Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

SSIP Overview: State Experiences with Stakeholder Engagement Part C/619 State Accountability Priority Area March 6, 2014 1.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "SSIP Overview: State Experiences with Stakeholder Engagement Part C/619 State Accountability Priority Area March 6, 2014 1."— Presentation transcript:

1 SSIP Overview: State Experiences with Stakeholder Engagement Part C/619 State Accountability Priority Area March 6,

2 SICC Strategic Plan and State System Improvement Process (SSIP) State Interagency Coordinating Council 2 Brenda Sharp

3 Stakeholder involvement in EarlySteps l Louisiana SICC+ Lead Agency + Stakeholders = Louisiana Part C 3

4 Where to Start? Beginning the SSIP discussion Opportunities for Input:  Review the Proposed SSIP  Discussions with SERRC  July 2013 presentation to SICC on proposed APR/SSIP  SICC voted to host a retreat to begin planning for the SSIP 4

5 Potential Indicator C11: Reviewing the Requirements  September 2013 Retreat  The Louisiana ICC Strategic Plan  Reengage stakeholders in looking for a focus for system improvement 5

6 SICC/Lead Agency SSIP Planning Retreat  Assemble  SSIP Planning: SICC Member and Stakeholders gather to discuss Indicator 11  Align State Initiatives  Look at other state early childhood initiatives align/overlap  Review Data  Review available data: APR, Early Childhood Redesign, Strategic Plan and OCDD Transformation Plan  Create Workgroups  What do we need to gather that we don't have? Look for trends and areas for improvement.

7 Stakeholder Involvement in Hawaii Part C SSIP Stacy Kong 7

8 Hawaii’s Process for Stakeholder Involvement Worked with a broad stakeholder group Identified a small state team Next step is to identify a small stakeholder group 8

9 Hawaii’s Broad Stakeholder Group ICC Members Dept. of Health Admin Care Coordinators Direct Service Providers Quality Assurance Staff Data staff Personnel training staff Contracted Providers Dept. of Human Services Dept. of Education 619 Coordinators Community Members Head Start (HS)/Early HS Parent Training 9

10 Hawaii’s Broad Stakeholder Process Discussed with large group: – Overview of SSIP process – Data graphs Small group discussion around indicators 3 and 4 to: – Identify potential focus areas – Identify other data needs 10

11 Next Steps around Stakeholder Involvement Identify a small stakeholder group to support and complete the SSIP work with HI’s State Team. Convene another broad stakeholder meeting in May to identify a focus area. 11

12 SSIP Overview: Phase I Tools and Resources SSIP Overview: Phase I Tools and Resources Part C/619 State Accountability Priority Area March 6,

13 13 Example: SSIP Phase I Activity and Timeline Chart

14 14 Example: SSIP Phase I Activity and Timeline Chart

15 15 SSIP Phase I Roadmap

16 SSIP Phase I Roadmap: Purpose Based on draft SPP/APR package Helps states: – Keep in mind the various SSIP activities that need completion for submission with the FFY 2013 SPP/APR – Understand key information about each SSIP activity – Plan and implement SSIP activities 16

17 “Which way you ought to go depends on where you want to get to...” ― Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland 17 SSIP Phase I Roadmap

18 Roadmap Content Each roadmap activity includes a description: – Brief highlights (purpose and what’s included) – Things to consider (e.g. potential questions) – Examples, where applicable – Potential tools and resources 18

19 Get Started What’s included: Forming State Team Identifying flow of activities and timelines Engaging stakeholders – Inform broad group of SSIP – Consider using small small group to assist with data and infrastructure analysis 19

20 Get Started When should stakeholders be included in the process? Who will be included as a stakeholder? Will different stakeholders be included at different points in the process? How will stakeholders be included in the process? 20 Considerations related to stakeholder engagement in SSIP activities - Examples:

21 Conduct Broad Analyses Includes broad data and infrastructure analyses Questions to guide analyses - examples: – How do the percent of children exiting Part C functioning within age expectation in Positive Social Emotional skills in the state compare to other states? – Have there been statewide increases in the percentage of families reporting that the program has helped them help their child develop and learn? – What system components impact on low performance in the state? 21

