Indicator 7: Early Childhood Outcomes

Indicator 7: Early Childhood Outcomes
Ginger Huffman, Coordinator Office of Early and Elementary Learning 2019

Child Outcomes Summary (COS)
Overview of Early Childhood Outcomes Why are they important? What are they? Who do they apply to? What is required? Welcome. This presentation provides early intervention and preschool special education staff with an introduction to the Child Outcomes Summary process. This information sets the stage for understanding the type of child outcomes data programs collect and how those data can support the overall goal of improving outcomes for children and families.

Why are they important? To ensure children are active and successful participants in a variety of settings and situations The goal of early childhood special education to enable our young children to be active and successful participants during their early childhood years and in the future in a variety of settings and situations. This includes in their homes with their families, in childcare and preschool or other programs in the community.

Why are they important? Accountability
In this age of accountability, policymakers are asking questions about how these goals are being met and measured over time within programs that are being supported by public funds. Research informs us that high quality services for children at the early childhood level and their families lead to good outcomes. However, judging the effectiveness of any program requires looking at results not simply at the process

Why are they important? Children will demonstrate improved:
Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) requires within the Annual Performance Report (APR)- Funding for IDEA Part C and B. Indicator 7: Preschool Outcomes Three child outcomes Children will demonstrate improved: Positive social emotional skills and social relationships Acquisition of knowledge and skills (including language and communication) Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs There, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) in the US Department of Education now requires states to report outcomes data for children and families served through Part C WV Birth to Three and Part B Preschool of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) as part of the Annual Performance Report (APR). This is indicator 7 within the APR.

Why are they important? Date helps understand impact & improve programs States use data regarding child outcomes in different ways to improve their programs. Special Education administrator’s should be reviewing this data with staff and others to show them how the impact that early childhood special education has on improving outcomes for their young children in their counties. This data evaluates the importance of our services and the development of children.

Why are they important? Review your data to help understand the cause and effect of successes as well as challenges at the program level. This something that can have a direct impact on the supports that are provided and resources that developed and or purchased to help overcome challenges to replicate successes.

What are the outcomes to be measured?
Three child outcomes: Children have positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships). Children acquire and use knowledge and skills (including early language/communication and early literacy). Children use appropriate behaviors to meet their needs. What parent or educator wouldn’t want see these things for every child? When you consider these three outcomes they relate to things that we would hope to see for all children, not just children receiving preschool special education. This is what I wanted for my two children so do other parents.

Who do these apply to? Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3
Children have positive social relationships Outcome 2 Children acquire and use knowledge and skills Outcome 3 Children take appropriate action to meet their needs. While these are outcomes that could apply to ALL children it is important to be aware of who they apply to and they are not required for every student.

Who do they apply to? Every child with an IEP including those receiving Speech and Language services only. These three outcomes apply to every child who receives early childhood special education with an IEP for the county is responsible for. This is regardless of the type of IEP, where the child receive services and includes students receiving speech only services.

Early Childhood Outcomes DO NOT replace IEP Goals and Objectives
Because these outcomes are applicate to all children early childhood special education services it is important to note the do not replace IEP goals and objectives that are unique for each child

Early Childhood Outcome
Effect Cause IEP Goals and Objectives measure EDUCATIONAL goals unique for each child Early childhood outcomes assess Growth & Impact As a result of early childhood special education IEP goals and objectives within an IEP measure progress towards educational goals that are for that child. Whereas, the three early childhood outcomes help assess growth and impact as a result of early childhood special education and services received.

OSEP Reporting Requirements
Report the percentage of children receiving early childhood special education services who: 1. Did not improve functioning 2. Improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning compatible to same-age peers 3. Improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it 4. Improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers 5. Maintained functioning at a level comparable to same aged peers 6 Age expectant skills maybe slight concern 7 Age expectant skills

OSEP Reporting Requirements
Annual APR (Indicator 7) Compare data across states/systems Inform policies, funding, resources & Supports The data is submitted annually within the APR and information will be used to assess impact and performance over time. Since this a national requirement it allows OSEP to gather information and data that can compared across states and systems. Overtime, form policies, funding and resources and supports provided to help ensure high quality services are provided to children and families in

Additional Resources

The Early Childhood Outcomes
Three child outcomes Children will demonstrate improved: Positive social emotional skills and social relationships Acquisition of knowledge and skills (including language and communication) Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs Lets review the 3 outcomes

Outcome 1 Children Have Positive Social Relationships
With: Adults ( parents, family members, others) Individuals within home, school and community Peers (classmates, siblings, friends) Let’s take a closer look at each outcome. The first outcome focuses on children having positive social relationships. This means having good relationships with adults and playing well with other children. It also includes being able to separate from an adult when dropped off at child care, expressing emotions and feelings appropriately, following rules and expectations in different settings, and sharing and taking turns.

Outcome 1- Children have positive social relationships
How well does the child separate & transition into routines This could include attachments and separations which might be demonstrated by how well the children transitions from one routine or integrate into the routine when coming into the classroom. For older children you may consider how well they follow rules related to groups or interact with others. This may include learning and following the rules and expectations during social interactions or choice time Does the Child follow rules & interact well with others

Outcome 2:Children Acquire and Use Knowledge and Skills
Applies to: Thinking Reasoning Ability to remember Problem solving The second outcome is that children acquire and use knowledge and skills. This outcome involves many skills that provide the foundation for later success in school such as thinking, reasoning, remembering, problem solving, understanding symbols, and learning new words. This outcome includes understanding the concepts of more and less and understanding the physical world, such as knowing that a ball will roll and ice will melt. The outcome also includes being able to repeat sounds, gestures, and words; expressive language and other communication skills; and, for older children, early literacy and numeracy.

Outcome 2: Children Acquire and Use Knowledge and Skills
How does the child overcome challenges or obstacles?

Understand symbols, language & communication

May apply to literacy & math skills preschoolers Remember, the age of the child and what would typically be expected for their age will play an important part of how you assessed each child’s ability to acquire and demonstrate knowledge and skills.

Outcome 3 - Children Take Appropriate Action to Meet Their Needs
Includes Taking care of basic needs Getting from place to place Using tools (e.g., fork, toothbrush, crayon) In older children, contributing to their own health and safety The third outcome is that children take appropriate action to meet their needs. Over the early childhood years, children become increasingly independent. This outcome includes taking care of basic needs like hand washing and going to the bathroom, getting from place to place, using tools like a fork or a toothbrush, and knowing not to run into the street. It also includes using motor skills to get something the child wants such a pulling up a stool, using words or gestures to request more crackers, and other appropriate ways to get what the child needs or wants.

Outcome 3 - Children Take Appropriate Action to Meet Their Needs
Includes contribution to health & safety

Child Outcomes Are Functional
meaningful to the child in the context of everyday living an integrated series of behaviors or skills that enable the child to achieve important everyday goals A critical characteristic of the three child outcomes is that they are functional. Functional outcomes refer to skills and behaviors that are meaningful to the child in the context of everyday living. Recommended practice for many years in early intervention and preschool special education has been to write functional outcomes on Individualized Family Service Plans (which are referred to as IFSPs) and Individual Education Programs (or IEPs). Nonfunctional outcomes are discrete behaviors taken out of context. Some assessment measures look at skills in isolation rather than context, such as how many rings a child can place on a stacking toy. Observing the child do this may provide valuable information for a skilled clinician, but it is not a functional, or meaningful, outcome for a young child. Similarly, compare a young child smiling to a child smiling back at her mom in interactive social play. Smiling in the context of social interaction represents a meaningful, functional outcome. Note the focus on the child’s ability to engage in activities that are meaningful to the child’s daily life. The three child outcomes reflect this emphasis on functioning, which is consistent with recommended practice for identifying individualized outcomes.

Outcomes Reflect Global Functioning
The three outcomes reflect The integration of multiple skills Functioning across settings and situations Rather than Skill by skill A standardized way Split by domains The three outcomes are broad. They reflect how the child functions throughout the day at home and wherever the child spends time. The outcomes cross developmental domains to capture how children integrate the skills and behaviors needed to participate in everyday activities. For example, we may observe a child who uses three-word phrases to engage another child in play. This tells us how he integrates language with social functioning. Think about a child who can point to juice to indicate that she would like a drink. This tells us the child can point and shows that child can point to communicate. Mapping assessment domains to each outcome never captures the full extent of the outcome, although there are aspects of some assessment domains that are more closely connected to a particular outcome than others. For example, communication skills are needed for each of the outcomes. Similarly, motor skills cut across all the outcomes. They enable children to build with blocks with friends, pour water at the water table, and walk across the room to get a toy. It is also important to keep in mind that there are many different ways children demonstrate each outcome, and how a child demonstrates an outcome is different for children of different ages.

Child Outcomes Summary Process
Overview of the COS Process In Session 1 of this training module, you learned about the child outcomes and why the data are collected. Now let’s talk about how to measure the three outcomes. This is the second in a series of presentations designed to provide early intervention and preschool special education staff with the information needed to complete the Child Outcomes Summary process.

What is the COS Process? A process for summarizing information on a child’s functioning in each of the three child outcome areas The Child Outcomes Summary process was developed to reflect the content of the three child outcomes and to provide a systematic method for teams to summarize information from multiple sources about a child’s functioning.

Why is the COS Process Needed?
No assessment instrument assesses the three outcomes directly. Recommended assessment practice is to use multiple sources of information. Different programs use different assessment instruments, and outcome data need to be summarized across programs. There are no assessment instruments that measure the three child outcomes directly. Furthermore, recommended practice in early childhood assessment is to use multiple sources of information about a child. Summarizing multiple sources of information for statewide reporting is a challenge though. Also, different programs use different assessment instruments and processes. Sometimes, different tools are used within the same program. These reasons all speak to the need for an approach that allows data from different sources and assessment tools to be summarized into a common metric. The Child Outcomes Summary process was developed to meet this need. It allows programs to synthesize information about a child from multiple sources and across different assessment tools to produce data that can be summarized across programs in the state, and across states for a national picture. In other words, the Child Outcomes Summary process allows programs to take the apples and oranges provided from multiple sources and from different assessment tools and convert that information into a common metric. Now let’s look at the key features of the process.

Features Uses information from multiple sources to describe how a child is functioning Relies on team-based discussion and decision-making Uses a 7-point rating scale to describe the child’s functioning across settings and situations Is completed upon program entry, on-going and exit. There are four key features of a quality Child Outcomes Summary process. First, the process produces a description of the child’s functioning at a single point in time by synthesizing multiple sources of information. Second, this approach is a team process, involving professionals and family members contributing to decision-making. Next, the process involves team members using the information gathered about a child to rate his or her functioning in each of the three outcome areas on a 7-point scale. Using the 7-point rating scale requires the team to compare the child’s skills and behaviors with those expected for his or her age. Finally, the Child Outcomes Summary process is completed at two points in time, at a minimum--when the child enters the program and when the child exits the program. Each state has its own policy for when entry and exit data are collected, and some states are choosing to complete the ratings more frequently, such as at annual IFSP or IEP reviews. Let’s discuss each of these four features in more detail.

The COS process produces a synthesis of information.
The COS process uses: Multiple Methods Curriculum-based assessment Norm-referenced assessment Developmental screening tool Observation across settings and situations Parent report Multiple Sources of Information Family Interventionists Teachers Service providers Physicians Child care providers Other people familiar with the child The Child Outcomes Summary process aligns with the DEC Recommended Practices because it involves synthesizing information about the child from multiple methods and sources. Here are examples of different kinds of information that may be used to inform the process in each of the three outcome areas. A quality Child Outcomes Summary process involves using methods of assessment that look at the ways in which children are using their skills in everyday settings and situations. Multiple methods and multiple sources are necessary to obtain a comprehensive picture of the child’s functioning. Having this information available is critical because the Child Outcomes Summary process itself is not an assessment tool. The COS process produces a synthesis of information. It is not an assessment.

7-Point Rating The COS process results in a rating for each of the three child outcomes. The rating is based on child’s functioning across settings and situations. A child’s functioning is compared with what is expected for the child’s age. Another key feature of the Child Outcomes Summary process is the use of a 7-point rating scale. After reviewing and discussing how the child uses his or her skills across settings, the team identifies the rating that best describes the child’s functioning for each of the three outcome areas. Identifying an accurate rating requires the team to compare the child’s skills and behaviors with those expected for his or her age.

When to Complete the COS Process
Exit from Program Entry to Program Ongoing The last key feature of the Child Outcomes Summary process is related to the timing of its completion. To provide data for the federal reporting requirements, the process must be completed when the child enters the program and again at program exit. The rating reflects the child’s functioning at each of these time points and should be determined as close to the actual entry and exit as possible. The comparison of exit to entry ratings provides information about the child’s progress. Some states determine interim ratings at IFSP or IEP meetings and regularly scheduled reviews when a team is assembled, but it does not have to be done as part of one of these meetings. Some states also complete the Child Outcomes Summary process one or more times between entry and exit to provide richer information for program improvement. Check your state’s policies and procedures for when and how often you are expected to complete the process. Required Required Required The COS process is to be completed in the present time to reflect the child’s current functioning.

Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process Takeaways
The COS Process: Relies on team-based discussion and decision- making. Uses information from multiple sources to describe how a child is functioning Uses a 7-point rating scale to compare a child’s functioning across settings and situations with what is expected for the child’s age. Is completed at entry, ongoing and exit. In conclusion, the Child Outcomes Summary process involves team-based discussion and decision-making around multiple sources of information. The process produces a rating for each of the three child outcomes. The rating is determined, at a minimum, at program entry and program exit. As you progress through this training module, you will learn more about how to identify a Child Outcomes Summary rating, including the criteria for each of the 7 points on the rating scale.

Understand Age-Expected Development
Many skills develop in predictable sequences. Children typically acquire skills within a certain time frame. Child development resources can help the team ground its knowledge of when children develop various skills. The next area of knowledge needed by the team is the age at which children typically acquire different kinds of skills. The rating process requires an understanding of the timing and sequences of development that enable children to have positive social relationships, acquire knowledge and skills, and take action to meet their needs. For example, children typically play next to their peers before they meaningfully interact with them. In addition to child development occurring in typical sequences, we also know that children typically acquire skills within a certain time frame. For example, most children learn to walk around 12 months of age. The rating process requires that team members understand both the sequence in which children acquire skills and the age range in which they are acquired. Team members will be asked to think about how the child’s functioning compares with what would be expected for a child his age. If the team members need additional information about child development, we encourage them to consult the many resources available. It is important to use these resources to ensure that the perception of what is typical development is accurate.

