Presentation to SAC June 3, 2015 Ruth Littlefield.

State Systemic Improvement Plan:

Improving social-emotional outcomes for preschool

children with disabilities

Presentation to SACJune 3, 2015

Ruth Littlefield

Why did we develop the SSIP? Indicator 17 says..

◦ The State’s SPP/APR includes a comprehensive, multi-year State Systemic Improvement Plan, focused on improving results for students with disabilities….

History

Phases

Analysis Planning

Phase IA. Data Analysis;B. Identification of the

Focus for Improvement;

C. Infrastructure to Support Improvement and Build capacity; and

D. Theory of Action

Phase IIE. Infrastructure

Development;F. Support for LEA

Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices;

G. Evaluation Plan

Phase III: h. Results of Ongoing Evaluation and Revisions to the SPP

Stakeholder Input Regional Focus groups Technical assistance from IDC and DaSY

Iterative process ◦ (broad analysis in-depth analysis)◦ Working plan not a static document

Input and Support

Preschool children with disabilities in the identified subset of districts will substantially increase their rate of growth in the area of improved positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships) by the time they turned six years of age or exit the program.

State-Identified Measurable Result

FFY 2013: 1210 preschool children with disabilities exited preschool special education

SSIP baseline data: Subset of 16 districts representing approximately 20% (241/1210*100) of the preschool children with disabilities who exited preschool special education

Not selected based on lowest performance

Seven Preschool Technical Assistance Network regions and the five Superintendent Regions.

Both assessment tools: AEPSi ™ and TS Gold ™. Range in size, with child count ranging from fewer than five to more than

100 preschool children with disabilities Offer a variety of service models and placement options. A significant factor used in identifying these districts was a readiness

and willingness to improve the social-emotional outcomes for preschool children with disabilities.

Subset of Districts

Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships)

State Subset

a. Preschool children who did not improve functioning

231.90%

31.24%

b. Preschool children who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers

16013.22%

53 21.99%

c. Preschool children who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it

27923.05%

6225.73%

d. Preschool children who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers

49841.15%

7631.54%

e. Preschool children who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers

25020.66%

4719.50%

Total 1210 241

Formula for Summary Statement 1: (c+d)/(a+b+c+d)

777/96080.94%

138/19471.13%

Data: Ind. 7 A: Indicator 17

Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships

FFY 13 B17 Numerator(subset)

FFY 13 B17 Denominator(subset)

FFY 13 B17 Baseline(subset)

FFY 13 State Level Data

A1: Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the % who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they exited the program.Formula: (c+d)/(a+b+c+d)

138(62+76)

194 (3+53+62+76)

71.13% 80.94%

(777/960)

Data

FFY 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Target 71.13% 71.13% 73.71% 76.29% 78.90%

Target setting

Results in meaningful, significant change

Impacts State-level data

FFY 13 Baseline = 71.13%

FFY 13: July 1, 2013-June 30, 2014

FFY 14 ends June 30 2015

FFY 15 ends June 30 2016.

Children have to receive intervention and then exit before we see impact.

1. The NHDOE was not able to disaggregate child outcome data by race/ethnicity, age, disability, length of time in service or setting. As a result, the NHDOE was not able to determine if these factors were impacting social-emotional outcomes for preschool children with disabilities.

2. The NHDOE was not able to link child outcome data to Part C or to the K-12 longitudinal data system. As a result, no conclusions could be made on child outcomes from Part C to Part B or regarding impact of preschool special education over time.

3. Local district personnel have varied ability to link data at the local level from preschool special education to the K-12 system. As a result, they are not able to analyze the long term impact of services by demographic and programmatic factors.

4. Local district personnel have limited capacity to analyze data to inform instruction and to guide IEP development. As a result, data are not used across all districts to the fullest effect and opportunities to refine practices to improve outcomes may be missed.

5. While the State-level data have been determined to be of high quality, some districts have identified a need to strengthen inter-rater reliability and to hone assessment skills. As a result, some data may not be accurately reflecting the social-emotional outcomes for individual children and assessments may not be conducted in the most efficient manner, creating a more cumbersome assessment process.

Root causes contributing to low performance based on Data Analysis

1. There was no formal state-level structure (advisory body or leadership team) that focused on improving social-emotional outcomes for preschool children with disabilities.

2. Local administrators and school board members did not uniformly understand the factors that impact positive social-emotional outcomes for preschool children with disabilities and cost-benefit of intervening early with sound, evidence-based practices.

3. Practitioners (district and community-based) have a range of knowledge and skill regarding the implementation with fidelity of evidence-based practices that are likely to improve social-emotional outcomes for preschool children with disabilities.

