1 QRIS National Learning Network Learning Table Welcome! 1 “Strengthening Inquiry”

Faculty Garrison Kurtz Jane Reisman Kasey Langley Diana Schaack Instructors Technical Support 2

Learning Table Overview October 7 (completed) October 27 (today!) December 1 Proposed Dates: January 26 February 23 March 23 3

Expands to... GoToMeeting Participant Tools 4 Clicking here...

Ground Rules Manage background noise through use of the mute buttons *6 switch between mute and talk Listen to understand Indicate your state and first name when speaking See each other as resources Realistic expectations of busy professionals 5

Forum Topics 6 Moving from our current situation to our desired - How do we manage the move from our current state (including whatever “plans or theory” we have articulated), to the new state? How must/should we engage the different players who want/need input and buy-in?

Critical Questioning What are your initial reactions to the Disarray QRIS Plans? 7

Case Study – Raising Critical Questions Assumptions What are some of the assumptions that are explicit or implicit in the Disarray QRIS plan? What is the basis for those assumptions? Are they valid or should they be revisited? Accountability What outcomes are the team designing/implementing accountable for achieving? Do the strategies match the outcomes? 8

Levels of Planning Strategies 9 Standards Program/ Practitioner Support AccountabilityIncentives Outreach & Communications 50,000 State of Disarray QRIS Pilot Expansion Strategies Long-term Financial Strategies Communications Outreach and Education 30,000 10,000 Set Quality Standards Accountability

State of Disarray 30,000 Foot Outcome Map Standards Set and promote quality standards Accountability Conduct ratings Gather and manage data Program/Practitioner Support Onsite consultation and coaching Small grants Incentives Increased subsidy based on star rating Outreach & Communications Statewide parent education campaign All children are ready for kindergarten F. Increased use of data to drive individual improvement plans D. Improved quality among parents/practitioners receiving support E. Increased understanding among parents of elements of high quality child care H. Increased number/percentage of children care slots are with high quality programs/practitioners A. Increased sustainability of high quality child care businesses participating G. Increased number and percentage of parents who choose to enroll kinds in high quality care C. More children participating in child care experience high quality B. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care F. Increased use of data to drive individual improvement plans D. Improved quality among programs/practitioners receiving support E. Increased understanding among parents of elements of high quality child care H. Increased number/percentage of children care slots are with high quality programs/practitioners A. Increased sustainability of high quality child care businesses participating G. Increased number and percentage of parents who choose to enroll kids in high quality care C. More children participating in child care experience high quality B. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care

30,000 Foot Assumptions 11 Assumptions - What are some of the assumptions that are explicit or implicit in the Disarray QRIS plan? What is the basis for those assumptions? Are they valid or should they be revisited? Accountability -What outcomes are the team designing/implementing accountable for achieving? Do the strategies match the outcomes?

State of Disarray 10,000 Foot Outcome Map All children are ready for kindergarten D. Increased common understanding of definition of quality among state’s child care stakeholders A. Increased understanding of current level of quality among existing providers C. Increased use of data to drive individual improvement plans B. Increased identification of opportunities to improve quality of existing programs Align quality standards with professional standards and early learning guidelines Review and revise quality standards periodically Align quality standards with professional standards and early learning guidelines Create data collection, analysis and reporting process/system and practices Assess and periodically monitor learning environment and interactions Analyze trends Select/ design assessment tools and processes Assign SODS rating Align standards with assessments and ratings tools 12 SET QUALITY STANDARDSACCOUNTABILITY: CONDUCT RATINGS GATHER AND MANAGE DATA D. Increased common understanding of definition of quality among state’s child care stakeholders C. Increased use of data to drive individual improvement plans B. Increased identification of opportunities to improve quality of existing programs A. Increased understanding of current level of quality among existing providers

10,000 Foot Assumptions 13 What outcomes are the team designing/implementing accountable for achieving? Do the strategies match the outcomes? Are there other outcomes that would you suggest adding in order to describe the theory and show short- term accountabilities? Any thoughts about Assumptions? What are some of the assumptions that are explicit or implicit in the Disarray QRIS plan? What is the basis for those assumptions? Are they valid or should they be revisited?

State of Disarray 50,000 Foot Outcome Map State of Disarray QRIS Pilot Standards Accountability Program/Practitioner support Financial incentives Outreach and education Expansion Strategies Long-term Financial Strategies Communications Outreach and Education Standards, ratings of programs Parents, policymakers, public All children are ready for kindergarten D. Increased support of funding for QRIS among policymakers E. Changed state norm related to quality expectations for child care H. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care A. More children participating in child care that exercises high quality G. Increased understanding among parents and public of quality care and role of QRIS C. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care QRIS pilot providers B. Increased school readiness among all children I. Increased number/ percentage of participants participating in QRIS 6 14 D. Increased support of funding for QRIS among policymakers E. Changed state norm related to quality expectations for child care H. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care A. More children participating in child care that exercises high quality G. Increased understanding among parents and public of quality care and role of QRIS C. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care QRIS pilot providers B. Increased school readiness among all children I. Increased number/ percentage of participants participating in QRIS

50,000 Foot Assumptions 15 What are some of the assumptions that are explicit or implicit in the Disarray QRIS plan? What is the basis for those assumptions? Are they valid or should they be revisited? How about those outcomes? Do they resonate with you? Would you suggest additional or different system-level outcomes?

Discussion and Initial Thoughts We’d like to hear back from each state, if we could, with your initial reactions to today’s material. Share an “Aha”, an idea that you’d like to pursue, or do differently 16 For what outcomes IS it reasonable to hold QRIS accountable?

17 Feedback Webinar Polling POLL 1 How prepared do you feel for creating Theories of Action, Logic Models and Outcome Maps for your state QRIS?

18 Feedback Webinar Polling POLL 2 Are you familiar with the recently published NCCIC Compendium on QRIS Systems and Evaluations?

19 Feedback Webinar Polling POLL 3 Are you familiar with the RAND Report on QRIS Systems in Five Pioneer States?

20 Homework Assignment By Noon Pacific Time 11/16/10, please send your state’s response to the following questions to Heidi Brown at ORS so that we can use it as the basis for conversation during the December 1 st Learning Table: 1.In thinking of the three levels of QRIS Outcome Maps for the State of Disarray we discussed today, what level of outcome map is most useful for what your state is in planning? Please share some reasons why this is helpful. 2.When comparing the strategies and outcomes in the State of Disarray’s Outcome Maps to your own state’s efforts, which additional strategies and outcomes do your plans include and which are missing? If you are not thinking about changing your plans to accommodate these differences, what are the assumptions that underlie your decision?

21 Next session: December 1, :30 AM Pacific12:30 PM Central1:30 PM Eastern Additional feedback, send to Thank you for your participation! Wrap Up