Why Age Anchor? Knowledge of child development is needed so the team can age anchor the child’s skills and behaviors. Age anchoring is important because early intervention and early childhood special education help children acquire age-expected skills to support their full participation in their homes, schools, and communities. Why does the Child Outcomes Summary process require a comparison with age-expected skills? Because moving toward or maintaining age-expected functioning will enable children to be full and active participants in their everyday world. One of the goals of early intervention and early childhood special education is to help children acquire the skills that are expected for their age. The ratings help programs see how successful they have been in helping children do this.

Know About the Child’s Functioning Across Settings and Situations
Includes observations of the child in different settings and times of day Includes information from those who know the child well More than what standardized assessment tools can tell the team To assign an accurate rating at entry and exit, the team needs to obtain a complete picture of the child’s skills and behaviors across multiple settings and situations. This means that in addition to gathering information through standardized assessment tools, teams should have other mechanisms for getting information about the child in other places and with other people. It is especially important to get a picture of the child in places where the child spends time, including at home, in child care, and in other community settings. The team needs to know how the child interacts with adult family members, siblings, extended family, and other significant people in the child’s life. This information can come from talking with those familiar with the child, such as family members, grandparents, and/or care providers, or from observations in places where the child spends time.

Describing Children’s Functioning
A child’s functioning with regard to age expectations can be thought of as: age-expected, immediate foundational, or foundational. For the purposes of the Child Outcomes Summary process, we use three terms to describe where a child’s skills are with regard to age expectations: age expected, immediate foundational, and foundational. Let’s explore each one.

Age-Expected Skills: Skills and behaviors that are typical for children of a particular chronological age Age-expected skills are exactly what the phrase says: They are the skills and behaviors that are seen in children of a particular chronological age. For example, if a child is 24 months old, age-expected skills are what a 24-month-old would be expected to do. We would describe a 24-month-old with 24-month-old skills as showing age-expected skills.

Age-Expected Skills: Skills and behaviors that are typical for children of a particular chronological age Immediate Foundational Skills: Skills and behaviors that occur developmentally just prior to age-expected ones Immediate foundational skills and behaviors are those that come just before age-expected skills in development. To understand immediate foundational skills, let’s consider the example of walking. When we think about the skills that come just before children become proficient in walking, we see that they are cruising from one piece of furniture to another and taking a few unsteady steps on their own. These are examples of immediate foundational skills for walking. If a child is not showing age-expected skills but is showing the skills that come immediately before the skills expected for the age, we would describe the child as showing “immediate foundational skills.”

Age-Expected Skills: Skills and behaviors that are typical for children of a particular chronological age Immediate Foundational Skills: Skills and behaviors that occur developmentally just prior to age-expected ones Foundational Skills: Skills and behaviors occurring early in development that are conceptually mapped to later skills and behaviors. These skills serve as the foundation for later development. Foundational skills occur much earlier in the developmental progression of skills. They are called foundational because they form the foundation for later skill development. When considering our example of walking, we would think about the skills needed for children to eventually learn to walk—those that come even before cruising and initial wobbly steps. Examples include pulling to stand, crawling or scooting, going from a sitting position to all fours in preparation for crawling, or, in younger infant development, pushing up while in tummy time. Children who are not yet showing age-expected skills but are showing skills that come much earlier in development would be described as showing “foundational skills.”

How Foundational Skills Lead to Age-Expected Functioning
Age-Expected Skills Immediate Foundational Skills Foundational Skills In sum, development occurs in predictable sequences, and a child’s current skill level can be described with regard to where the child is in the sequence. This graphic shows the relationship between the three types of skills. Note that foundational skills provide the basis for later skills and that immediate foundational skills come just before age-expected skills in the sequence. Foundational skills are frequently the skills chosen for intervention for children showing delays to help them move closer to age-expected development. For the Child Outcomes Summary process, individuals within the team need to understand child development and the sequence in which skills develop. To reach a rating, teams will need to think about whether the child’s skills and behaviors in each outcome area are age expected, immediate foundational, or foundational.

What statement(s) describe “functional” skills or behaviors?
John uses two word utterances Tameka points to her shoe and says “ help me” to her teacher when her shoe is untied Jenny hops on one foot Hector watches his sister push the toy truck and then he pushes the truck. John can utter two words it does not mean he can effective communicate with those two words. Tameka uses two words to express she needs and can communicate with those words. If jenny is hopping on one foot you may wonder why or she injured. She may hop on one foot to play a game with her peers . Hector shows how he can observe a behavior and imitate it. He pushed the truck which is additional information of a skill he can do

Functional skills inform EC Outcomes
Tameka points to her shoe and says “help me” to her teacher when her shoe is untied

Functional skills inform EC Outcomes
Jenny hops on one foot as she plays a game with her peers.

Functional skills inform Early Childhood Outcomes
Hector watches his sister push the toy truck and then he pushes the truck.

Early Childhood Child Outcomes
Assessment tools and observations can help organize what information is needed to determine age expectant anchors for progress ratings.

Child Outcomes Summary (COS) Process
The 7-Point Scale Welcome to Session 4. In this session, we’ll take an in-depth look at the 7-point scale that is used in the Child Outcomes Summary process.

Understand the 7-Point Scale
Working in a team when applicable, assign a rating from 1 to 7 for each of the three outcome areas at a given point in time. The scale describes the child’s status compared to age- expected functioning. The highest point represents age-expected functioning, and lower points represent the degree of distance from age-expectations. In the last session, we introduced the 7-point rating scale. The 7-point scale is used to indicate a child’s status on each of the three outcomes at a given point in time. These points always include entry and exit from early intervention or early childhood special education programs. Some programs determine the child’s status on the scale in between these time points as well. The 7-point scale indicates how the child’s current functioning compares to age-expected functioning for his or her chronological age. The 7-point scale’s highest point represents age-expected functioning and lower points represent the degree of distance from age expectations. Let’s take a look at a graphic that explains this concept for positive social relationships.

Levels of Functioning Age-expected Age – expected skills and behavior
skills and behaviors Movement away from age-expected functioning Most children show age-expected skills and behaviors that enable them to have positive social relationships. There are many ways to demonstrate age-appropriate behaviors. Some children are shy, some are talkative, some are active, some are not. Not all 3-year-olds are the same, but as long as they are functioning like 3-year-olds, they are considered to be showing age-expected skills and behaviors. These children are in the innermost circle. Some children’s behavior is considered outside the realm of age-expected behaviors and skills. There are many different ways for children to fall outside what is considered typical, such as by showing skills and behaviors of a younger child or by showing behaviors that are inappropriate and interfere with the child’s forming of positive social relationships. Some children show behaviors and skills that are only slightly outside the realm of typical. Other children show behaviors and skills considerably removed from age expectations, and others even further removed. The goal of early intervention and early childhood special education services is to provide children with supports to develop skills and behaviors that get them as close as they can be to age-expected. In this way, children can form positive social relationships and actively and successfully participate in a variety of settings. Movement toward age-expected functioning

Rating of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Child shows functioning expected for his or her age in all or almost all everyday situations that are part of the child’s life. No one on the team has concerns about the child’s functioning in this outcome area. Let’s take a closer look at each point on the scale, beginning with a rating of 7. A rating of 7 indicates that, in all or almost all everyday settings and situations, the child shows skills and behaviors that are expected for his or her age. A rating of a 7 also indicates that at this time, no one on the team has concerns about the child’s development. We’ll define what concerns are in just a bit.

Descriptor Statements for “7”
For a 36-month-old girl, Kimberly is showing age-expected functioning in Positive Social Relationships. Relative to other 48-month-olds, there are no concerns. Nathan has all the skills that we would expect of a child his age in the area of Knowledge and Skills. Calvin has age-expected skills, with no concerns, in the area of Taking Action to Meet Needs. As we just said, some states use descriptor statements instead of numbers. Descriptor statements are sets of statements that describe the mix of age-expected, immediate foundational, and foundational skills for the child. Often, states provide two to three alternative descriptor statements so that there are choices for how the statement is worded when the rating is documented. If the descriptors are used, states have a very specific list of descriptor statements to choose from for each point on the scale. This slide shows three examples of descriptor statements. A descriptor statement for a child who is rated a 7 might be: “For a 35-month-old girl, Kimberly is showing age-expected functioning in Positive Social Relationships.” Note that this descriptor includes the critical feature for a rating of 7—that Kimberly has age-expected functioning in most or all situations in the outcome area. By using this statement, the team is describing Kimberly’s functional level, i.e., that it is what we would expect for her age.

Rating of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Child’s functioning generally is considered appropriate for his or her age, but there are some significant concerns about the child’s functioning in this outcome area. Although age-appropriate, the child’s functioning may border on not keeping pace with age expectations. Example descriptor statement: Relative to same-age peers, Tuan has the skills that we would expect of his age in regard to Knowledge and Skills; however, there are concerns about his development staying at an age-expected level. A rating of 6 also indicates that in all or almost all everyday settings and situations, the child shows skills and behaviors that are expected for his or her age. However, a rating of 6 indicates that the team has significant concerns about the child’s functioning in the outcome area. These concerns are substantial enough to suggest keeping an eye on the child’s development to determine the need for additional support in the future.

“Concerns” That Distinguish Ratings of 7 vs. 6
Early Childhood Outcomes Center “Concerns” That Distinguish Ratings of 7 vs. 6 Concerns raised for which families and providers may want to offer extra support and strategies to promote development, but the area of concern is not a possible indicator or precursor of a significant developmental problem. (7) vs. Developmental concerns—weaknesses significant enough to watch closely and possibly support. Although age-expected now, the child’s development borders on not keeping pace with age-expected levels or shows early signs of possible developmental problems. (6) Now let’s talk for a minute about when a team would use a rating of 6. All children have strengths and weaknesses, and most families and providers will identify areas to work on to support ongoing growth, which may be called “concerns.” So, what types of concerns would result in a rating of 6? The kinds of concerns that lead to a 6 rating rather than a 7 are more developmental concerns— developmental issues that are significant enough to warrant closely watching and/or supporting the child. Examples of concerns where a rating of 6 would be appropriate are concerns about the child’s development potentially not keeping pace with age-expected development in the future or a child who is showing early signs of a possible developmental problem. On the other hand, examples of concerns where a rating of 7 would be appropriate instead of 6 might include: Shyness—A 15-month-old child may be very shy, but the behavior is expected for the age; or Temper tantrums—A parent may be worried about a 2-year-old’s temper tantrums. The team will want to help the parent address these behaviors, but the team can also help the parent understand that tantrums are to be expected given the child’s age.

Rating of Rating of 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Child shows functioning expected for his or her age some of the time and/or in some settings and situations. Child’s functioning is a mix of age-expected and not age-expected behaviors and skills. Child’s functioning might be described as like that of a slightly younger child. Example descriptor statement: For a 17-month-old girl, Julia uses a mix of age-expected skills, but she continues to demonstrate some skills below her age level in Taking Action to Meet Needs. Now let’s move on to a rating of 5. A rating of 5 indicates that a child shows some functioning that is expected for his or her age in some settings and situations or some of the time. This means that at other times or in some settings, the child is showing some functioning that is not age-expected. This mix of age-expected and not age-expected functioning is the main differentiation between a rating of 5 and ratings of 6 or 7. Children who are rated a 5 have functioning that might be described as that of a slightly younger child because, developmentally, they present with some skills and behaviors that we would expect to see earlier in development. Now let’s take a look at how ratings of 5 and 4 differ from one another.

Rating of Rating of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Child shows occasional age-appropriate functioning across settings and situations. More functioning is not age-expected than age expected. Example descriptor statement: Will has a few of the skills we would expect in the area of Positive Social Relationships, but he shows more skills that are not age-appropriate. A rating of 4 also indicates that there is a mix of age-expected and not age-expected skills, but in the case of a rating of 4, the child shows more functioning that is not age-expected. Children who receive a rating of 4 show only occasional age-expected functioning across settings and situations; they show mostly functioning that is not age-expected. The functioning that is not age-expected could be described as immediate foundational or foundational functioning, or both .

Rating of Rating of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Child does not yet show functioning expected of a child of his or her age in any situation. Child uses immediate foundational skills most or all of the time across settings and situations. Functioning might be described as like that of a younger child. Example descriptor statement: At 33 months old, Jeremy mostly uses immediate foundational skills in the area of Knowledge and Skills. Now let’s look at the criteria for a rating of 3. The key feature of a rating of 3 is the lack of any age-expected functioning in the outcome area. A rating of 3 means the child is showing immediate foundational skills almost all the time and across settings and situations and possibly some foundational skills, but no skills or behaviors that are age-expected in the outcome area. Children who are rated a 3 have functioning that might be described as that of a younger child when comparing their functioning with what is expected at their age because their skills and behaviors are those that we might see earlier in the developmental progression.

Rating of Rating of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Child occasionally uses immediate foundational skills across settings and situations. More functioning reflects skills that are not immediate foundational than are immediate foundational. Example descriptor statement: In the area of Positive Social Relationships, Felipe occasionally shows immediate foundational skills but has more skills that are like those of a much younger child. In a rating of 2, we see fewer immediate foundational skills compared with a 3. A rating of 2 indicates that a child only occasionally uses immediate foundational skills across settings and situations and primarily has more of the foundational skills we see earlier in development. An example descriptor statement for a rating of 2 might be: “In the area of Positive Social Relationships, Felipe occasionally shows immediate foundational skills but has more skills that are like those of a much younger child.” Note that this statement includes the key points of a definition of a rating of 2, namely the presence of occasional immediate foundational functioning, but more functioning that is at the foundational level.

Rating of Rating of 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Child does not yet show functioning expected of a child his or her age in any situation. Child’s functioning does not yet include immediate foundational skills upon which to build age-appropriate functioning. Child’s functioning might be described as like that of a much younger child. Example descriptor statement: The skills that Ana uses to get her needs met are like those of a much younger child. She has early skills in this area but not yet immediate foundational or age-expected skills. Finally, a rating of 1 means the child does not yet show any age-expected or immediate foundational functioning in the outcome area. A child with a rating of 1 is showing all skills at the foundational level of development. Children with a rating of 1 have functioning that might be described as that of a much younger child; when comparing their functioning with age expectations, their skills are at levels we’d expect to see much earlier in the developmental progression. An example descriptor statement for a rating of 1 might be: “The skills that Ana uses to get her needs met are like those of a much younger child. She has early skills in this area but not yet immediate foundational or age-expected skills.” Note that this statement highlights the important point that a child with a rating of 1 has an array of foundational skills but not yet any immediate foundational or age-expected skills.

Important Note The 7-point scale can be used to describe the functioning of children with a wide range of abilities, including those with mild developmental delays and those with significant disabilities or regressive disorders. Early intervention and early childhood special education programs serve children with a wide range of abilities, including those with mild developmental delays and those with significant disabilities and regressive disorders. Some children have a delay in only one of the outcomes areas and will show age-expected functioning in the other two outcomes. It’s important to remember that children with more significant developmental delays and disabilities will receive ratings at the lower end of the 7-point scale – and that’s OK. It’s an accurate picture of the child’s functioning at that point in time. Understanding the criteria for the 7-point scale is extremely important for deriving an accurate rating. More information will be provided in a future presentation about how to use the rating scale in a team decision-making process.

Decision Tree for Summary Rating Discussions
Does the child ever function in ways that would be considered age-expected with regard to this outcome? No (consider rating 1–3) Yes (consider rating 4–7) Does the child use any immediate foundational skills related to this outcome upon which to build age-expected functioning across settings and situations? Does the child function in ways that would be considered age-expected across all or almost all settings and situations? No Yes No Yes To what extent is the child using immediate foundational skills across settings and situations? To what extent is the child’s functioning age-expected across settings and situations? Does anyone have concerns about the child’s functioning with regard to the outcome area? Uses skills that are not yet immediate foundational Occasional use of immediate foundational skills Uses immediate foundational skills most or all of the time Occasional use of age-expected skills; more behavior that is not age- expected Uses a mix of age-expected and not age-expected behaviors and skills Let’s start by talking about the decision tree, which is a tool to help teams understand and apply the 7 points on the scale. It is made up of a series of questions. After reviewing the information about a child’s functioning in an outcome area, the first question a team will consider is whether the child ever shows any age-expected development. If the answer is yes, then the team will continue down the right side of the decision tree. The next question for the team to consider is, “Does the child function in ways that would be considered age-expected across all or almost all settings and situations?” If the answer is yes, then the team should be thinking about a rating of 6 or 7. Remember that a rating of 7 would mean that no one on the team has concerns about the child, while a rating of 6 indicates that the team has concerns about the child in this outcome area. If the answer is no, then the team should be thinking about a rating of 4 or 5. If the team decides the child uses a mix of age-expected and not age-expected behaviors and skills across settings and situations, then the team would select a 5. If, on the other hand, the team decides the child makes occasional use of age-expected skills and that there is more behavior that is not age-expected, then the team would select a rating of 4. Before we move to the left side of the decision tree, we want to talk about a question that some teams have asked about: the word “ever” in the first question. Sometimes children show only one or two isolated examples of age-expected behavior, with nearly all their everyday behavior being not age-expected. Does that one isolated example mean the question should be answered yes? One or two isolated examples of age-expected behavior do not mean the child is showing age-expected behavior. So the answer to the first question is no. For a yes answer, the child needs to use one or more age-expected skills in his or her everyday functioning in at least one setting or situation. If the team answers no to the first question about age-expected functioning, the team would move to the left side of the decision tree to consider ratings of 1, 2, or 3. Now the team members would ask themselves if the child uses any immediate foundational skills across settings and situations. If the answer is yes, the team should be thinking about a rating of 2 or 3. If the child uses immediate foundational skills most or all of the time across settings and situations, the team would choose a rating of 3. If the child makes occasional use of immediate foundational skills, the team would select a rating of 2. If the team thinks the child is not using immediate foundational skills in the outcome area, then the team will assign a rating of 1. A rating of 1 indicates that the child has foundational skills and no immediate foundational or age-expected skills. Children with ratings of 1 still display many skills, but in the sequence of skill development, all their skills are more than one step removed from age-expected skills. Yes No Rating = 1 Rating = 2 Rating = 3 Rating = 4 Rating = 5 Rating = 6 Rating = 7 Updated 11/12/2015

Using the Decision Tree Effectively
Not a script Guides the team to consider the implications of the distance of the child’s skills from age expected for the selection of a rating It is important to note that the decision tree was not written as a script for individuals to read during the meeting. The decision tree is a guide to help teams reflect on the questions they need to answer to reach a rating and helps the team use the criteria consistently to decide between ratings.

Special Considerations
Let’s talk about some special considerations when using the 7-point scale.

Always Provide Ratings for All Three Outcomes
Ratings are needed for all outcomes even if… No one has concerns about a child’s development in an outcome area. A child has delays in one or two outcome areas but not in all three. Teams sometimes ask whether children need ratings in all three outcome areas. The answer is yes. Ratings are always provided on all three outcome areas. This is true even if no one has any concerns about a child’s development in an outcome area or if a child is showing delays in only one or two of the outcome areas. Ratings on all three outcomes are needed to provide a complete picture of the child’s functioning.

Children Who Have Only Communication Delays
The COS team needs to focus discussions on whether and how communication difficulties are affecting the child’s functioning with regard to each of the three outcomes. Practitioners sometimes ask whether children with only communication delays, especially articulation delays, should be rated automatically as typically developing on Outcomes 1 and 3. The answer is no. The team needs to consider how the child’s communication, including articulation, is affecting the child’s functioning in all three outcome areas. When thinking about how a child with articulation delays would be rated on all three outcomes, the team members should focus their discussion on how articulation or other aspects of the child’s communication are affecting the child’s functioning across settings in each of the outcome areas.

Discussion Points for the Team
Is the child able to communicate with peers in play situations? Can others understand the child when he is making a request ? Is the child able to convey critical needs (e.g., safety needs)? How does the child’s communication influence her functioning across settings and with different people? For example, when considering Outcome 1, the team should focus on how well the child is understood during social interactions and how well the child communicates with other children. When considering Outcome 3, the team should ask questions about the impact of articulation delays on the child’s ability to make his or her wants and needs known or to convey critical safety needs to different people or in different situations.

Children With Atypical Functioning
Sometimes children display skills or behaviors that are different from the typical progression of skills. Examples of atypical behaviors: Self-stimulating behaviors Perseverations on specific activities Strict adherence to daily rituals Echolalia Most of our discussion has focused on the mix of foundational, immediate foundational, and age-expected skills observed across settings and situations. However, children sometimes display behaviors that do not represent delays in the usual progression of skills. Rather, they exhibit a pattern of consistently reoccurring behaviors that are atypical. These kinds of atypical behaviors are uncommon and are markedly different from what is observed in the child’s peers. Examples include self-stimulating behaviors, perseveration on specific activities, strict adherence to daily rituals, and echolalia.

Considering Atypical Functioning in Ratings
To determine a rating, consider: The extent to which the atypical behavior influences the child’s functioning in the outcome area; and As with all ratings, the extent to which the child shows age-expected functioning in the outcome area across settings and situations. How should teams consider these atypical behaviors in rating the child’s functioning? The team must consider the extent to which atypical behaviors influence the child’s level of functioning in each outcome area across settings and situations. For example, if the child spends a lot of time engaged in self-stimulating behaviors, then she is not able to interact as much with people around her. If the child displays self-stimulating behaviors in response to others’ actions instead of reciprocating and extending interactions with those people around her, then the self-stimulation has a functional impact on her relationships with others. The team must consider the extent of this impact on age-expected functioning across settings and situations. Sometimes, teams focus on the atypical behaviors but overlook what the child is doing in an age-expected way. For example, a child may be overly focused on cars, have several rituals related to toy cars, and perseverate on making car sounds. All of these may be interfering with the child’s interactions with children and with the child’s availability to engage in learning about new things. On the other hand, the child may also have strengths in an outcome area. For example, he may interact with books appropriately, be age-appropriate with regard to doing puzzles, and be able to provide good descriptions of past events. When deciding a rating in an outcome area, the team needs to examine the entire repertoire of the child’s skills and determine which are and are not age-appropriate.

Assistive Technology Devices
“Any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of a child with a disability.” (IDEA, 2004) If the child has access to and uses an assistive technology device, rate the child’s functioning using that device. If the child uses an assistive technology device only in some settings (e.g., only at home), think about this as you would any instance where the child displays different skills or behaviors across settings. Another important consideration is the role of assistive technology devices when considering a rating. Ratings should reflect the child’s functioning using whatever assistive technology devices are used in his or her everyday routines and activities. For example, teams discussing a child who wears glasses or hearing aids or who uses a walker or wheelchair should consider the child’s functioning with the use of these items. In some cases, a child may have more access to assistive technology in particular settings than others. If so, then that variability in the child’s use of the technology will probably mean he or she shows a mix of functioning across settings and situations.

Can a Child Have All 7’s at Entry?
Ratings reflect everyday functioning. Children with visual impairments or other diagnosed conditions may show age-expected functioning in all three outcomes even at program entry. For these children, services are provided to keep their functioning at age expectations. A common question about the 7-point scale is whether teams can appropriately rate a child’s functioning as a 7 across all three outcome areas at program entry. The answer is yes. We do see that some children in early intervention or early childhood special education will have ratings of 7 in all three outcome areas. People may ask, “Why would a child with all 7s be receiving early intervention or early childhood special education services?” The team needs to remember that eligibility determination is independent of the child outcomes rating. A rating is based on the child’s everyday functioning in the outcome area across setting and situations. There are a number of examples of children who may have 7’s on all three outcomes at entry, such as: A child who has sensory impairments but functions at age-expected levels when assistive technology is in place. A child with a diagnosed condition who displays age-expected functioning as an infant but for whom delays are likely later in development. Early intervention or early childhood special education for these children is trying to prevent delays in development from occurring.

Rating Scale: 1 Child does not yet show functioning expected of a child his or her age in any situation. Child’s functioning does not yet include immediate foundational skills upon which to build age-appropriate functioning. Child functioning reflects skills that developmentally come before immediate foundational skills. Child’s functioning might be described as like that of a much younger child. Let’s talk about the rating of a one. You might consider this rating “not yet.” Assigning the student a score of one means that they are not yet showing age-appropriate behavior in any area of that outcome. We might think of this student’s functioning as that of a much younger child.

Here is the Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center’s (ECTA) decision tree with the route to a rating scale of one highlighted. On the decision tree, the first question to answer is: “Does the child ever function in ways that would be considered age-appropriate with regard to this outcome?” This is a yes/no question. If you answer no, you will be assigning a 1-3 rating. If you answer yes, then you would move to the 4-7 range. But for rating one, we would answer no, so the next yes/no question we need to answer is “Does the child use any immediate foundational skills related to this outcome upon which to build age-appropriate functioning across settings and situations?,” to which we answer no. The next box reinforces our choice by stating “Uses skills that are not yet immediate foundational.” Following this progression, we arrive at the rating of one.

Rating Scale: 2 Child occasionally uses immediate foundational skills across settings and situations. More functioning reflects skills that are not immediate foundational. For a rating of two, the student uses some immediate foundational skills across settings and situations, but most activities still do not have the immediate foundational skills present.

Here is our decision tree with the path to the two rating highlighted
Here is our decision tree with the path to the two rating highlighted. To the second yes/no question we answered yes, so that leads us to the next question: “To what extent is the child using immediate foundational skills across settings and situations?” Our choices are ‘occasionally’ or ‘most or all of the time.’ For a rating of two, we would go with ‘occasional use of immediate foundational skills.’

Rating Scale: 3 Child does not yet show functioning expected of a child of his or her age in any situation. Child uses immediate foundational skills, most or all of the time, across settings and situations. Immediate foundational skills are the skills upon which to build age-appropriate functioning. Functioning might be described as that of a younger child. For a rating of three, the student is using immediate foundational skills most or all of the time across settings and situations. The student may still be described as functioning like a younger child, as he is not yet show age-appropriate functioning in any situation.

Here is the highlight track for a three rating
Here is the highlight track for a three rating. The answer to the last question is that the student uses immediate foundational skills most or all of the time across settings and situations.

Rating Scale: 4 Child shows occasional age-appropriate functioning across settings and situations. More functioning is not age-appropriate than age-appropriate. Now we are moving closer to age-appropriate skills. While the student occasionally shows age-appropriate skills, there are still more skills that are not age-appropriate.

Here is the breakdown for rating four
Here is the breakdown for rating four. We answered yes to question one, but no to question two. The next question poses “To what extent is the child’s functioning age-appropriate across settings and situations?” For a rating of four, our student would be doing this occasionally.

Rating Scale: 5 Child shows functioning expected for his or her age some of the time and/or in some settings and situations. Child’s functioning is a mix of age-appropriate and not age- appropriate behaviors and skills. Child’s functioning might be described as like that of a slightly younger child. The next rating is five. We score a five when the child shows age-expected functioning some of the time and in some settings and situations, but not all. It is a mix of age-appropriate and not. We might think of this student as only slightly younger than their actual age.

Here is our decision tree for a five rating
Here is our decision tree for a five rating. The difference from the four to the five rating is the student is using a mix of age-appropriate and non-age-appropriate behaviors and skills across settings and situations.

Rating Scale: 6 Child’s functioning generally is considered appropriate for his or her age but there are some significant concerns about the child’s functioning in this outcome area. These concerns are substantial enough to suggest monitoring or possible additional support. Although age-appropriate, the child’s functioning may border on not keeping pace with age expectations. For a rating of six, the student generally functions at age-appropriate levels, but there are some significant concerns about the child’s functioning in the area. These concerns may warrant monitoring or additional supports.

For a six rating, we answered yes to our second question, and answered yes to our third question, which is “Does anyone have concerns about the child’s functioning with regards to the outcome area?” If anyone on the decision team (all individuals involved in the child’s programming and the family) has a concern, then the answer is yes. This constitutes a rating of six.

Rating Scale: 7 Child shows functioning expected for his or her age in all or almost all everyday situations that are part of the child’s life. Functioning is considered appropriate for his or her age. No one has any concerns about the child’s functioning in this outcome area. For a rating of seven, no one has a concern about the student’s functioning in this outcome area, and the student displays functioning expected for his or her age in all or almost all everyday situations.

Here is our highlighted decision tree getting to the seven rating
Here is our highlighted decision tree getting to the seven rating. I know we have gone about this in a backward manner, but I wanted you to become familiar with the decision tree. When you and the team are discussing ratings for your student, you will begin at the top of this chart and proceed down for each rating to be determined. You will not choose the number and work backward. This tool is helpful when team members are finding it difficult to come to a number rating determination. What questions do you have?

Always Provide Ratings for All Three Outcomes
Ratings on all three outcomes should be reported for every child with an IEP. Ratings are needed in all areas even if: No one has concerns about a child’s development. A child has delays in one or two outcome areas, but not in all three outcome area.

COS Form Complete on all children, three thru age five some children maybe age six, and are receiving early childhood special education services. COS forms are completed based on typical child development. Most complete an one entry, on going and Must complete an exit rating. The COSFs are filled out on any child ages 0-6 that receives special education services. For the 0-3 population, the forms are completed by personnel. Staff will complete separate entry and exit forms to demonstrate progress within their program. Upon the student’s enrollment in school, a new entry form is completed. ****OK requires only one entry and one exit rating. The only exception to this rule is if the child has received less than six months of services. COSFs are not required for those students receiving less than six months of service. Due to the short time frame, these students may not have made sufficient progress to increase their number score. There are many child development scales, choose the one that you like best, just remember the Outcomes are rated on typical child development, not by comparing one child with a disability to another child with a disability.

Initial COS Ratings Recommend that the COS ratings form be completed at the eligibility meeting for children who are eligible for preschool special education services. If you are not completing at the eligibility meeting than someone should meet with that teacher to complete the ratings based on the information available, parent interview, assessment information, and or child observations.

Exit Ratings- Classroom Teachers
Classroom teachers conduct COS ratings using the Early Learning Scale, curriculum-based assessment information, work samples child observation, and input from related service providers and parents.

Service Provider Location – Speech Only Services
When a child is driven into a specific location to receive services, the collection of valid and reliable outcomes data can be challenging. Assessment information and information from parent interview and child observations by providing services. You must intentionally plan to collect data from outside the service location at certain times in the year.

Type of COS Entry COS Ongoing/Progress COS
Exit COS- child transitioned to kindergarten or exited the pre-k program Exit COS- not completed due to inability to locate family Exit COS-not completed, initial IEP completed less than 6 months ago

Early Learning Reporting System (ELRS) Reporting Dates
ELRS window reporting dates for 2017 – 2018 Window 1: 9/08/ /08/2018 Window 2: 1/04/ /28/2019 Window 3: 4/26/ /24/2019

Demonstrating growth It takes at least two ratings to demonstrate growth The compares the entry and exit ratings for each child and determines what developmental trajectory pattern they fell into. Categories a –e.

Two Questions Addressed at Exit
Rating Question: To what extent does the child show age-appropriate functioning, across settings and situations, on this outcome? Progress Question: Has the child shown any new skills or behaviors related to this outcomes since the last outcomes summary? Now that we’ve looked at the developmental trajectories and the different types of progress that children can make, let’s talk about how progress is captured in the Child Outcomes Summary process. When the team completes the Child Outcomes Summary process at exit, they will answer two questions about the child for each of the three outcome areas. The first question, the rating question, is: To what extent does the child show age-appropriate functioning, across settings and situations, on this outcome? The team answers this question by providing a rating. This is the same question addressed at entry. The second question, the progress question, is new to the Child Outcomes Summary process at exit. The progress question is: Has the child shown any new skills or behaviors related to this outcome since the last outcomes summary? This question is called “the progress question” because it tells us whether the child has made any progress compared to him or herself since the entry rating.

How to Answer the Progress Question
Answer “yes” if the child has acquired ANY new skill related to any aspect of the outcome since the entry rating. Example: Using one new word or gesture to get his needs met. Answer “no” if the child has not acquired ANY new skills related to any aspect of the outcomes since the entry rating. The progress question is a yes/no question that documents whether or not the child has acquired any new skill since the entry rating. The question focuses on whether the child has made progress compared to his or her own previous level of functioning. If the team is not already familiar with the kinds of gains the child has made, the team should look at earlier assessment results and progress notes to help answer this question. Any one new skill in the outcome area counts as a “yes.” So, for example at exit, if in the two years since the entry rating, the team has seen the child begin using even one more new word or gesture to get his needs met, then the team should answer “yes” to the progress question for Outcome 3. If the child has not acquired any new skill related to any aspect of the outcome since the entry rating, then the answer to the progress question should be “no.”

Rating Scale Jeopardy $100 $100 $100 $200 $200 $200 $300 $300 $300
Age appropriate functioning – no concerns Mix of age appropriate and not age appropriate functioning No age appropriate functioning – not yet showing immediate foundational skills Some age appropriate functioning but very little No age appropriate functioning – lots of immediate foundational skills Age appropriate functioning – some concerns Rarely shows age appropriate functioning No age appropriate functioning – some immediate foundational skills Age appropriate functioning $100 $100 $100 $200 $200 $200 Now let’s check your knowledge of the 7 points on the Child Outcomes Summary rating scale. As with Outcomes Jeopardy, make sure you are in ‘slide show’ mode and click on each box so that the ‘door’ slides away. Behind the door is the answer to the question. You provide the question, which might be ‘What is a rating of 1?’ ‘What is a rating of 2?’ and so on. Record your responses on the ‘Jeopardy Score Sheets’ 100 A rating of 7 A rating of 5 A rating of 1 200 A rating of 4 A rating of 3 A rating of 6 300 A rating of 4 A rating of 2 A rating of 6 or 7 $300 $300 $300

What Happens During the Exit COS Process?
For each outcome, the team will: Gather information about the child’s functioning Discuss the information and determine the rating You should be able to and or explain the rationale for the rating So, what happens during the exit Child Outcomes Summary process? The process used for the exit Child Outcomes Summary is nearly the same as what happens at entry. Again, current information will be gathered about the child’s functioning across settings and situations. The child’s team will meet to review the information and discuss how the child’s functioning compares to that of age-expected functioning. The team will determine which of the ratings on the 7-point scale best describes the child’s functioning, and the rationale for the rating will be documented. In addition, the team will answer the progress question for each of the outcome areas. Answer the progress question

Preschool Outcome Categories
Three child outcomes Children will demonstrate improved: Positive social emotional skills and social relationships Acquisition of knowledge and skills (including language and communication) Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs 5 Categories under each outcome: Children who did not improve functioning Children who improved functioning but not enough to move closer to same age peers Children who improved functioning enough to move nearer to same age peers but did not reach it Children who improved functioning to reach same age peers Children who maintained functioning comparable to same age peers

OSEP Progress Category (a)
(a): Children who did not improve functioning. Those children who acquired no new skills or regressed during their time in the program. Rated lower at exit than entry; OR Rated 1 at both entry and exit: AND score “No” on the progress question. The next slides discuss the Progress Categories outlined by OSEP. There are five progress categories based on the entry and exit scores for each child. Progress category (a) is for those students whose functioning did not improve. There are two reasons that will yield an (a) category: if the child regressed, therefore scoring lower upon exit than entry or the student received a number 1 rating at entry and exit AND did not gain any new skills between entry and exit. This is rare.

OSEP Progress Category: (b)
(b): Children who improved functioning, but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same aged peers. Children who acquired new skills but continued to grow at the same rate throughout their time in the program. Rated 5 or lower at entry; AND rated the same or lower at exit; AND “Yes” on the progress question. Progress category (b) is assigned to those students who improved their functioning, but were rated at a 5 or lower at entry and exit. This may be because the student had a slow but steady rate of growth during their service time, and their skills did not improve enough to move nearer to same aged peers. Referencing the previous slide, category (b) would be assigned if the student had a rating of 1 at entry and exit but made some progress during the service time.

OSEP Progress Category: (c)
(c): Children who improved functioning to a level nearer to same aged peers but did not reach it. Children who acquired new skills but accelerated their rate of growth during their time in the program. They were making progress toward catching up with their same aged peers but were still functioning below age expectations when they left the program. Rated higher at exit than entry; AND Rated 5 or below at exit. Category (c) is for those students who made progress, were rated higher at exit than entry, but were still below the number rating of 5 at exit. These students acquired news skills at a good rate, but still were unable to meet age expectations.

OSEP Progress Category: (d)
(d): Children who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same aged peers. Children who were functioning below age expectations when they entered the program but were functioning at age expectations when they left. Rated 5 or lower at entry: AND rated 6 or 7 at exit. Category (d) students were rated 5 or lower at entry but made enough progress to be rated at 6 or 7 at exit.

OSEP Progress Category: (e)
(e): Children who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same aged peers. Children who were functioning at age expectations when they entered the program and were functioning at age expectations when they left. Rated 6 or 7 at entry; AND rated 6 or 7 at exit. Category (e) students were rated a 6 or 7 at both entry and exit. This means they were functioning at or near age expectations at entry and exit. You may wonder why these students were receiving special education services if they were at or near age expectations. Remember we are rating the students in three outcome areas: Social-emotional, acquisition of knowledge and skills, and use of appropriate behaviors to meet needs. The student may be at or near age expectations in one outcome area and lower in another.

Name Entry 2a Exit 2a Exit 2b OSEP category Maria 7 Yes e Joseph 6
Jonas 3 5 c Phoenix 4 b Angela 1 No a Juan 2 Ethan Adrian Brittany d Landon Here is an example class (or group) graph for Outcome 2, Use of Knowledge and Skills.

Exit 2a is how the child is functioning at exit.
Name Entry 2a Exit 2a Exit 2b OSEP Category Looking at our example , we see these scores are for Outcome 2: Knowledge and Skills. Entry 2a is in response to the question: to what extent does the child show age-appropriate functioning across a variety of settings and situations on thinking, reasoning, remembering, and problem solving; understanding symbols ; and understanding the physical and social worlds at entry. Exit 2a is how the child is functioning at exit. Exit 2b is a yes/no response to whether the child has made any progress. The responses to these three items yield an OSEP rating category. Entry 2a is the number rating the student received up their entry to the program in outcome area 2. Exit 2a is the number rating they got upon exit from the program, or when they aged out of the program. Exit 2b is the question asked for each outcome: “Has the child shown any new skills or behaviors related to the area of _________ ? “ (whatever the outcome is measuring, in this example use of knowledge and skills). The last column gives the OSEP category that would be assigned based on the information.

Let’s consider these individually for each OSEP category.
Name Entry 2a Exit 2a Exit 2b OSEP category Angela 1 No a Let’s consider these individually for each OSEP category. Angela entered at a 1 and exited at a 1. The answer to the progress question was no, so this placed her in the (a) category because: She did not improve functioning, and She rated 1 at both entry and exit: AND score “No” on the progress question. So using the example graph, let’s look at each progress category. Angela is in category (a) for outcome 2 because she was rated a 1 at both entry and exit, and did not make any progress toward the goal.

Name Entry 2a Exit 2a Exit 2b OSEP Category Phoenix 4 Yes b Ethan 1 Both Ethan and Phoenix entered and exited at the same number with a ‘yes.’ This gives them a (b) rating because: They improved functioning, but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same aged peers. Rated 5 or lower at entry; AND rated the same or lower at exit; AND “Yes” on the progress question. Here are two examples of category (b). Both boys were rated the same at entry and exit (but lower than 5) but made progress toward the goal.

However, we can answer yes to 2b, which puts him in category (b).
Name Entry 2a Exit 2a Exit 2b OSEP Category Landon 5 3 Yes b Let’s take a look at Landon. Landon’s scores at first glance are a little confusing. Why would his exit number be lower than his entry number? Because we are making the number choice based on age- appropriate functioning. When Landon entered, say at age 3, he was functioning closer to age-appropriate, giving him a entry score of 5. At exit, Landon is now 6 years old, but has not made a lot of progress, so he is even farther from age-appropriate peers, so we give him a score of 3. However, we can answer yes to 2b, which puts him in category (b). Here is another example of category (b). This one is a little tricky. Upon entry, possibly when Landon was three years old, he was rated a 5. At exit, Landon is 6 years old. Since we are comparing to same aged peers, his score is lower than at entry because he has not made sufficient progress to move him closer to age expectations. The answer to the progress question is yes, so this put him in category (b).

rated higher at exit than entry AND rated 5 or below at exit.
Name Entry 2a Exit 2a Exit 2b OSEP Category Jonas 3 5 Yes c Juan 2 4 Adrian These three students exited at a higher score than they entered and yes progress was made. This places them in the (c) category since they: improved functioning to a level nearer to same aged peers but did not reach it, and rated higher at exit than entry AND rated 5 or below at exit. Here we see three different examples of how to get the (c) category. These students made progress, were rated higher at exit than entry, but it was still below 5.

Rated 5 or lower at entry AND rated 6 or 7 at exit.
Name Entry 2a Exit 2a Exit 2b OSEP Category Brittany 4 7 Yes d Brittany entered with a 4 and exited at a 7. She made progress in skills (yes). This places her in OSEP category (d) because: She was functioning below age expectations when she entered the program but was functioning at age expectations when she exited. Rated 5 or lower at entry AND rated 6 or 7 at exit. (remember….these categories are not ordinal) Brittany falls into category (d) because she was functioning lower than age expectations at entry, but made good progress, enough to bring her up to age expectations at exit.

Rated 6 or 7 at entry; AND rated 6 or 7 at exit.
Name Entry 2a Exit 2a Exit 2b OSEP Category Maria 6 7 Yes e Joseph These two students are both in the range of age-appropriate, one moved from 6 to 7 the other stayed the same. Both had ‘yes’, so they fall into category (e) because: were functioning at age expectations when they entered the program and were functioning at age expectations when they left. Rated 6 or 7 at entry; AND rated 6 or 7 at exit. These two students are in category (e). They were functioning at or near age expectations at entry and exit.

Remember that this chart only shows data for Outcome 2.
Category % A 10 B 30 C D E 20 Based on the preceding data, this is how our ‘class’ fell in the OSEP rating categories. Remember that this chart only shows data for Outcome 2. Here is a breakdown of the percentages for each category based on our example class. Are there any questions?

Summary Statements for Each of the Three Outcomes: Summary Statement 1: Of those preschool children who entered the preschool program below age expectations in each Outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program SS1 social Target Target State target 78.50

Summary Statement 2: The percent of preschool children who were functioning within age expectations in each Outcome by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. SS1 social Target Target State target 62.00

Video Progress Categories

Resources/HELP/Questions?
ECTA Center The Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center Technical questions may be sent to the helpdesk at Questions? Special Education/COSF Ginger Huffman – ELRS - Lisa Ray-

Indicator 7: Early Childhood Outcomes

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Indicator 7: Early Childhood Outcomes"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Indicator 7: Early Childhood Outcomes

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Indicator 7: Early Childhood Outcomes"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback