1. Inquiring Families Want to Know: Engaging Families in the Outcome Rating Process
Hearing Family Stories
Gaining Family Insight
Involving Families
Adapted from materials developed by Naomi Younggren, 2011
Kathi

2. 2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference
Presenters: Shannon Dunstan, ID Kathi Gillaspy, NECTAC/ECO Pam Miller, MD Judy Swett, PACER/NECTAC Jennifer Zielinski, ID Jennifer Barrett-Zitkus, IL
Introduction of speakers
Who’s in the room?
Turn over to Judy
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference 2

3. Hearing Family Stories
Empower families to be active members of the IFSP/IEP team
Encourage them to share their thoughts and ideas with you
Not a separate process – it’s really empowering families to be active members of team by asking to hear their stories
Encouraging them – may be some prompts that can be used to get the family talking. More specific and deliberate than just asking, “how’s it going??
Can’t separate the COS work from the IFSP or IEP – not just something do at the beginning or end of the year.
This begins with evaluation and assessment process; how you initiate the relationship with the family to help them feel empowered and informed. It sets the stage. Don’t hide information (family outcomes)
Gathering information in regular meetings with a family about how they see their child making progress. Some of that comes about from talking about outcomes and the strategies developed to address the outcome, checking in with parents about it went, what worked/didn’t worked.
We’re assuming that this information is then kept as part of the progress monitoring…
As having those regular conversations, are setting the stage for the COS and the rating – it will be more natural. Strong relationships and regular communication allow families
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

4. Gaining Family Insight
Setting the stage so families take an active role in interaction
Listening
Asking good questions
Ask for feedback, invite comments/reactions
Starts at the initial contact and builds
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

5. Interviewing Pointers Westby, Burda, & Metha, 2003
Use open-ended questions
Use restating – repeating the exact words
Summarize and invite opportunities to correct
Avoid back-to-back and compound questions
Avoid leading questions
Cautiously use "why" questions
Listen more than talk
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

6. 2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference
Parent Roles
Team Member
Information Provider & Receiver
Participant in the COS rating discussion
Equal team member with same respect, collaboration and honest would any other
Highlight here that it is NOT accurate to assume that parents don’t want or can’t handle the information in the COS – they WANT and KNOW information.
Remember Parent Roles
Share EC Outcome Information Early & Often
Include EC outcomes information in discussions about progress toward outcomes/goals
Include Parents in the COS Rating Discussion
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

7. Share Information Early & Often
Red represents all the opportunities throughout the process to share/have conversations about child and family outcomes
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

8. What We Should Expect from Family Involvement in the COS Rating?
Yes!
They can provide rich information about their child’s functioning across settings and situation.
Maybe
They will know whether their child is showing age expected skills.
Maybe…
But with prompts, can help them understand what IS typical, and where their child is right now.
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

9. 2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference
How Families Can Help
They know their child best. As a partner on the team they can provide information about how their child:
Gets along with family and friends
Manages feelings
Tries to do new things
Communicates new ideas
Tries to be independent
Seeks help when needed
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

10. You can't handle the truth!*
Families can handle the truth
We need to be able to share information with them openly and honestly
* Col. Jessup, A Few Good Men 10
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

11. 2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference
Genuinely engage families in the entire process, appreciate their strengths, and reach agreement with them about their child. -Naomi Younggren
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

12. Talking with Families about Child Outcomes
Illinois Early Intervention Training Program
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

13. 2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference
Illinois
25 Point of Entries (Child and Family Connections)
Designated Service Coordinator Model (450)
Vender Model Provider Base (5,000)
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference 13

14. Introduction of Child and Family Outcomes
Provider
Service Coordinator

15. Service Coordinator Overload

16. Illinois EI Training Program Shift
Family
Service Coordinator
Child and Family Outcomes
Provider
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

17. Online Trainings

18. 2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference
Online Trainings
System Overview Online
Understanding the Illinois Child Outcomes Process Online Training
The Impact of Early Intervention on Families Online Training
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference

19. Face to Face Training System Overview Follow-Up Face to Face
Outcomes in Action Follow-Up
EI Sponsored Trainings
EI Institutes
EI Cohorts

20. Provider Forums and LIC Meetings
Local Provider Meetings
Local Interagency Meetings

21. (19,622 Active IFSPs)

22. Direct Opportunities for Family Support on Child Outcomes
Referral
Intake (Routines –Based Interview )
IFSP Meetings (Decision Tree)
Monthly Contact
Exit
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference 22

23. 2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference
Resources
ECO Outcomes Video
ECO Center Website
Decision Tree
EI Training IFSP Video
Illinois Training Newsletter and Web Site
Illinois Early Intervention Clearinghouse
Project Enhance
Enhance Comparison with Child Assessments Study, we will compare information about children’s progress that is collected in different ways. We will examine the relationship between the summary rating process the program uses when the child starts and stops receiving services with the scores and progress documented in a formal assessment of the child. The assessment tools are the Battelle Developmental Inventory (BDI-2) and Vineland Scales of Adaptive Behavior (Vineland-II). Assessments will be given to children near program entry and program exit, around the same time as when teams decide on summary ratings.
he Team Decision-Making Study, we will use videos of the child’s team discussing how a child is doing to learn how teams describe a child’s functioning and summarize it with a rating. We will investigate the discussion process the child’s program uses to decide upon the appropriate rating. We will examine who is involved in the discussion, how long it takes, what evidence people describe, and how they use that information to decide on a rating. In the Record Review Study, we will look at information from a child’s records. We will explore how the child was doing when he or she entered the program and the progress the child is making. We will investigate the agreement between the rating, the information documented on the rating form itself, and other information in the child’s record, such as progress notes or practitioner observations.
2012 Measuring and Improving Child and Family Outcomes Conference 23

24. Embedding the ECO Process into Early Childhood IEPs
As the Early Childhood Coordinator, I have also been working to evaluate our State’s Early Childhood Outcomes and Early Childhood IEP’s. The Office of Special Education Program has a mandate that each state have accurate and timely reporting around Early Childhood Outcome.

25. During the last two years, I have worked to evaluate the Early Childhood Outcome – Indicator 7 data and processes for the State. I started by visiting over 75% of all developmental preschool programs, reviewing the Child Outcome Summary Forms for accurate reporting processes, cross walking the student’s entered into the State Early Childhood Outcome data system and student’s reported on District December 1 Counts, and facilitated a statewide survey regarding Idaho’s current ECO process. What I found was disheartening.

26. During the 2010/2011 school year, Idaho under-represented students reported on December 1 and student’s reported in the Early Childhood Data system by over 1000 students.
I then looked at the State required Child Outcome Summary Forms, over a two year period for minimal compliance. To meet minimal compliance the current Child Outcome Summary Form must have included 6 components:
It was completed as a team process, and
Parent input was documented, and
An observation or interview was conducted and that information was reported on the form, and
An Anchor Assessment was completed, and
Student’s present level of performance was documented in regard to age appropriate skills, immediate foundational skills, and foundational skills, and
The rating matched the information that was provided.

27. Parent involvement was documented less than 32%
Documented age appropriate, immediate, and foundational skills less than 26%
Student’s ECO rating matched information provided less than 10%
Overall minimal criteria for accurate reporting less than 3% of the time
This information is based on a cross section of preschool IEP’s reviewed during Child Count Verification during 2011 and 2012
As you can see the result put our Federal Reporting scores into question. Something had to change.

