1. SPP Indicators B-7 and B-8: Overview and Results to Date for the Florida Prekindergarten Program for Children with Disabilities PreK Coordinators Meeting Orlando, FL - May 6, 2010 Batya Elbaum University of Miami

2. 2 State Performance Plan The current SPP began in FY 2005-06 and will remain in effect through FY 2010 - 2011 Each year, States must submit an Annual Performance Report to OSEP that reports on state-level progress on each indicator Each year, LEA performance must be reported publicly

3. 3 Critical features of the SPP Valid and reliable data Report of baseline data Selection of targets Improvement or slippage Improvement activities

4. SPP/APR Part B Indicator #8 “Percent of parents with a child receiving special education services who report that schools facilitated parent involvement as a means of improving services and results for children with disabilities.”

5. Preschool parent survey items parents agree with most People from preschool special education, including teachers and other service providers, are available to speak with me. People from preschool special education treat me as an equal team member.

6. Preschool parent survey items parents agree with less My recommendations are included on the IEP/IFSP. I am part of the IEP/IFSP decision- making process.

7. Preschool parent survey items parents agree with a lot less People from preschool special education explain what options parents have if they disagree with a decision made by the preschool special education program. People from preschool special education give me options concerning my child’s services and supports.

8. Parent survey items parents agree with least People from preschool special education give parents the help they may need, such as transportation, to play an active role in their child’s learning and development. I have been asked for my opinion about how well preschool special education services are meeting my child’s needs.

9. How we get the percent on the indicator We calculate a measure on the scale for each parent. We can display these in a graph that allows us to visualize the results for the group as a whole. We apply the state-determined minimum standard of a measure of 600. We count the number of parents with measures at or above 600 and divide by the number of parents who responded to the survey. The result is the percent on the indicator.

10. Distribution of measures for parents of preschool children 2008-09

11. FL Results for B-8

12. Progress towards targets

13. Response rates Number of 2009 responses and response rates (mailed survey) K-12: 8.9%; n = 13,369 PreK:15.5% n = 3,479 Number of 2010 responses as of 4/15/10 (online + paper) K-12: 0-540; 14 districts > 100; n = 4,123 PreK: 0-67; 8 districts > 20; n = 593

14. Activities to boost response rates and facilitate parent involvement Activities at the state level Activities at the district level Activities at the school level

15. SPP/APR Part B Indicator #7 “Percent of preschool children with IEPs who demonstrate improved: Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships); Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/ communication and early literacy); and Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs.”

16. 16 Child Outcomes Reporting Categories For each outcome area we must report: A - % of children who did not improve functioning B - % of children who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers C - % of children who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it D - % of children who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers E - % of children who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers

17. Florida’s use of BDI-2 assessment data Developmental status measured at program entry and program exit A standard score of 78 or above (>-1.5 SD) is considered to represent a level of functioning that is “comparable to same-aged peers”

18. Florida’s use of BDI-2 assessment data Indicator 7-A: Personal-Social domain Indicator 7-B: Communication domain Indicator 7-C: Adaptive domain

19. 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. (c+d/a+b+c+d) for each outcome category) Outcome A: 66.2% Outcome B: 59.2% Outcome C: 59.9%

20. Summary statement #2 The percent of preschool children who were functioning within age expectation in each Outcome by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. (d+e/a+b+c+d+e) for each outcome category) Outcome A: 75.8% Outcome B: 52.8% Outcome C: 73.6%

21. 21 Child Outcomes Reporting Requirements Baseline data reported in February 2010 (reflecting assessments of children who exited in 2008-09) State and school district outcomes will be publicly reported beginning in 2011, when we will report progress towards targets

22. Targets

23. Factors that may affect reported percentages on this indicator Factors related to data collection Completeness of assessment data Reliability of assessment data Accurate basals and cielings Proper administration of items Accurate scoring of items Accurate scoring of assessment domains Accurate data entry into Data Manager

24. Factors that may affect reported percentages on this indicator Factors related to children and services Child’s time in program Type and severity of delay(s) on entry Type and intensity of services provided

25. State efforts to ensure high-quality data while maximizing efficiency of the Child Outcomes Measurement System BDI-2 trainings by Riverside staff BDI-2 Training-of-trainers Guidelines for use of BDI-2 Screening Test Permissible entry of raw scores (vs. item-level data) into Data Manager, with Quality Assurance check Ongoing conversations with Riverside to improve the Data Manager NECTAC/ECO-sponsored BDI-2 workgroup