BEST FOR ALL KIDS Infusing Inclusion into TQRIS (Quality Rating & Improvement Systems) Edna Collins, Ph. D., Program Specialist, NC DHHS Division of Child Development & Early Education Jani Kozlowski, Senior TA Specialist Zero to Three Mary F. Sonnenberg, M.Ed., Deputy Director, Delaware Stars for Early Success, Delaware Institute for Excellence in Early Childhood Verna Thompson, 619 Coordinator Delaware Department of Education Moderator: Pam Winton FPG Child Development Institute

AGENDA  National Context and Overview  Issues Related to an Inclusive Approach to QRIS  Structures & incentives  Measurement  Professional development  Examples & Perspectives from Two States (DE and NC)  State context (DE and NC)  Strategies for addressing issues  Vexing Questions for Small Group Discussion

NATIONAL CONTEXT Focus on High Needs Children

NATIONAL CONTEXT Focus on Cross Sector Systems Building

NATIONAL CONTEXT Accountability & Quality

Quality Movement = Multiple Quality Initiatives Accreditation Criteria OSEP Monitoring and Accountability Head Start Performance Framework

Two Different Quality Initiatives Quality Inclusion QRIS US DOE OSEP State Performance Plan Annual Report (SPP APR) Early Childhood Early Childhood Special Education/ Early Intervention

8 What Is QRIS?  Varies from state to state with all states participating at some level  Common elements include  Quality standards  Process for assessing standards  Outreach and support to programs to raise quality  Financial incentives  Consumer awareness

What Is QRIS (CONT.) ?  A method to assess, improve, and communicate the level of quality in early and school-age care settings  May also be called a Tiered Quality Rating and Improvement System (TQRIS) 9

What Does QRIS Look Like?  Builds on foundation of licensing and adds multiple steps between licensing standards and higher quality standards  Offers supports/incentives for reaching higher levels  Provides easily recognized symbols for higher levels 10

Why Develop A QRIS?  The overall goal of QRIS is to improve the quality of programs through system-wide improvements  Opportunity to do the following  Increase quality of care for children  Increase parents’ understanding and demand for higher quality care  Increase professional development of child care providers 11

Why Develop A QRIS (Cont.) ?  Create alignment between licensing, subsidy, and quality and across early childhood sectors (e.g., child care, prekindergarten, Head Start, and others)  Link support and initiatives to a quality framework  Provide an accountability measure for funding 12

What Is OSEP SPP APR? State data on children with disabilities and their families collected and reported to congress  Includes % of preschool children with disabilities receiving services in regular early childhood programs (Least Restrictive Environment)  States must identify targets for increases in % in LRE, identify improvement activities, and explain state progress 13

Three Issues Related to an Inclusive Approach to Quality Within QRIS  Structures & incentives  Measurement  Professional development

STATE CONTEXT QRIS Development  Delaware  North Carolina

QRIS Development in Delaware  Initiated in 2007  Children with Special Needs was a component  619 Coordinator on the Advisory Committee  Intention – to provide quality environments for children at risk – including children with disabilities  2008—Depart. of Education designated lead agency for QRIS  Managerial implementation of Stars given to the Delaware Institute for Excellence in Early Childhood located at the University of Delaware  2009—Programs not moving up; little fiscal oversight; poor reputation of program  2010—State & federal funding for QRIS; Placed moratorium on new programs while developed strategic plan to revise the state’s QRIS

 2011  Delaware Governor Markell and General Assembly appropriated $22 million to boost the state’s child care subsidy system, fund the administration of Stars, and fund a tiered reimbursement component  December 2011 – RTTT-ELC awarded  As part of the Early Learning Challenge, public schools could now participate in Delaware Stars  Established Stars Management Team  619 Coordinator on Management Committee  Established a strategic plan to revise the QRIS  Revision of Stars Standards  Practice Principles: Continuity, Inclusion, Intentionality  Stakeholder input & review – State level groups and providers  Reviewed by national experts QRIS Development in Delaware

 In 2012  January 2012: 178 programs participating  New Points/Hybrid System launched  New programs began to be admitted January 2012  December 2012: 322 programs were participating  Increased numbers of programs at Star Level 3, 4, & 5  Cross-Sector expansion as Stars began to serve public school programs (619, Title I)  New Technical Assistance Model  Emphasis on relationship-based TA  Focus on classroom-based assistance to programs  More effort to better prepare TAs  Lower caseloads (40:1) leading to increased TA time with programs (twice a month on average)  Stars Plus Cohorts – More intensive TA model QRIS Development in Delaware

QRIS (Star-rated License) in NC  Implemented in 1999  Embedded in licensure  Minimum licensing requirements = 1 star  5-star system  Primarily points-based  2-component rated license  Program quality (ERS, ratio & group size, quality points)  Staff education  Star rating linked to subsidy rates  Developmental Day (all) and Public School (many) sites are required to be licensed

QRIS Advisory Committee Recommendations  Met September 2009 – June 2012  Recommended change to a hybrid system  Blocks at Levels 1, 3, 5  Points at Levels 2, 4  Specializations leading to Program of Distinction  Raise the floor and raise the ceiling  Many specific recommendations about inclusion  New quality indicators for all programs  Inclusion Specialization  Process recommendations  Map specific recommendations onto conceptual framework  Collect feedback from providers  Test new levels using existing and new data

TQRIS Validation Study (Funded By RttT-ELC)  Purpose: To validate revised TQRIS before recommending changes to Child Care Commission and NC Legislature  Study the impact of recommended changes  Gather feedback from the field  Use results to develop blocks, points, weighting, and standards for each level  Identify quality features that distinguish between programs at higher levels  Relate program features and quality ratings to children’s progress

Structures & Incentives Issues  What is a structure for bringing sectors together around program quality within a QRIS framework?  What are incentives for ensuring buy-in across sectors and ensuring a fair and equitable QRIS for all?  How do you address the “What’s In it For Me?” question?

