1. Trends in Child Outcomes (C-3 / B-7) and Family Outcomes (C-4)
Analysis and Summary Report of All States’ Annual Performance Reports Christina Kasprzak,
Robin Rooney, Siobhan Colgan
Lynne Kahn, Kathy Hebbeler (NECTAC / ECO)
November 30, 2010
4:00 PM EST

2. Webinar Focus
1. National data on child and family outcomes (C3/B7 and C4) 2. Challenges related to collecting and reporting on this indicator 3. Improvement activities

3. Who is joining us on the call today?
Quick Poll 1
Who is joining us
on the call today?

4. Child Outcomes Data
Summary of 2010 APR Data

5. Part C State Approaches (n=56) to Measuring Child Outcomes
Child Outcomes Summary Form (COSF)
41 (73%) states
Single assessment statewide
7 (13%) states
Publishers’ online assessment systems
3 (5%) states
Other approaches
5 (9%) states

6. State Approaches to Child Outcomes Measurement
Part C Program
Early Childhood Outcomes Center –August 2010 MP GU
Legend:
COSF
Publishers’ on-line systems
One tool statewide
Other AS HI

7. 619 State Approaches (n=59) to Measuring Child Outcomes
Child Outcomes Summary Form (COSF)
36 (61%) states
Single assessment statewide
9 (15%) states
Publishers’ online assessment systems
6 (10%) states
Other approaches
7 (12%) states 7

8. State Approaches to Child Outcomes Measurement Section 619 Programs
Early Childhood Outcomes Center –August 2010 MP GU MH
Legend:
COSF
Publishers’ on-line systems
One tool statewide
Other PW FM AS HI

9. The number of Part C children with outcome data is increasing!
Part C Total Number of Children States Included in Progress Data
# of children reported
# of States
FFY07
FFY08
99 or less 13 6 25 16 9 11
2000+ 3 10
Range =
Range =

10. The number of 619 children with outcome data is increasing!
619 Total Number of Children States Included in Progress Data
# of children reported
# of States
FFY07
FFY08
99 or less 12 8 14 6 10 7 5
3000+ 9 15
Range= 3-10,157
Range= 3-9,967

11. Number of children in the data
Quick Poll 2
Number of children
in the data

12. Missing Data ECO additional analysis
State efforts to identify missing data
State efforts to reduce missing data

13. National Conference Call on Data Quality – Coming Soon
What do you know the quality of your state’s outcomes data?
Do you know how much missing data you have? How much is reasonable?
Missing data is still a major problem for many states. Join us to learn about how much progress has been made and how your state compares to the national numbers.

16. Part C Progress data trends
FFY07
FFY08
Part C Progress data trends

17. 619 Progress data trends
FFY07
FFY08

18. Quick Poll 3
Progress
Data Trends

19. Part C - Category ‘e’ by % served

20. FFY2008 Summary Statements
Baseline FFY08
Part C
619
SS1
SS2
Outcome 1
63%
76%
61%
Outcome 2
68%
54%
53%
Outcome 3
69%
62%
75%
65%

21. Part C - Summary Statement 2 by % Served

22. What States are Doing for Improvement
Continuing training and TA on data collection system
Enhancing data systems
Developing data analysis
Identifying and addressing data quality issues
Identifying areas for program improvement

23. Open Discussion
Questions?
Comments?

24. Family Outcomes Data
Summary of 2010 APR Data

25. State Approaches to Family Outcomes Measurement Part C Program
Early Childhood Outcomes Center – August 2010 HI GU AS MP
Legend:
ECO Family Outcomes Survey
State-developed survey
NCSEAM survey

26. Survey timing and family population
Total
All families
Families with ≥6 months*
Point in time (or time period) 25 12 37
Based on child participation 8 9 17
-at exit
(3)
(6)
-at IFSP meeting(s)
(2)
-IFSP and/or exit
(1) 33 21 54
*One State used ≥9 months, and one State used ≥12 months

27. Quick Poll 4
Survey
distribution

28. Response rate variables

29. Response rate by state size

30. Representativeness: Comparison data
Thirty-nine states (70%) reported the source of data used:
Part C population/ 618 data: 31 states
Program population data: 3 states
Target population: 3 states
State data (not specified): 2 states
Remaining 17 states did not specify

31. Addressing representativeness
Quick Poll 5
Addressing
representativeness

32. Criteria used for evaluating representativeness
Forty-six states (89%) reported the criteria they used for determining representativeness
Race/ ethnicity: 73% (41 states)
Geography (district, county, region): 50% (28 states)
Sex: 21% (12 states)
Child’s age: 20% (11 states)
Disability/ eligibility category: 9% (5 states)
Length of time in services: 9% (5 states)
Program size : 9% (5 states)
Previous years: 2009: 44/56 (78.6%) and 2008: 37/56 (66.1%) reported criteria used
Mean number of criteria used this year: 2.7
Previous years: 2009: 2.6 criteria and 2008: 2 criteria.

33. Performance and trends
Early intervention has helped…
Families know their rights: 84%
+3% from last year
Families effectively communicate children’s needs: 85%
+2% from last year
Families help their children develop and learn: 90% +2% from last year

34. Performance by Survey Type

35. Performance by scoring criteria

36. Performance by state size

37. Performance by percent served

38. Were data representative?
Forty-four states reported whether their data were representative (79%)
Yes, some data provided: 36% (20 states)
Yes, no data provided: 14% (8 states)
No: 11% (6 states)
Varied results: 18% (10 states)
No conclusions re: representativeness reported among the remaining 12 states (21%)

39. State Highlights Analyzing and reporting outcomes among subgroups
Improvement activities based on detailed analysis (e.g. by subgroups of families)
Data collection improvement activities
Partnering w/parent organizations

40. Suggested Formats for February 2011 APR Reporting
fed_req.cfm#ECOSuggestedFormats
(this link is also available from
the webinar series page)

41. Open Discussion
Questions?
Comments?

42. Full APR analysis Reports are Available Online
Part C:
Part B:
(these links are also available from
the webinar series page)

43. Trends in Child Outcomes (C-3 / B-7) and Family Outcomes (C-4)
Thank you for participating.
Presentations from this series and their related resources
are made available on the NECTAC website at: