Expanding the National Toolbox for Measuring Part C Participation Rates: Feasibility and Utility of Birth Cohort Methodology Donna Noyes, Ph.D., New York State Early Intervention Program, and Lynne MacLeod M.Stat., Utah Baby Watch Early Intervention Program The Infant and Toddler Coordinators Association (ITCA) is a not-for-profit corporation that promotes mutual assistance, cooperation, and the exchange of information and ideas in the administration of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Part C Early Intervention program and provides support to state and territory Part C coordinators. The ITCA Data Committee would like to acknowledge interns Kendra Babitz, Masters in Public Policy, University of Utah, and Raquel Valezquez, in partial fulfillment of Masters in Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Albany, for their work on this project. A list of references for the literature cited in this poster will be provided as a handout. Background As specified in the regulations of Section 618 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, each state’s Part C early intervention program must report annually the number of children birth through three who received Part C services according to an active Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) on a state-designated child count date between October 1 and December 1; reporting cumulative (annualized) counts of children on active IFSPs is optional. Although states’ cumulative counts typically exceed single-day counts (Data Accountability Center, 2012; Markowitz & MacLeod, 2012) (see Figure 1), questions remain in the field whether either metric reflects Part C participation adequately. Figure Single-Day vs. Cumulative Counts Source: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Data Analysis System (DANS), OMB # : "Infants and Toddlers Receiving Early Intervention Services in Accordance with Part C,” data updated as of July 15, Recent studies (Rosenberg, Zhang & Robinson, 2008; Rosenberg, Robinson, Shaw & Elison, 2013) comparing states’ single-day child count percentages to theoretical estimates of child developmental delays suggest that current Part C federal 618 reporting may significantly underestimate participation in and the need for Part C early intervention services. This emerging evidence was the impetus for the Infant and Toddler Coordinators Association (ITCA) Data Committee to investigate the feasibility and utility of birth cohort methodology as a possible additional measure of Part C participation. Applying birth cohort methodology to early intervention involves tracking any Part C participation for the group of children born in the same calendar year through age three, in contrast to the federally-reported methods of counting the number of children born in different years served under an active IFSP on a single day in a year and/or cumulatively in a one-year period. Methods Conclusions State and local programs need accurate and reliable measures of Part C participation not just for federal reporting but also for evaluating child find; projecting ongoing and future service and funding needs; guiding resource allocation and infrastructure planning and budgeting; and establishing valid cost data. Birth cohort analyses offer a different picture of Part C participation than do states’ federally-reported child counts, providing a better benchmark to assess the extent to which early intervention programs are reaching eligible populations nationally, statewide, and at the local level. Birth cohort analyses fit with current national interest and efforts to build statewide longitudinal data systems that facilitate following children through Part C to pre-K and beyond, as well as inform the discussion to establish prevalence of developmental delays. More work is needed to understand how states’ Part C eligibility criteria affect participation rates. Results continued Figure 4. New York Case Study: Comparison of Counts of Children Served, Figure 4 illustrates the variation across methodologies in the assignment of New York counties to categories based on the number of children served. Birth cohort data provided a more comprehensive depiction of Part C participation in New York statewide and locally by county than did the averaged single-day and cumulative child counts. A case study of children served in New York state’s Early Intervention system compared counts for a 2007 birth cohort to average aggregate October 1 single-day and calendar year cumulative child counts for for all counties. Methods continued In Figure 2, the two federally-reported Part C participation metrics (single-day and cumulative counts) are contrasted with birth cohort methodology over a theoretical four-year period. Figure 2. Three Part C Participation Methodologies Year 2Year 1Year 3Year 4 Cumulative Count Participation in the entire year Birth Cohort Count Participation any time from the birth year through age three BIRTH YEAR Single-Day Count Participation on one day in the year The ITCA Data Committee collected 2008 birth cohort data from 23 states and compared it with states’ corresponding 2011 single-day and cumulative child counts, as shown in Figure 3. Birth cohort percentages showed higher Part C participation rates than did either federally-reported metric and also provided information about the prevalence of developmental delays in children born in 2008, as identified per states’ eligibility criteria, who received early intervention services. Results Figure 3. Part C Participation for 23 States: ITCA 2008 Birth Cohort vs Single-Day and Cumulative Child Counts