Data to Inform Program Improvement at All Levels Every day, we are honored to take action that inspires the world to discover, love and nurture.
Understanding and Using Early Childhood Outcome (ECO) Data for Program Improvement TASN – KITS Fall 2012 Webinar August 31 st, 2012 Tiffany Smith Phoebe.
Presented at ECEA-SCASS Meeting Savannah, Georgia October, 2010 OSEP Initiatives on Early Childhood Outcomes Kathy Hebbeler Early Childhood Outcomes Center.
Summary Statements. The problem... Progress data included –5 progress categories –For each of 3 outcomes –Total of 15 numbers reported each year Too many.
Considerations Related to Setting Targets for Child Outcomes.
Parent and National TA Perspectives on EC Outcomes Connie Hawkins, Region 2 PTAC Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI Lynne Kahn ECO at FPG and NECTAC.
Communicating Effectively with the Media and Public about Child Outcomes Data Early Childhood Outcomes Conference July 30-31, 2010 Donna Spiker Sharon.
Early Childhood Outcomes Workgroup Christina Kasprzak and Lynne Kahn ECO and NECTAC July 2009.
O S E P Office of Special Education Programs United States Department of Education Aligning the State Performance Plan, Improvement Strategies, and Professional.
Measuring EC Outcomes DEC Conference Presentation 2010 Cornelia Taylor, ECO Christina Kasprzak, ECO/NECTAC Lisa Backer, MN DOE 1.
OSEP Project Directors Meeting
Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI International AUCD Meeting Washington, DC
G-CASE Fall Conference November 14, 2013 Savannah, Ga
Review of Summary Statements for Target Setting on Indicators C3 and B7 Lynne Kahn and Christina Kasprzak ECO/NECTAC June 9,
Early Childhood Outcomes Data (Indicator C3 and B7)
OSEP Initiatives on Early Childhood Outcomes
Webinar for the Massachusetts ICC Retreat October 3, 2012
Using outcomes data for program improvement
The Basics of Quality Data and Target Setting
Building Capacity to Use Child Outcomes Data to Improve Systems and Practices 2018 DEC Conference.
Early Childhood and Family Outcomes
Researchers as Partners with State Part C and Preschool Special Education Agencies in Collecting Data on Child Outcomes Kathy Hebbeler, ECO at SRI International.
ECO Suggestions on Indicators C3 and B7 Kathy Hebbeler, ECO
Gathering Input for the Summary Statements
Target Setting for Child Outcomes
ECO Suggestions on Indicators C3 and B7 Kathy Hebbeler, ECO
Kathy Hebbeler, Lynne Kahn, Christina Kasprzak ECO/NECTAC
Review of Summary Statements for Target Setting on Indicators C3 and B7 Lynne Kahn and Christina Kasprzak ECO/NECTAC June 9,
Measuring EC Outcomes DEC Conference Presentation 2010
Measuring Part C and Early Childhood Special Education Child Outcomes
Child Outcomes Data July 1, 2008 – June 30, 2009
Christina Kasprzak Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute
Measuring Child and Family Outcomes Conference August 2008
Early Childhood Outcomes Data (Indicator C3 and B7)
Presentation transcript:

National Call on Public Reporting of Local Child Outcomes Data NECTAC/ECO June 11, 2010

Objectives for the call Information sharing about the requirement to report local child outcomes data Discussion of questions and issues 2

Public Reporting Requirement in IDEA 2004 ( Report C3 and B7 the same way and at the same time you do the local reporting on other indicators) `(C) PUBLIC REPORTING AND PRIVACY- `(i) IN GENERAL- The State shall use the targets established in the plan and priority areas described in subsection (a)(3) to analyze the performance of each local educational agency in the State in implementing this part. `(ii) REPORT- `(I) PUBLIC REPORT- The State shall report annually to the public on the performance of each local educational agency located in the State on the targets in the State's performance plan. The State shall make the State's performance plan available through public means, including by posting on the website of the State educational agency, distribution to the media, and distribution through public agencies. `(II) STATE PERFORMANCE REPORT- The State shall report annually to the Secretary on the performance of the State under the State's performance plan. 3

Local Reporting on C3 and B7- Is anything different? The state C3 and B7 SPP data included: –Percentages of children in the progress categories (a through e) for each of the 3 outcomes –The 2 Summary Statement percentages for each outcome –Baseline and target data on the 2 Summary Statements for each outcome 4

The Summary Statements 1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in each Outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they exited the program. 2.The percent of children who were functioning within age expectations in each Outcome by the time they exited the program. 5

What to include in local reporting For each local program: –The percentages of children reported for each Summary Statement for each outcome, i.e. The percent who changed growth trajectories and the percent who reached age expectations for each outcome Compared to The state targets for FFY2009 6

Methods for reporting - Tabular data Outcome 3: Taking Appropriate Action to Meet Needs 7

Questions and issues: Reflecting local program How can the data reflect our local program effectiveness when not all the children who exit from our program received all of their services here? 8

Questions and issues: Comparisons How large does a difference have to be to be a meaningful difference? Local to state target, local to local Big local programs are likely to track the state Summary Statements closely Cautions related to comparisons –Quality of the data –Number of children in the calculations (i.e., small n) What factors explain a difference? 9

Questions and issues: Messaging Putting the message on the data – why do we do it? how do we do it?: –Understanding the potential for misinterpretation of data –Needing to have different messages for different audiences (levels for detail) –Making sure that persons explaining the data have good understanding of the data –Other issues you have? 10

Questions and Issues: Getting local programs ready What are programs doing to get ready for public reporting of local data? Make sure local programs understand and can explain the summary statements Make sure local programs understand and can explain the a-e progress categories Note: will need a-e to understand summary statements 11

12

The Summary Statements 1.Of those children who entered the 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. 2.The percent of children who were functioning within age expectations in each Outcome by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. 13

Other Ways to Think about Summary Statement 1 How many children changed growth trajectories during their time in the program? Percent of the children who entered the program below age expectations made greater than expected gains, made substantial increases in their rates of growth, i.e. changed their growth trajectories 14

Formula for SS 1 (c+d)/(a+b+c+d) 15

Summary Statement 2 2. The percent of children who were functioning within age expectations in each Outcome by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. 16

Other Ways to Think about Summary Statement 2 How many children were functioning like same aged peers when they left the program? Percent of the children who were functioning at age expectations in this outcome area when they exited the program, including those who: started out behind and caught up and entered and exited at age level 17

Formula for SS 2 (d+e)/(a+b+c+d+e) 18

Questions and Issues: Local data use How are programs thinking about using the local child outcomes data? Local determinations? (optional) Program improvement? (make sure you trust the data!) Focusing TA to local programs? –For data quality –For program improvement 19

Questions and Issues Others? 20

Resources There are several helpful documents on the NECTAC website – asp#reportdatahttp:// asp#reportdata Forthcoming report from Technical Assistance Center on IDEA Accountability Data (DAC) with recommendations for small n’s Outcomes meeting – July ! 21