Belgoaid Early childhood intervention in Belgium

Introduction  Belgium is like a small Europe with language communities, regions and districts.  For a foraigner our Federal structure is rather complicated,as a result and that makes that we have 4 legislations on Early Childhood Intervention depending on the language community you belong to and the region or district you live in.

Communities Regions

The beginny of ECI Flanders ( 6 mil. habitants)  First projects started at the end of the seventies  1990 first legislation in the Flemish community Philosophy: home based approach intervention home based approach intervention Brussels French speaking community ( 1 mil. habitants)  First projects started at the end of the seventies  1990 first legislation in the French community  2000 legislation for Brussels Philosophy: guidance service Wallonia (3,3 mil. habitants)  First projects started at the end of the seventies  1990 first legislation in the French community  2004 legislation for Wallonia Philosophy: early childhood intervention German speaking community ( habitants)  Began1986  First legislation 1990  Adaptations 1999 Philosophy: early childhood intervention

Mission Flanders  A home based pedagogical support  Pedagogical intervention, social and psychological support to the child, the family and the environment Brussels French speaking community  Individual support in daily life environment  Principal mission related to age category and supplementary mission depending on topics ( kindergarten, integration in the school, leisure time,…)  Pedagogical intervention, social and psychological support to the child, the family  Technical support Wallonia  Guidance in daily life  Individual assessment up to 8 year  Pedagogical intervention, social and psychological support to the child, the family and the environment  Prevention and detection German speaking community  Family guidance  Individual programs (rehabilitation, educational support, social and psychological treatment, diagnostic, integration,…

Remarks  We see an evolution from the medical paradigm over the educational paradigm to a more ecologic-systemic approach  Family (home based approach)  Network of the family  Inclusion (collaboration with general services)  The philosophy depends from the start period. In the seventies the relationship between parents and professional comes into the focus, new ideas are raising:  Partnership (parent groups, parent as expert, agreement, …)  Educational framework ( the necessity to involve special pedagogues or psychologist on a universal level in each service)  Self-support

PROGRAMMING ( planning) Flanders ( 6 mil. habitants)  1 service for each handicap in each province Mental -, motor -, hearing -, visual disability and autism 5 Provinces  20 services acknowledged for a specific handicap Brussels French speaking community ( 1 mil. habitants)  no planning  7 services acknowledged for mission 1 preschool age Wallonia (3,3 mil. habitants)  1 service for early intervention in a community from at least 8000 children under 8 years of age.  18 services acknowledged general services and specified handicapped German speaking community ( habitants)  1 service for the German speaking community

Age ranged Flanders  0 – 66 year Brussels French speaking community  0 – 66 depending on the mission Wallonia  0 – 8 year German speaking community  0 – 7 year

Remarks  Do we need handicapped specific services? The conclusion from the Belgoaid meeting was that you need the expertise about the disability and that you acquired the special pedagogical approach. Specified services includes the danger to exclude some children ( multiple handicapped children, children with new and rather unknown disabilities,…) General services included the danger to neglect the specific approach ( adapted stimulation program, specific pedagogical handling, …)  Some services can give a long term guidance, in other legislations there is a rupture between preschool en school aged, infants and adults,… The conclusion from the Belgoaid meeting was that specific early childhood intervention is suitable but with enough specific attention to it can be part of a larger guidance program.

Admission Conditions to enter the program Flanders  Inscription in the Flemish Fund for the social integration of disable persons  Provisional decision for 1 year based on a simple medical attest  Definitive decision based on a multidisciplinary report made by a acknowledge diagnostic centre Brussels French speaking community  Inscription in the French Fund must only be suggest if the handicap is severe Wallonia  Positive decision of the Wallon Agency for the social integration of disable persons  Provisional decision  Decision from another region German speaking community  Inscription in the German Fund isn’t necessary

remarks  Prevention becomes more difficult if parents need a inscription and decision from the fund for the social integration of disable people  For some parents this inscription is one step to far  Because of the necessity of an inscription you can not respect the individual private time that some parents need  A small threshold guarantee abuse

Working Models Flanders  Individual guidance contract  Home visit = session  Session = an intervention of at least one hour at home in the family of the child or in the secondary life environment  Individualised intervention program  Standards of the quality handbook Brussels French speaking community  Individual support ( individualised program and annual evaluation )  Session = intervention at home, in the service or in the secondary life environment  Collaboration with other services Wallonia  Individual guidance contract  Individualised intervention program  Collaboration with the network with a preference for general services  Service project German speaking community  Individualised guidance convention  Collaboration with the network  Guidance of the parents  Assessment of the child

Grants Flanders  Grants for salaries and activities  Grants in relationship to the number of actual visits Brussels French speaking community  Grants for salaries and activities  Grants for salaries related to categories and families Wallonia  Grants for salaries and activities German speaking community  Annual convention negotiated with the German Fund in relation to the demands

Remarks  Problem of waiting lists  How to share the means over the families

Financial intervention for the parents Flanders  € 4,2 for each session ( home visit)  Signature of the parents Brussels French speaking community  Between € 1,32 and € 13,16 a month depending on the demands and the families Wallonia  Maximum € 25 a month German speaking community  € 8,95 for the first assessment  1 % of the family allowance with a maximum of € 2,85 for each session

Remarks  In Flanders parents has to sign for each home visit. Seventy percent of the sessions must be done in home visits or in the kindergarten. What is the influence of this instruction in the law on daily work?  Is this positive for the parents and does it increase the partnership or is it a difficult exercise for the professionals in maintaining the balance between parents and professionals?  The report of the agency mentions that parents must be involved in the annual evaluation and the individualised programs.  Certain legislations focus more on the collaboration with the network and the inclusion  What is the influence of the price that parents have to pay?

Control and evaluation Flanders  Control of the number of sessions and the prescriptions of the legislation  External and internal audits on quality conform the standards of the quality handbook  Account control Brussels French speaking community  Control of the prescriptions of the law (at least 2 sessions each month in each family)  Account control  Pedagogical evaluation Wallonia  Account control  Each three year a new acknowledgement must be asked and motivated  Annual internal evaluation German speaking community  Global evaluation two time a year

Remarks  We need a legislation that should guaranty a equitable division of the means according the needs  The service requires creativity in spite of an all to often lack of a flexibility on the part of the government agencies  The challenge is to find a balance between a quantitative and qualitative evaluation