1. States’ Experiences Preparing for the OSEP On-site Results Activity Presented September, 2011

2. Overall Purpose of Results Work To assist States’ efforts to identify resources and strategies that will lead to improved outcomes for infants, toddlers and children with disabilities. (OSEP shifting to looking more at results rather than solely focusing on compliance issues.)

3. Purpose/Goals/Intentions of On-Site Results Activity Clarify purpose and expectations for work related to results topic area Identify/review desired performance related to results topic area Identify challenges related to the results topic area Review/suggest and obtain agreement on essential improvement activities Review existing plan/draft plan, including activities, timelines, benchmarks, evaluation and reporting

4. Child or Family Outcomes Results Topic StateDatesTopic MSSeptember 14-15Child outcomes OKSeptember 26-30Child outcomes PROctober 3-7Child outcomes NMOctober 3-7Child outcomes TXOctober 24-28Family outcomes NJOctober 31-November 4Child outcomes SCOctober 31-November 4Family outcomes CTNovember 7-10Child outcomes NCNovember 14-18Family outcomes MINov 28-December 2Family outcomes

5. Preparatory TA for States OSEP asked DAC to design and implement a workshop with other TA partners Webinar – July 7 Workshop – August 4 TA Partners participating in planning and onsite results visit, as needed by states Follow up TA

6. Webinar – July 7 WHO: States MSIP state contacts other MSIP staff TA providers invited by states to workshop WHAT: OSEP overview Timeline/sequence of events Overview of and preparation for workshop

7. Workshop – August 4 WHO: States MSIP state contacts other MSIP staff TA providers invited by states to workshop (= 149) WHEN & WHERE: Day after OSEP Leadership Mega Conference (9:00 am – 4:00 pm) Same hotel as Mega

8. Workshop – August 4 WHAT: https://www.ideadata.org/Workshop2011.asp SISEP on implementation science Stakeholders’ role Work time in state teams with critical friends SMART/Results Topic Critical friends Relevant data Hypothesis

9. Survey Feedback from Workshop Participants 70 state staff participated in the workshop: 36 ( 51%) provided feedback Workshop helped clarify Results topic: 50% greatly 38% somewhat Critical friends were helpful: 68% greatly 21% somewhat Tools were helpful: 29% greatly 59% somewhat Assistance with data: 50% greatly 27% somewhat Identification of stakeholders: 41% greatly 35% somewhat

10. Survey Feedback from Workshop Participants Sample of comments from 22 state participants: Thank you for… work time… training… organization Example of high quality service coordination Now have more direction and better prepared Too late in process Too much the week of Mega Needed more clarity as to who to invite (e.g., TA providers)

11. SMART topic: What is you SMART topic and how did you select it? Data: What data have you reviewed and how has data be a key part of your results work? What additional data do you plan to look at in the process? Stakeholders: How have you (will you) involved stakeholders in the process? Onsite planning: What are you planning for your onsite agenda/process? TA: What TA supports have you used (or do you plan to use) in the results process? Pitfalls: What have been your pitfalls or challenges in this process? Do you have any lessons learned you can share? States’ Experiences

12. 4 States’ Experiences (To-Date) New Jersey: Terry Harrison, Susan Evans North Carolina: Sherry Franklin Michigan: Lisa Wasacz Mississippi: Susan Boone