Root cause analysis based on Infrastructure Analysis

Stakeholder input◦ SSIP Input group◦ PTAN Regional focus group◦ NHDOE/PIC: family input◦ Subset of districts: Lead Personnel◦ Incidental Input (surveys, scans, natural

opportunities) State Leadership Team Promote TA/PD System

Coherent Improvement Strategies

Data system development◦ Expand data reporting and collection (POMS)◦ Explore linking POMS to NHDOE data systems◦ Assess feasibility of linking FCESS-PSE◦ Longitudinal data on social-emotional outcomes

NHDOE supports expansion of this work beyond the subset of districts◦ Ongoing alignment across preschool special

education and related initiatives◦ Maximize national resources


In-depth data and infrastructure analysis of subset of districts◦ Self-assessment framework◦ Liaison assigned to support teams◦ Identify current initiatives, strengths to leverage

opportunities for improvement, and challenges/barriers

◦ Identify local coherent improvement strategies Enhance implementation of Evidence-based

practices Family engagement Use implementation science


NHDOE promotes capacity of subset of districts to sustain improved results in social-emotional outcomes for preschool children with disabilities◦ Build personnel capacity◦ Ensure ongoing training and support◦ Educate administration and school board about

cost-benefit of quality early childhood supports◦ Define markers of success and evaluate

improvement strategies


NHDOE, with Parent Information Center, will develop resources for districts that increase family engagement and promote positive social-emotional outcomes for preschool children with disabilities.◦ How schools communicate with families regarding

a child’s social-emotional development◦ Strategies to support social-emotional

development at home◦ Strengthening understanding of role of district in

helping families connect to social-emotional resources


New Hampshire State Systemic Improvement Plan Theory of Action

“We know from a wide body of research that children’s earliest experiences will have consequences for the rest of their lives. That’s why we need to ensure that our system of early childhood services and supports works to promote healthy development early in life” Governor

Hassan, NH Comprehensive Plan for Early Childhood 2013-2016

IMPROVEDSOCIALEMOTIONAL OUTCOMESFOR PRESCHOOLCHILDREN WITHDISABILITIES

CHILD LEVEL ACTIVITIES

Engagement with adults, peers and materials

Playing, Learning and

Growing

STATE LEVEL ACTIVITIES

Enhance Data SystemsNHSEIS

I4SEEPOMS

Connect NH BOLD Initiatives,

Safe Schools/Healthy Students and

SEE Change through the SSIP

to leverage broader Early

Childhood State

InfrastructureSpark NH Vision:“All NH Children

and their families are

healthy, learning and thriving now

and in the future.”

Evaluation of SSIP

IFNew Hampshire Department of

Education leverages statewide

initiatives, data systems,

infrastructure and interagency drivers to scale-

up the implementation

of evidence-based practices for increasing

child engagement, including the

DEC Recommended

Practices;

THENPreschool

children with disabilities will benefit from

the implementatio

n of evidenced-

based practices with fidelity that

promote social-emotional

development

THENDistricts will

develop a deep

understanding of their local

infrastructure and data;

participate in high quality PD; receive high quality

TA and create,Implement

and evaluate plans to

improve social emotional

outcomes for preschool

children with disabilities in their district

THENStaff working

with preschool children with

disabilities will implement evidence-

based practices with

fidelity, engage

families, gather data and adjust

instruction, in order to

improve social emotional

outcomes for preschool

children with disabilities in

their classrooms

Research Rationale: “Young children’s healthy social and emotional development is critical to school readiness and positive long term outcomes.” (National Research Council & Institute of Medicine, 2000; Raver & Knitzer, 2002; Thompson & Raikes, 2007).

Family and Stakeholder Engagement: “

THEN

Preschool children with disabilities will increase their rate of growth in the area of improved positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships).

DISTRICT LEVEL

ACTIVITIESData and

Infrastructure Analysis

Participation in PD/TA

Receive Coaching

EvaluationOf Coherent

Improvement Plans

CLASSROOMLEVEL

ACTIVITIESImplementation

of evidence-based practices

Family Engagement

Evaluation of Fidelity of

Implementation of Evidence-

Based Practices

Infrastructure Development◦ Who will implement infrastructure changes◦ Resources Needed◦ Expected outcomes◦ Timelines◦ Steps to further align/leverage current

improvement plans/initiatives ◦ Involvement of other SEA offices and other

agencies

Phase II

Evidence-based practices◦ Steps and activities that support implementation of

improvement strategies◦ Communication strategies and stakeholder

involvement◦ How barriers will be addressed◦ Who will be in charge of implementing◦ How activities will be implemented with fidelity◦ Resources that will be used◦ How expected outcomes of strategies will be measured◦ Timelines◦ Involvement of other SEA offices and other agencies

Phase II

Evaluation plan to evaluate implementation ◦ Short-term and long-term objectives to measure

implementation and impact on results◦ Plan must be aligned with

Theory of Action Other components of SSIP

◦ Plan must include: How stakeholders will be involved Methods to collect and analyze data on activities and

outcomes How the State will use evaluation results to:

Examine effectiveness of implementation Measure progress toward achieving intended outcomes Make modifications to plan How results of evaluation will be disseminated

Phase II

Report on progress including:◦ Results of ongoing evaluation◦ Extent of Progress

Revisions to the SPP

Phase III

SAC representatives on stakeholder group? Feedback to larger committee?

Other comments of questions for the bureau?

Wrap Up

Presentation to SAC June 3, 2015 Ruth Littlefield.

Documents

Transcript of Presentation to SAC June 3, 2015 Ruth Littlefield.