22 Conduct Broad Analyses For documents not available on the web, contact your RRC state liaison 22 Tools and resources – Infrastructure examples: – NCRRC SWOT Analyses: State Infrastructure – ECTA Systems Framework

23 Conduct Broad Analyses Data Tool - Example – SSIP Child Outcomes Broad Data Analyses Template plate_FINAL.docx 23

24 Identify Focus/Results Primary concern or Potential Focus for Improvement/Measurable Results Considerations - examples: – Does the broad data and infrastructure analyses substantiate the potential focus for improvement? – Are there initiatives in the state related to this potential focus for improvement? Is the Part C/619 program connected to them? – Do you anticipate having leadership support around this focus area? 24

25 Identify Focus/Results Tool – Example: – NERRC Review of State Context: Considerations in Identifying Measureable Result for Students/Children with Disabilities as Focus for SSIP 25

26 Conduct In-depth Analyses In-depth data and infrastructure analyses related to primary concern/potential focus Suggested steps for completing in-depth data analyses Potential questions for in-depth infrastructure analyses – Which policies/procedures support practices that will lead to or impact improved outcomes for young children with disabilities in our selected focus for improvement? – Do we have sufficient funds to provide supports in building capacity of LEA/EIS programs to scale and sustain implementation of evidence-based practices? – Are there fiscal resources that could be leveraged to support the implementation improvement strategies? 26

27 Conduct In-depth Analyses Tools and resources – examples: – Initiative Inventory for SSIP – Analyzing Child Outcomes Data for Program Improvement: A Guidance Table For documents not available on the web, contact your RRC state liaison 27

28 Local Contributing Factor Tools 28

29 Refine Focus/Results In-depth analyses leads to refinement of Focus for Improvement/Measureable Results Examples of Focus/Measureable Results: – Improving social emotional outcomes for children with disabilities – Improving literacy for children living in poverty – Improving families’ ability to help their child develop and learn 29

30 Refine Focus/Results Considerations for a “good” Focus/Results – Examples: – What resources are already committed or could be leveraged for this focus? – Does the system have adequate capacity to support improvements in this focus area? – Will this focus make a significant impact on results? – Will change in practices and beginning improvement in child and family outcomes be able to be achieved in 2-4 years? Tool – example: – SSIP Focus for Improvement Worksheet 30

31 Identify Improvement Strategies Considerations: – Does the strategy focus on changing practice or address barriers such as infrastructure issues? – Is the strategy based on evidence-based solutions? – Will the strategy build local capacity to improve results? Tools and Resources - Example – NIRN-SISEP Adapted Hexagon Tool – DEC Recommended Practices For documents not available on the web, contact your RRC state liaison 31

32 Develop Theory of Action Synthesis of information of information gathered Simple “if-then” statement: If we conduct data analysis to determine area in which state will focus for improvement then we identify and implement strategies to build LEAs/EIS program’s capacity then we will improve performance in the area needing improvement and the identified result for children with disabilities. Information on using a graphic or Logic Model 32

33 Develop/Review APR Drafting SSIP in FFY 2013 SPP/APR - considerations: – Determine who is responsible for drafting – Identify who needs to review and/or approve – Creating a timeline for drafts to be submitted, reviews to be completed, and approval obtained Review SPP/APR, obtaining stakeholder input 33

34 The END! The END! SPP/APR Submission – February

35 Contact Information Anne Lucas, WRRC/ECTA Megan Vinh, WRRC Stacy Kong, Hawaii Part C Brenda Sharp, Louisiana Part C Cornelia Taylor, ECTA/DaSy Christina Kasprzak, ECTA Grace Kelley, SERRC 35

36 Thank you for your attention! This is the second half of the first webinar in a series on SSIP presented in Resources related to this call and other presentations in the series are available at the following URL: IDEA DATA CENTER

Download ppt "SSIP Overview: State Experiences with Stakeholder Engagement Part C/619 State Accountability Priority Area March 6, 2014 1."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google