EI/ECSE Contractor Meeting s1

EI/ECSE Contractor Meeting Minutes – October 9, 2013 Time Topic Purpose Action 9:00 – 9:15 Updates Information Applications were submitted for Hubs. Results will be announced in November.  Hubs (Nancy JD) COSA Conference – People who attended reported it was useful and would attend  Stakeholder meeting again. Early Childhood (EC) wasn’t a separate strand, which made it easier to Nov 7th attend both EC and school age sessions. A suggestion was made for next year to have sessions that cross school age and early childhood, with a list of early intervention (EI) sessions. North Carolina Grant - Oregon has been invited to be a part of a North Carolina (NC) grant for kindergarten assessment and early learning. More information will be forthcoming. Feedback from districts this year indicated they want a formative assessment and the NC grant may help with this. State Interagency Coordinating Council / Local Interagency Coordinating Council (SICC/LICC) Retreat - 57 people attended representing 31 counties. The main focus of the retreat was to inform people about the new Early Learning System and how everything fits together. Sarah Drinkwater, Assistant Superintendent of Student Services and Nancy Johnson-Dorn provided updates about ODE and the early learning system. Jada Rupley, Early Learning System Director, provided a short video address. Hubs were an important part of the discussion and EI/ECSE programs are involved in every effort around the state. Other topics included linking parent to resources and the new LICC manuals. EcWeb admin assistants meeting – A meeting is planned for March 12, 2014, for EcWeb admin assistants to meet with Dan at Linn-Benton-Lincoln (LBL) ESD (during the contractors’ meeting that day) to discuss EcWeb, SECC, etc. The LBL computer lab has been reserved for this and will accommodate about 36 people. Programs may include anyone who works with EcWeb. It would be a good idea to bring your own laptop since the number of laptops available is very limited. EC PBIS workgroup – The EC PBIS workgroup is meeting every other month and a subgroup working on Safety First is meeting on the off months. The Safety First curriculum is being reviewed and revised, including the actual hold. There is discussion about videos to train, how many hours of training are needed to be a trainer, and how to implement everything with fidelity across the state. Ann Todd,

