1. 2012 OSEP Leadership Conference Leading Together to Achieve Success from Cradle to Career Child Outcomes for Early Intervention and Preschool Special Education: The National Picture Lynne Kahn ECO at FPG Kathy Hebbeler ECO at SRI Presentation # EB7

2. Overview National numbers and the quality of the state data The findings for 2010-11 Findings for the last 3 years State variation and data quality 2Early Childhood Outcomes Center

3. OSEP Reporting Requirements: Child Outcomes Positive social emotional skills (including positive social relationships) Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/ communication [and early literacy]) Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs 3Early Childhood Outcomes Center

4. If you have not seen it…. 4Early Childhood Outcomes Center www.the-eco-center.org

5. State Approaches to Outcomes Data, 2010-11 Approach Part C (N=56) Preschool (N=59) COS* 7 pt. scale43/56 (77%)36/59 (61%) One tool statewide 7/56 (13%)9/59 (15%) Publishers’ online analysis 3/56 (5%)6/59 (10%) Other5/56 (9%)8/59 (14%) * Child Outcomes Summary Rating

6. States are in various stages with regard to building their child outcomes measurement systems Some phrased in Some changed approaches 6Early Childhood Outcomes Center Child Outcomes: What we know

7. 3 Methods Methods for Calculating National Estimates 1.States with the highest quality data weighted by child count to represent all states* 2.All states weighted by child count 3.All states averaged (each state weighted as 1) 7Early Childhood Outcomes Center *The data we will be presenting for the national picture

8. Identifying the States with Highly Questionable Data Criteria for eliminating states: Not reporting data on enough children Odd patterns in the data Review of method reported suggested the data were of questionable quality 8Early Childhood Outcomes Center

9. Continued increase in the number of states included 9Early Childhood Outcomes Center 08-0909-1010-11 Pt. C192939 Part B Preschool 153336 Number of States that Met Criteria for Inclusion in the National Analysis

10. OSEP Reporting Categories Percentage of children who: a.Did not improve functioning b.Improved functioning, but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers c.Improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it d.Improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same- aged peers e.Maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers 10Early Childhood Outcomes Center 3 outcomes x 5 “measures” = 15 numbers

12. And now the data…. 12Early Childhood Outcomes Center And now the data….

13. 13 *Based on 39 states with highest quality data

14. 14 *Based on 36 States with the highest quality data.

15. The Summary Statements 1.Of those children who entered the program below age expectations in each outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 3 [6] years of age or exited the program. 2.The percent of children who were functioning within age expectations in each outcome by the time they turned 3 [6] years of age or exited the program. 15Early Childhood Outcomes Center

16. 16 *Based on 39 states with highest quality data

17. 17 *Based on 36 States with the highest quality data.

18. Part C: Trends over Time 18Early Childhood Outcomes Center

19. Part C: Trends over Time 19Early Childhood Outcomes Center

20. Part B Preschool: Trends over Time 20Early Childhood Outcomes Center

21. 21Early Childhood Outcomes Center Part B Preschool: Trends over Time

22. Looking for Patterns 22Early Childhood Outcomes Center

23. 23

24. 24Early Childhood Outcomes Center %

25. 25

26. Part C: States continue to report on more children 26Early Childhood Outcomes Center Total Number of Children States Included in the Child Outcomes Data Number of children reported Number of States and Jurisdictions 2007-08 (N=56) 2008-09 (N=56) 2009-10 (N=54) 2010-11 (N=54) 99 or less13654 100-4992516910 500-999613107 1,000-1,9999111013 2,000+3102022

27. 27Early Childhood Outcomes Center

28. 28 Total Number of Children Included in Progress Data Number of children reported Number of States and Jurisdictions FFY 2007 (N=58) FFY 2008 (N=58) FFY 2009 (N=58) FFY 2010 (N=59) 10 or fewer1111 10-9911767 100–49914642 500-99910 12108 1000–19998795 2000–29995101112 3000–4999511913 5000-89993379 9000+1112 Part B Preschool: States continue to report on more children