28. A statewide survey was conducted and sent to all developmental preschool teachers and special education directors from around the state to get their input on the new process. The responses did not align with what was being seen in practice.
70% of Respondents were ECSE teachers
55% have been working 10 or more years
84% respondents ECOs was one of their primary responsibilities
57% were initially trained by SDE
33% received training by a college or not at all

29. Side by Side Comparison
Survey Response
Practice Evidence
70% proficient or expert
64% and 59% used team at entrance and exit
88% collected AA, IF, and F
71% used the decision tree
3% met minimal compliance
77% and 86% used team process at entrance and exit
26% in 2012 and 20% in 2011 AA, IF and F documented
Rating matched Evidence provided 10% 2012 and 8%
In reviewing the documentation and the survey responses there was discrepancy. What respondents thought they were doing and what was found in factual reporting were:
70% of respondents felt they were proficient or expert at completing the ECO process – yet only about 3% of the Outcomes were completed with minimal compliance
64% use a team process to determine entrance and 59% at exit – The sampling did show a high percentage of team process with 77% documenting a team process 2012 and 86% in 2011, however the expectation is 100% utilize a team process
88% collect data on the AA, IF and F during assessment and observations – only 26% noted AA, IF, and F on the COSF-R form in 2012 and only 20% in and 35% and 29% respectively reported an observation or interview on their COSF-R form.
71% use the decision tree – Only 10% in 2012 and 8% in 2011 did the QA get the same score based on the information provided.

30. Early Childhood Outcomes are NOT Meaningful
Paperwork, just another form
more work not related to services provided
just what the state says to do
not relevant, not a useful tool
more time, not enough time to process paper
ECO areas are very broad in comparison to IEP goals
team does not want to take the time so do it alone
not valued by the team
to subjective
program will not change if ECOs goes away
takes time away from teaching
current practice lacks, not a true picture of child
progress with most challenging students is not reflective in ECO reporting
outcomes do not reflect minimal growth of severe students
data is more important for developing goals and intervention then reporting outcomes
easier to see growth in IEP but not on an anchor assessment
Redundant
takes time way from kids; more meetings that takes time away from students

31. Teachers thoughts regarding Parent Input
do not understand the need for ECO document
ECO is only used to gather information and functional outcomes come out of the IEP as a team process
COSF forms takes a lot more prodding of parents for information
difficult for parents to answer the question what are my child’s strengths, hard for parents to articulate concerns
how much parent input do we need
parents don’t know how to make sense of their child in regard to education
parent is not a valuable member until parent teacher conferences
gathering information from parents is good but not actuate for goal outcome without extensive observations
unrealistic to get every parent to give input
not parent friendly
too long, too many steps
do difficult to sit with family and develop IEP and fill out ECOs information
makes families really sad to hear skills child is lacking
too much grief for parents

32. So What to Do?
Change our perception to emphasize how the ECO process can promote quality programs and growth for children
Change how we look at the whole child
Change and give value to how we look at outcomes for children
Change in attitude
Change, change, change.

33. In cooperation with the National Early Child Outcome Center, Other State 619 Coordinators, School Districts from across the State, Special Education Directors, and Consulting Teachers new preschool IEP/ECO forms were developed, piloted, and modified based on input. THIS REQUIRES EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS TO DO NO ADDITIONAL PAPERWORK. Rather than completing two sets of paperwork, the ECO requirements have ben embedding into our state IEP form.

34. Partnering with Parents

35. Parent Training and Information Center
Partner with Idaho State Department of Education
Educate, train and provide information to parents
Ensure parent involvement
Parent participation in decision making and planning

36. Find the following on the ITC: www.idahotc.com
Online Learning Community
Early Childhood
eGuidelines
Early Childhood Outcomes
Transitions
IEPs
Best Practice
Least Restrictive Environment
Housed at: Center on Disabilities and Human Development, University of Idaho

37. Contact Information:
Shannon Dunstan Early Childhood & Interagency Coordinator Idaho State Department of Education Division of Student Achievement and School Improvement Division of Special Education (208)

38. Engaging Families in the Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process: A Framework

39. Engaging Families in the Child Outcomes Summary Process: Video Resource39

40. Engaging Families in the Child Outcomes Summary Process: Video Viewing Guide40

41. Engaging Families: Locally Developed Resources41

43. Online COS Tutorial: Bringing It All Together43

44. Thank you for coming! www.the-eco-center.org
Questions?
Thank you for coming!