D:\Docs\2017-12-14\06c17dde348fc214105e25a0f9e1f664.doc Time Topic Purpose Action Rob Horner, and NWPBIS Network are interested in how to get a system in place. Nancy Johnson-Dorn has had a brief discussion with Jada Rupley about it. Jada requested a written description of the plan to be reviewed by the Early Learning Division (ELD) cabinet. 9:15 – 9:45 Safety Checklist (Nancy JD) Report and share At the last contractors’ meeting we discussed the childcare compliance checklist from the Office of Child Care. Although the ECSE programs are exempt from clinical licensing, it appears that some ECSE classrooms might need some improvements in the health and safety areas covered in the checklist. The thought is that we should consider doing an annual checklist in our classrooms. Please send your feedback to Nancy Johnson-Dorn. If you see anything that’s crossed out that shouldn’t be, please let Nancy know and she will share our input with the child care office. There was a suggestion to leave out the part of the checklist that addresses food for EI/ECSE. 9:45 – 10:15 Student Growth Goals for Discussion Student growth goals are a part of teacher effectiveness assessment that was licensed staff SB 290 contained in Senate Bill (SB) 290. (Nancy JD and Nancy A) There was discussion about student growth goals, including suggestions for a standard measurement for teacher effectiveness using Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System (AEPS). It was recommended that AEPS goals be used as an evaluation measure for a goal. A COSA presentation on goals suggested that outcomes could be a measurement of teachers’ strategies. Another suggestion was community mapping with outcomes based on parent access of community resources (parents as “learners”). There will be further discussion on this at another contractors’ meeting. Northwest Regional (NWR) ESD uses the Talent Ed system (automated) for recruitment and hiring. This system permits feedback and electronic signatures and goes straight to the human resources department. An iPad can be used for observations, and the system can also be used for a variety of other things, including making recommendations for hiring, requests for conferences, workshops requiring tuition, etc. Applications can be reviewed online. It can be done anywhere and it saves a lot of time and copies. 10:15 – Break 10:30 10:30 – Vision screening group Status Update The Vision Screening work group is working on identifying what the requirements for 10:35 (Ginna) a pediatric screening are and how EI/ECSE programs will need to implement and follow up on the requirement (per House Bill 3000). A few experts have been contacted and more information is coming. One resource that has been identified is Infantsee, which is a public health program in which optometric practitioners provide a free screening for children under the age of one. The vision screening requirement needs to be implemented during the 2014-15 school year. More to come. Page 2 D:\Docs\2017-12-14\06c17dde348fc214105e25a0f9e1f664.doc Time Topic Purpose Action 10:35 – Child Outcomes Data study Update Susan Graham, Douglas ESD and Judy Newman, Early Childhood Cares, have 10:45 (Judy and Susan) narrowed the focus of the study by selecting a sample of data. The Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) provided a crosswalk for the XYZ items that is different than the Brookes XYZ crosswalk. They are working with Jantina Clifford and Misty Waddell (UO). The outcomes they looked at came out very different, but a larger sample is needed. The Brookes sort uses objectives, while we were just counting goals; a decision about what makes the most sense needs to be made. We want to make sure our data is accurate, especially in light of service levels and key performance measures (KPMs). Diane Tipton, High Desert ESD, has done a comparison of outcomes across years, comparing outcomes across time. What factors influence the outcomes (e.g., new staff, eligibility category, etc.?) What about children who are for some reason not entered into the system? Julie Schweigert at David Douglas has put out a 1 page guide on how to score AEPS. A copy is attached to these minutes. Next meeting will include a discussion about AEPS results. Diane will send her data. Update: ECO is being absorbed into Early Childhood Technical Assistance (ECTA_. 10:45 – Head Start (Nancy A.) Head Start (HS) programs all have access to EcWeb. There have been requests 11:15  Records requests for paper copies of information (e.g., IFSPs) for children who are applying but not  Access to EcWeb enrolled in Head Start yet (30 – 40 requests at MECP). It was agreed that  Calendars and services confidential ECSE or EI information should not be released to Head Start prior to the family’s enrollment into the program. Question: When a child is eligible for or enrolled in Head Start; is a signed copy of the IFSP needed by the Head Start program? Answer: They do not need a signed copy according to HS Performance Standards, but their own policy may require it. EI/ECSE programs do not need to provide a signed copy. Head Start programs may access the IFSPs on EcWeb. Some Head Start programs are having issues with children not receiving services on days that EI/ECSE programs do not provide services, and would like EI/ECSE calendars and services to align with theirs. Unfortunately, this may not be possible when there are multiple school districts and programs to work with. The interagency agreement with the Office of Head Start reportedly says ECSE will follow the Head Start calendar. This is especially problematic when a Head Start program changes their days of no service (e.g., Monday or Wednesday instead of Friday). 11:15 – MOE Information and ODE has requested MOE data. Is everyone doing this the same way? Are people 11:25 (Nancy A.) discussion using referral or evaluation numbers? It makes sense to use referral numbers.

D:\Docs\2017-12-14\06c17dde348fc214105e25a0f9e1f664.doc Time Topic Purpose Action 11:25 – OT,PT and ASD caseloads Discussion Regarding the shift to the Regional Program core services model, a couple programs 11:40 and cost shifts (Stacy) indicated they do not have the same resources as prior years for Regional Services. It appears there may also be some payment issues. Programs are having difficulties hiring and funding related service personnel. Tamie Prociw, InterMountain ESD, indicated that it is hard to find motor staff in her area. They are considering face-to-face contact initially, then possibly using electronic consultation. MECP is having difficulties with filling motor and speech language pathologist (SL/P) positions. Autism Report (from Autism Commission workgroup) has been released. How is it going to affect this group and how should we coordinate?

11:40 Training or Resource Discussion Nancy JD introduced the idea of an across-the-state training full day workshops (at -12:00 Sharing (Nancy JD) OCDC?), possibly one day in April. How should it be organized, what should people  Tele Intervention walk away with? Topic suggestions:  Project GLAD . “GLAD” training for preschool. This emphasizes English proficiency at school, preschool but supports the first language at home. This would affect early learning in  Other ideas general, not just ECSE (Head Start, for example). Ideas: survey each EI/ECSE program ideas from staff; . OT teleintervention consultation - how to consult with Head Start, community preschools, etc. . Writing student goals; . Implementation of primary service model; . Primary and collaborative consultation. Teaching Resource modules have already been used.

Please let Nancy Johnson-Dorn know if programs want to have trainings in other places.

Autism – commission, insurance, interventions - are we all on the same page, and what is the direction? Should we invite someone to the January contractors meeting? Who?

12:00 – Lunch 12:30 12:30 – 1:45 EcWeb (Dan S.) Information Dan provided updates related to:  ASD template for . Since June: Programs can now get new SSIDs directly from EcWeb EcWeb . Starred messages system – to track messages  New format Child . Announcements and memo posting Outcomes (Bruce) . Forms – large print versions for staff or families, keywords for templates  Public Insurance . Lists, Medicaid, metrics (service level analysis & workload analysis) please and written notice review and be sure staff enter information into service level analysis. Page 4 D:\Docs\2017-12-14\06c17dde348fc214105e25a0f9e1f664.doc Time Topic Purpose Action (Bruce) . Getting started guide – Dan can send it if you need it. . Infrastructure – e.g., archived forms server, backup storage . Agency transitions – e.g., WESD new program admin, data admin, DDSD . EcWeb lost a programmer – this will have an impact for 6 months. . EcWeb has more funding resources for this year, so they are looking at hiring a help services coordinator. . Today: Autism evaluation – working on an evaluation template for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). . Evaluation template – there was a request to put parent contact information on cover page of the evaluation. . Can IFSPs be modified in the system? They are designed as a collaborative report, but once they are archived they cannot be changed. . It is a good idea to have a person who is responsible for developmental concerns. Please send Dan information about the aspect of outcomes you want to look at (e.g., periodicity.) . Electronic signature for insurance consent is allowed, but you must be able to authenticate it. A facsimile signature is stronger than an email confirmation, for example. Multifactor authentication is good, but more complex. Eventually, parents will have portals into the system. . Insurance notice – programs must give insurance notice one time per year to parents. If the parent requests electronic notification, the program must document the notice before consent is obtained. . Electronic notifications – we need to take a broader approach – not just the insurance form. More people are requesting electronic documents - figuring out the standard of proof is the issue. For ECSE, it is left to the state to decide what is needed or acceptable; for EI, most documents can be sent electronically, with a few exceptions. . Private preschool count – There are 3 different pieces of data requested on the ODE form: 1. Districts have to report all children 3-21 enrolled in private schools. 2. How many children were eligible 12/1/12 in their district ( 3-5 with disabilities)? 3. How many children in their district (3-5) who were parentally placed in private schools? ECSE is considered public school. . The directions need to be modified and Dan will send them out again. 1:45– 2:00 Next Meeting: January 8th Discussion and Suggested agenda Items for next meeting: planning  Update on child care checklist – Nancy JD Suggested agenda items:  Update on child outcomes work – Judy and Susan  Update on vision screening – Ginna, Judy, and Nancy F  Ideas for April training – Nancy JD  Presentation from autism from ASD workgroup – need to identify someone

D:\Docs\2017-12-14\06c17dde348fc214105e25a0f9e1f664.doc Time Topic Purpose Action  Update from Dan  Other (teacher effectiveness measurements/outcomes?)

AEPS: Organization and Scoring

Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System for Infants and Children, 2nd edition (AEPS) Level 1: AEPS 0 – 3 Level 2: AEPS 3 – 6 Test Organization  Developmental Domains: Fine Motor, Gross Motor, Adaptive, Cognitive, Social – Communication and Social  Developmental Domains > Strands > Goals > Objectives  Strands and Goals are organized in hierarchical order (developmentally easier to developmentally more advanced)  Objectives are organized in a reversed hierarchical order (developmentally more advanced to developmentally easier)

Scoring Goals and Objectives  AEPS goals and objectives are scored a 2, 1 or 0 when the child… 2 - consistently meets criterion, - performs the skill independently - the skill is a functional part of child’s repertoire of skills

1 - inconsistently meets the criterion - performs the skill with assistance - performs only some aspects or parts of the skill to criterion - performs the skill only under certain circumstances

0 - does not meet criterion - does not yet perform the skill given repeated opportunities or assistance - does not yet perform the skill because it is above age level expectations

PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE CRITERIA FOR BOTH THE GOALS AND THE OBJECTIVES (Criteria for each goal and objective can be found on the AEPS Protocol and in more extensive detail in the AEPS Manual: Volume 2)

D:\Docs\2017-12-14\06c17dde348fc214105e25a0f9e1f664.doc  some goals are a summation of the objective skills: these goals have a criteria that contains the following guidance…“note: Child must score a 2 on Objective ___ through Objective ____ in order to score a 2 on the goal. If the child scores a 1 and/or a 0 on some objective, then the goals should be scored as a 1. If the child scores a 0 on all objectives, then the goal should be scored a 0” OR “Displays skills in objectives __ - __”  some goals are a higher level skill than the skills being measured by the objectives: these goals and objectives should be assessed and scored individually, according to their specific criteria.

Totals:  Area Domain Scores: add together all objective and goal scores  X,Y,Z totals: total items labeled with X, Y or Z  Area Domain Scores and X, Y, Z totals entered onto EC Web / Assessments

D:\Docs\2017-12-14\06c17dde348fc214105e25a0f9e1f664.doc