29. Early Childhood Outcomes Center29

30. 30Early Childhood Outcomes Center %

31. 75 th Percentile 50 th Percentile 25 th Percentile Minimum Maximum Outlier

32. Variation across states percent “a” : Part B 619 2010-11

33. Variation across states percent “b” : Part B 619 2010-11

34. Variation across states percent “c” : Part B 619 2010-11

35. Variation across states percent “d” : Part B 619 2010-11

36. Variation across states percent “e” : Part B 619 2010-11

37. Variation across states in greater than expected growth (Summary Statement 1) : Part B 619 2010-11

38. Variation across states in exits at age expectations (Summary Statement 2) : Part B 619 2010-11

39. Variation across states percent “a” : Part C 2010-11

40. Variation across states percent “b” : Part C 2010-11

41. Variation across states percent “c” : Part C 2010-11

42. Variation across states percent “d” : Part C 2010-11

43. Variation across states percent “e” : Part C 2010-11

44. Variation across states in greater than expected growth (Summary Statement 1) : Part C 2010-11

45. Variation across states in greater than expected growth (Summary Statement 2) : Part C 2010-11

46. Part C Improvement Activities # states Topic/theme 11 Training/TA on evidence based practices, effective practices, family centered services, DAP 5TACSEI/CEFEL 3 Training/TA on social emotional development (not TACSEI/CEFEL specific) 3Training/TA on more functional IFSP outcomes 2Revised IFSP format to enhance practices 4Training/TA on Literacy 2Training/TA on RBI 2Training/TA on ASD 2Training/TA on PSP 7 Other topics: coaching, instruction, self-help, transition practices, Special Quest, assistive technology, relationship based services in NE 46Early Childhood Outcomes Center

47. Conclusions The data show good outcomes for many children who attend Part C and Part B, Preschool. The data quality continues to get better. The data will be a powerful tool for program improvement when – The data are consistently good at the local level – States and local programs consistently use it. 47Early Childhood Outcomes Center

48. You might be interested in….. 48Early Childhood Outcomes Center Sponsored jointly by ECO and NECTAC

49. For more information…. www.the-eco-center.org 49Early Childhood Outcomes Center

50. 50Early Childhood Outcomes Center

51. Identifying States with Quality Data 51Early Childhood Outcomes Center

52. Calculating Missing Data for Part C Proxy for missing data = Number with data for C3/ Exiting Data (618) 52Early Childhood Outcomes Center Do not expect this number to be 100%..but we don’t expect it to be 10% either

53. Percentage of Exiters Reported by Part C Continues to Increase 53Early Childhood Outcomes Center

54. Calculating Missing Data for 619 Proxy for missing data = Number with data for B7/ Child count 54Early Childhood Outcomes Center Do not expect this number to be 100%..but we don’t expect it to be 10% either

55. Percentage of Child Count Reported by Part B Preschool Continues to Increase 55Early Childhood Outcomes Center

56. Many states reporting a low percentage for “a” but still have a few outliers. Part C Part B Preschool <2% 32 30 2 to <5% 11 5 to <7% 5 3 7 to <13% 0 5 28 to 49% 3 0 56Early Childhood Outcomes Center Number of States by % Reported in “a,” 2010-11

57. Early Childhood Outcomes Center 57 Reason Part C state was excluded Number excluded Percent (n=51) State is sampling36 No outcomes data reported00 Reported outcomes data on less than 28% of reported exiters 36 Had at least one outcome with category a greater than 10% or category e greater than 65% 48 Reported outcomes data on less than 28% of reported exiters AND Had at least one outcome with category a greater than 10% or category e greater than 65% 12 Questionable data quality based on review of SPP/APR and knowledge gained through TA 12 States included in the analysis3976

58. Early Childhood Outcomes Center 58 Reason Part B state was excluded Number excluded Percent (n=51) State is sampling 48 No outcomes data reported 12 Reported outcomes data on less than 12% of child count 24 Had at least one outcome with category a greater than 10% or category e greater than 65% 48 Reported outcomes data on less than 12% of child count AND Had at least one outcome with category a greater than 10% or category e greater than 65% 00 Questionable data quality based on review of SPP/APR and knowledge gained through TA 24 No child count data available 12 Reported Summary statements but no progress categories 12 States included in the analysis 3671

59. Producing National Estimates Using the States with the Highest Quality Data 1.Divide the states into those with large, medium, and small child counts. 2.Identify the states that appear to have the best data. 3.Weight by child count and calculate the overall OSEP percentages using the “best data” states in each category. 4.Use the OSEP percents and total child count for each category to get the national estimates. 59Early Childhood Outcomes Center

60. Variation across states in Outcome 1: Part B 619 2010-11

61. Variation across states in Outcome 2: Part B 619 2010-11

62. Variation across states in Outcome 3: Part B 619 2010-11

63. Variation across states in Outcome 1: Part C 2010-11

64. Variation across states in Outcome 2: Part C 2010-11

65. Variation across states in Outcome 3: Part C 2010-11