States’ Experiences Preparing for the OSEP On-site Results Activity

Presented September, 2011

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.)

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

Child or Family Outcomes Results Topic

State Dates TopicMS September 14-15 Child outcomes OK September 26-30 Child outcomesPR October 3-7 Child outcomesNM October 3-7 Child outcomesTX October 24-28 Family outcomesNJ October 31-November 4 Child outcomesSC October 31-November 4 Family outcomesCT November 7-10 Child outcomesNC November 14-18 Family outcomesMI Nov 28-December 2 Family outcomes

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

Webinar – July 7WHO: • 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

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

Workshop – August 4WHAT:

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

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

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)

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

4 States’ Experiences (To-Date)

New Jersey: Terry Harrison, Susan Evans

North Carolina: Sherry Franklin

Michigan: Lisa Wasacz

Mississippi: Susan Boone