DE Stars Structures & Incentives 619 Program Participation in DE Stars ▶ 619 Workgroup  Completed alignment document ­ Stars standards and 619 federal regulations; state procedures  Will revise 619 Procedures Manual to align to DE Stars standards  Will lead to clearly defined procedures for 619 programs  Will lead to improved inclusive settings for 619 programs ▶ RTTT ELCG Target for participation and # children with disabilities  7 of the 16 school district 619 programs volunteered to participate  619 programs recruiting community programs to apply to DE Stars

NC QRIS Structures & Incentives  Participation of 619 and Part C stakeholders in QRIS Advisory Committee  Use of Validation Study to test recommended new system, decreasing chances the providers will just “opt out”  Idea: Convene expert stakeholders to develop Inclusion Specialization

Vexing Question Related to Structures & Incentives (for small group discussion) How do you consider ways of including the variety of programs for children with disabilities (e.g., Part C services provided in a variety of settings, or programs that are part-time … 2.5 hrs per day… or segregated programs that are licensed but may have very different goals)?

Measurement Issues  How do you measure high quality inclusive practices?  How do you ensure that the measurement system in place assesses whether early education teachers/practitioners are demonstrating that they are meeting the needs of young children with disabilities?  How do you ensure that young children with disabilities have access to quality learning opportunities that will lead to increased child outcomes?

DE Stars Measurement 619 Programs who apply to DE Stars  May achieve Star Level 3  If they have less than 50% typically developing peers in classrooms  If they have required documentation listed in 619 Procedures Manual  Score at least a 3 on Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS)  May achieve Star Level 4 or 5  If they have at least 50% typically developing peers in all classrooms  If they have required documentation listed in 619 Procedures Manual  Score at least a 4 or 5 on Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS)

Domain: Family and Community Partnerships Maximum 20 points Rationale: Family involvement and reciprocal family-provider relationships are fundamental to high quality early care and education services. This dimension of practice emphasizes ongoing, bi-directional communication between families and programs. Meaningful family engagement in early care and education programs requires attention and sensitivity to the needs of all families. Further, collaboration between child care programs and schools/other agencies assists programs in accessing resources to meet the needs of young children and their families. Categories: Communication (FC), Involvement & Support (FS), Community Partnerships (FP) Crosswalk between Delaware Stars for Early Success ECE Center Standards & Delaware IDEA Part B Section 619 Program Standards

NC QRIS: Measurement  Challenge in current rated license assessment: ERS and children with disabilities  Idea for revised TQRIS: Additional quality indicators related to child assessment (would help to ensure positive child outcomes).  Challenge: Measuring additional quality indicators reliably and efficiently.  Challenge: Would implementing an Inclusion Specialization suggest that all programs need not focus on high quality inclusive practices?

How can QRIS measurement system be kept as simple, practical, feasible and affordable as possible to ensure “buy-in” from practitioners and administrators, at the same time that indicators are meaningful within the context of inclusion? Vexing Question Related to Measurement (for small group discussion)

Professional Development Issues  How do you ensure that PD is available to support improvements within an inclusive QRIS system?  How do you ensure that teachers/practitioners have access to ongoing support that will lead to changes in their practice that will lead to more intentional teaching, and learning opportunities for young children with special needs.

DE Stars Professional Development  Inclusion Credential developed by Interagency Workgroup  EIEIO (Expanding Inclusive Early Intervention Opportunities)  Early Literacy/Math Training offered to Stars TA’s, 619 programs, Head Start  Specific Technical Assistants assigned to School District programs

NC QRIS: Professional Development  Challenge in current system: Availability of high quality in-service PD; any training hours meet requirement.  Idea for revised TQRIS: Additional criteria for in-service professional development focused on inclusion.  Challenge: Strengthening the TA and PD system related to inclusion.

How do you keep the costs of PD in line with funding available? Vexing Question Related to Professional Development (for small group discussion)

Reflections  I am interested in …  I want to know more about …

Vexing Questions Small Group Discussion

Questions For Discussion  Incentives/Structures: How do you consider ways of including the variety of programs for children with disabilities (e.g., Part C services provided in a variety of settings, or programs that are part-time..2.5 hrs per day…or segregated programs that are licensed but may have very different goals)?  Measurement: How can QRIS measurement system be kept as simple, practical, feasible and affordable as possible to ensure “buy-in” from practitioners and administrators, at the same time that indicators are meaningful within the context of inclusion?  PD: How do you keep the costs of PD in line with funding available?

References & Resources  North Carolina QRIS Advisory Committee Executive Summary Executive-Summary.pdf Executive-Summary.pdf  Why Program Quality Matters for Early Childhood Inclusion. Recommendations for Professional Development (2009). Chapel Hill, NC: FPG/NPDCI

THANK YOU