1. Early Childhood Outcomes Data (Indicator C3 and B7)

2. Why are state early intervention and preschool special education agencies collecting data on child and family outcomes?

3. Why? Accountability Program Improvement
Federal government (Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education) requires that states submit data on outcomes
In some states, policy-makers are asking for outcome data
Program Improvement
State agencies (and local programs) want to use data on outcomes to improve services for children and families

4. Federal Forces Proving Impetus for Data on Child Outcomes
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

5. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
SEC <<NOTE: 20 USC 1416.>> MONITORING, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT. ``(a) Federal and State Monitoring.-…..
…..
``(2) Focused monitoring.--The primary focus of Federal and State monitoring activities described in paragraph (1) shall be on-- ``(A) improving educational results and functional outcomes for all children with disabilities;

6. Early Childhood Outcomes Center
OSEP Reporting Requirements: Child Outcomes
Early Childhood Outcomes Center

7. Overarching goal for EI and ECSE
“…To enable young children to be active and successful participants during the early childhood years and in the future in a variety of settings – in their homes with their families, in child care, in preschool or school programs, and in the community.”
(from Early Childhood Outcomes Center,
Early Childhood Outcomes Center

8. Early Childhood Outcomes Center
Three Child Outcomes
Positive social emotional skills (including positive social relationships)
Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/ communication)
Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs
Early Childhood Outcomes Center

9. OSEP reporting categories
Percentage of children who: a. Did not improve functioning b. Improved functioning, but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers c. Improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it d. Improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers e. Maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers
OSEP came up with these 5 categories for reporting children’s progress in the three outcome areas. (Summer 2005: OSEP announces the child and family outcomes States must report on through their SPP/APRs. Progress categories evolved to 5)
3 outcomes x 5 “measures” = 15 numbers

10. The Summary Statements
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 3 [6] years of age or exited the program.
c + d/ (a+b+c+d)
The statements on which states set targets this year.

11. The Summary Statements
2. The percent of children who were functioning within age expectations in each Outcome by the time they turned 3 [6] years of age or exited the program. d + e
Targets set for summary statements this year.

12. The concepts are easier than the words or the formulas
Summary statement 1: How many children changed growth trajectories during their time in the program?
Summary statement 2: How many children were functioning like same aged peers when they left the program?
Other ways to think of SS1 – how many made more than expected growth. Sometimes called ‘significant.’ SS2 – for preschoolers – ‘ready for kindergarten.’ At age level.

13. State Approaches to Measuring Child Outcomes
Part C
(56 states/jur)
Preschool
(59 states/jur)
One tool statewide
7/56 (13%)
9/59 (15%)
Publishers’ online analysis
3/56 (5%)
6/59 (10%)
COSF 7 pt. scale
41/56 (73%)
38/59 (64%)
Other
5/56 (9%)
7/59 (10%)
Percents changed this year for several reasons: (1) we recoded the online analysis with one tool as online analysis due to more in common, (2) at least one more state provided data so the N is different, and (3) a couple states changed categories
Changes from preliminary data due to ‘week of clarification’ documents and also taking out ‘at risk’ from those states, as appropriate.

14. State Approaches to Child Outcomes Measurement – 619 Programs
Early Childhood Outcomes Center – August 2009 MP GU MH
Legend:
COSF
Multiple Publishers’ on-line systems
One tool statewide
Other PW FM AS HI

15. State Approaches to Child Outcomes Measurement – Part C Program
Early Childhood Outcomes Center –August 2009 MP GU
Legend:
COSF
Multiple Publishers’ on-line systems
One tool statewide
Other AS HI

16. Total Number of Children States Included in Progress Data
Section 619
Range =
<10 = 1
10–99 = 7
100–499 = 6
= 12
1000–1999 = 7
2000–2999 = 10
3000–4999 = 11
5000+ = 4
Part C
Range =
< 30 = 2
30-99 = 4
= 16
= 13
= 11
2000+ = 10
Early Childhood Outcomes Center

18. Early Childhood Outcomes Center
Outcome A: Percentages Reported in Progress Categories “a” and “e” grouped by Percent Served
Part C
Early Childhood Outcomes Center

21. Early Childhood Outcomes Center
Percentages of Children Reaching Age Expectations grouped by Percent Served for Part C
Early Childhood Outcomes Center

25. Early Childhood Outcomes Center