Connecticut Part C State Performance Plan Indicator 11 State Systemic Improvement Plan Phase II.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WV High Quality Standards for Schools
Advertisements

Virginia - March 2014 (Content adapted from 2014 MSRRC Forum) Preparing for the State Systemic Improvement Plan.
High Quality Child Outcomes Data in Early Childhood: More Important than Ever Kathleen Hebbeler, SRI International Christina Kasprzak, Frank Porter Graham.
C ontent of the IFSP Produced by NICHCY, In this module, you’ll learn:  Why the IFSP is so important in early intervention  The 8 types of information.
State Systemic Improvement Plan: Preparing, Planning, and Staying Informed Presentation to Louisiana ICC July 10, 2013.
SPP/APR/SSIP/SiMR Welcome to More Acronyms. Who is here? Introductions – who are you HERE? Your name cards are color coded by which group you represent.
Welcome! Review of the National Part C APR Indicator 4 Family Data FFY 2011 ( ) Siobhan Colgan, ECTA, DaSy Melissa Raspa, ECTA.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary & Secondary Education Overview of Results Driven Accountability Assuring Compliance and Improving Results August.
July 2013 IFSP and Practice Manual Revisions April 29, 2013 May 3, 2013 Infant & Toddler Connection of Virginia Practice Manual Infant & Toddler Connection.
NC SSIP: 5 Things We’ve Learned Directors’ Update March 2015 ncimplementationscience.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/Recent+Presentations.
Getting Ready for Phase II of the SSIP
Ready for Phase II? Developing an Effective Systemic Improvement Plan Anne Lucas, ECTA/WRRC Grace Kelley, SERRC Taletha Derrington, DaSy Christina Kasprzak,
Ready for Phase II? Developing an Effective Systemic Improvement Plan Anne Lucas, ECTA/WRRC Grace Kelley, SERRC Taletha Derrington, DaSy Christina Kasprzak,
NC SSIP: Top 5 Things We’ve Learned Mid-South Meeting January 7-8, 2015.
TIP Webinar Targeted Improvement Planning. ILCD EDN Guidance Document First document to review in preparation for your TIP development. The questions.
RESULTS DRIVEN ACCOUNTABILITY SSIP Implementation Support Activity 1 OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS.
Results-Driven Accountability OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS 1.
Overview of Idaho’s State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) Division of Special Education Dr. Charlie Silva State Director of Special Education 1.
The Center for IDEA Early Childhood Data Systems What Practitioners Need to Know about Measuring EI and ECSE Outcomes Kathleen Hebbeler, SRI International.
Community Planning Training 1-1. Community Plan Implementation Training 1- Community Planning Training 1-3.
Speakers Dr. Blanca Enriquez, Director, Office of Head Start
First, a little background…  The FIT Program is the lead agency for early intervention services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
Michigan Department of Education, Office of Special Education Welcome on behalf of Teri Chapman Director of Special Education Joanne Winkelman, Office.
NC SSIP DAC Update March 2015 ncimplementationscience.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/Recent+Presentations.
State Systemic Improvement Plan March 18,  All components of an accountability system will be aligned in a manner that best supports States in.
Connecticut Part C State Performance Plan Indicator 11 State Systemic Improvement Plan Phase II.
Overview of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) Anne Lucas, WRRC/ECTA Ron Dughman, MPRRC Janey Henkel, MPRRC 2013 WRRC Leadership Forum October.
Engagement as Strategy: Leading by Convening in the SSIP Part 2 8 th Annual Capacity Building Institute May, 2014 Joanne Cashman, IDEA Partnership Mariola.
Presentation to SAC June 3, 2015 Ruth Littlefield.
Using State Data to Inform Parent Center Work. Region 2 Parent Technical Assistance Center (PTAC) Conference Charleston, SC June 25, 2015 Presenter: Terry.
SSIP Implementation Support Visit Idaho State Department of Education September 23-24, 2014.
Infant & Toddler Connection of Virginia Results of FFY 2007 Monitoring Indicators For The Annual Performance Report & State Performance Plan.
Overview of the State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP)
What is HQPD?. Ohio Standards for PD HQPD is a purposeful, structured and continuous process that occurs over time. HQPD is a purposeful, structured and.
Results Driven Accountability PRT System Support Grant Targeted Improvement Plan Cole Johnson, NDE.
SSIP Process A Suggested Pathway, Timeline and Gantt Chart WRRC Regional Forum Eugene October 31 and November 1, 2013.
Lessons Learned about Going to Scale with Effective Professional Development Iris R. Weiss Horizon Research, Inc. February 2011.
Why Do State and Federal Programs Require a Needs Assessment?
SPP/APR - SSIP Stakeholders Meeting # 5. Agenda for Today Stakeholder involvement Review Draft SSIP –Baseline Data / Target setting –Introduction –Data.
All components of an accountability system will be aligned in a manner that best support States in improving results for infants, toddlers, children and.
The CSEFEL and State Implementation Partnerships An Overview.
Evaluation Planning & Reporting for School Climate Transformation Grant (SCTG) Sites Bob Algozzine University of North Carolina at Charlotte Steve GoodmanMichigan's.
Georgia Parent Mentor Kickoff: Inform, Imagine, Inspire with Results-Driven Accountability Ruth Ryder DEPUTY DIRECTOR OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS.
SHERRI YBARRA, SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION SUPPORTING SCHOOLS AND STUDENTS TO ACHIEVE.
Resources / Inputs Political Environment State and Federal Budget Families Providers DSS MOUs/ MOAs Contracts OEC Other Stakeholders Medicaid Modernization.
State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP) Office of Special Education January 20, 2016.
Collaboration through State Systemic Improvement Planning: Working together to improve outcomes for young children with disabilities Division for Early.
2016 Utah Transition Institute Developing Improvement Strategies.
Connecticut Part C State Performance Plan Indicator 11 State Systemic Improvement Plan Phase II.
Arizona State Systemic Improvement Plan Update State Performance Plan / Annual Performance Report  All indicators are still significant and will be.
Connecticut Part C State Performance Plan Indicator 11 State Systemic Improvement Plan Phase II.
Children’s Policy Conference Austin, TX February 24, ECI as best practice model for children 0-3 years with developmental delays / chronic identified.
OSEP-Funded TA and Data Centers David Guardino, Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education.
Universal GO 4 IT Training. Welcome and Introductions.
SPP/APR - SSIP Stakeholders Meeting # 4. Agenda for Today What’s New –OSEP Evaluation Tool –Updated timeline Workgroups Report Out –Data –Infrastructure.
Phase I Strategies to Improve Social-Emotional Outcomes
Rorie Fitzpatrick & Dona Meinders, WestEd
Pacific and Caribbean States/Entities Early Intervention and
Using Formative Assessment
Region 1 PTAC Regional Conference
Kristin Reedy, Co-Director June 24, 2016
OSEP Project Directors Meeting
G-CASE Fall Conference November 14, 2013 Savannah, Ga
2018 Improving Data, Improving Outcomes Conference
NC Preschool Pyramid Model Leadership Team Summit January 9-10, 2019
Leadership Team Training
Part B: Evaluating Implementation Progress and Impact of Professional Development Efforts on Evidence-Based Practices   NCSI Cross-State Learning Collaboratives.
Christina Kasprzak Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute
Measuring Child and Family Outcomes Conference August 2008
Implementing, Sustaining and Scaling-Up High Quality Inclusive Preschool Policies and Practices: Application for Intensive TA September 10, 2019 Lise.
Presentation transcript:

Connecticut Part C State Performance Plan Indicator 11 State Systemic Improvement Plan Phase II

Timelines and Descriptions of Each Phase of the SSIP, adapted from the Part C Indicator Measurement Table Year 1 – FFY 2013 Delivered April 2015 Phase I: Analysis Year 2 - FFY 2014 Due April 2016 Phase II: Plan Years FFY Due February Phase III: Implementation and Evaluation  Data Analysis  Description of State Infrastructure to Support  Improvement and Build Capacity  State-identified Measureable Result (SIMR)  Selection of Coherent Improvement Strategies  Theory of Action Multi-year plan addressing:  Phase I Content including Updates  Infrastructure Development  Support for EIS Programs or Providers in Implementing Evidence-Based Practices  Evaluation Plan Reporting on Progress including:  Phase I and Phase II Content/Updates  Progress toward short and long-term outcomes  Revisions to the SPP and evaluation data to support decision

Phase I submitted April 1, Data Analysis -3- Coherent Improvement Strategies -5- Theory of Action Graphic -2- Infrastructure Analysis -4- State-identified Measurable Result (SiMR)

SiMR Parents of children who have a diagnosed condition will be able to describe their child’s abilities and challenges more effectively as a result of their participation in Early Intervention.

Other States

Knowledge of Evidence Base by parents, health care providers, and EIS providers Training for parents, health care providers, and EIS providers If then Then Policy as reflected in procedures, forms, and service guidelines ….parents, health care providers, and EIS providers all have a shared understanding about the true purpose of early intervention visits to coach families, and ….all training and TA is aligned to support families as decision makers (vs. only providing therapy services to children), and ….providers will implement research supported practices with fidelity including natural learning environment practices, coaching as a style of interaction with families, and the use of a primary service provider approach and …families will learn new skills and understand the unique ways that they can help their children develop and learn. ….the lead agency and EIS programs revise policies, procedures, and guidelines to focus on supporting families, …families will be better able to describe their child’s abilities and challenges so that their children receive individualized services in natural settings and demonstrate improved behavioral and educational results. “My son learns best by watching, parallel play, and hand over hand when he doesn't know how to move his body.” “My son’s language is great, but he often needs reminders to take a breath before he speaks so he can be heard.” CT Part C SSIP Theory of Action

Phase II due April 1, Infrastructure Development -2- Support to EIS Programs -3- Evaluation

Education and Outreach to referral sources, parents, EIS providers and LEAs Professional Development for parents, health care providers, and EIS providers If then Then Fiscal Enhancements that maximize revenue and support EBPs at high quality EIS programs ….parents, health care providers, and EIS providers all have a shared understanding about the true purpose of early intervention visits to coach families, and ….all training and TA is aligned to support families as decision makers (vs. only providing therapy services to children), and ….providers will implement research supported practices with fidelity including natural learning environment practices, coaching as a style of interaction with families, and the use of a primary service provider approach and …families will learn new skills and understand the unique ways that they can help their children develop and learn. ….the lead agency and EIS programs revise policies, procedures, and guidelines to focus on supporting families, …families will be better able to describe their child’s abilities and challenges so that their children receive individualized services in natural settings and demonstrate improved behavioral and educational results. “My son learns best by watching, parallel play, and hand over hand when he doesn't know how to move his body.” “My son’s language is great, but he often needs reminders to take a breath before he speaks so he can be heard.” CT Part C SSIP Theory of Action

Implementation Teams Infrastructure Development Support to EIS Providers Evaluation Education and Outreach Aileen – FCS Personnel Development Deb – PS Fiscal Enhancements Lynn, Mary & Alice Measuring true Family Outcomes Aileen – FO LC

Specify (a)improvements that will be made to the State infrastructure to better support EIS programs and providers to implement and scale up EBPs to improve results for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families. (b)the steps the State will take to further align and leverage current improvement plans and other early learning initiatives and programs in the State, including Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge, Home Visiting Program, Early Head Start and others which impact infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families. (c)who will be in charge of implementing the changes to infrastructure, resources needed, expected outcomes, and timelines for completing improvement efforts. (d)how the State will involve multiple offices within the State Lead Agency, as well as other State agencies and stakeholders in the improvement of its infrastructure. Infrastructure Development

Specify… (a)how the State will support EIS providers in implementing the evidence-based practices that will result in changes in Lead Agency, EIS program, and EIS provider practices to achieve the SIMR(s) for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families. (b)Identify steps and specific activities needed to implement the coherent improvement strategies, including communication strategies and stakeholder involvement; how identified barriers will be addressed; who will be in charge of implementing; how the activities will be implemented with fidelity; the resources that will be used to implement them; and timelines for completion. (c)Specify how the State will involve multiple offices within the Lead Agency (and other State agencies such as the SEA) to support EIS providers in scaling up and sustaining the implementation of the evidence-based practices once they have been implemented with fidelity. Support to EIS Providers

Specify… (a)how the evaluation is aligned to the theory of action and other components of the SSIP and the extent to which it includes short- term and long-term objectives to measure implementation of the SSIP and its impact on achieving measurable improvement in SIMR(s) for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families. (b)how the evaluation includes stakeholders and how information from the evaluation will be disseminated to stakeholders. (c)the methods that the State will use to collect and analyze data to evaluate implementation and outcomes of the SSIP and the progress toward achieving intended improvements in the SIMR(s). (d)how the State will use the evaluation data to examine the effectiveness of the implementation; assess the State’s progress toward achieving intended improvements; and to make modifications to the SSIP as necessary. Evaluation Plan

ECTA / DaSy Self Assessment

IDC Logic Model Example

Another Example

TODAY Teams Logic Model Worksheets Report Back SSIP Logic Model

Logic Model Worksheets

Break into Implementation Teams

Report Out

Lunch Place your colored dots on items from a different team where you see overlap with your team Use sticky notes for questions/suggestions What does this mean?

Build SSIP Logic Model

Report to OSEP is due April 1, 2016 Draft on Birth23.org by February 15 th Teams to complete all 3 components Next Steps

Phase III due FEBRUARY 1, Phase I and Phase II Content Updates -2- Progress toward Short and Long-term Outcomes -3- Revisions to SPP and Evaluation Data to Support Decision …and each February in SPP (2018, 2019, and 2020)