Early On State Systemic Improvement Plan (SSIP)

Michigan Part C Early On®
State Systemic Improvement Plan
(SSIP)
Phase II
Michigan’s Part C SSIP Phase II
Table of Contents
SSIP Phase II Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 1
Component #1: Infrastructure Development ........................................................................................................ 3
1(a) Specify 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. .....................................................................................................................................................................3
1(b) Identify 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. .....................................................................................................................................................................5
1(c) Identify who will be in charge of implementing the changes to infrastructure, resources needed, expected
outcomes, and timelines for completing improvement efforts. ................................................................................7
1(d) Specify 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. .......................................................................9
Component #2: Support for EIS programs and providers Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices ............... 11
2(a) Specify 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. ............................................................................................................11
2(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. .....................................................................................................12
2(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. .....................................................................................13
Component #3: Evaluation .................................................................................................................................. 14
3(a) Specify 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. ...................................................................................................................................................................14
3(b) Specify how the evaluation includes stakeholders and how information from the evaluation will be
disseminated to stakeholders. .................................................................................................................................15
3(c) Specify 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). ........................15
3(d) Specify 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. ................................................................................................................................................................16
Phase II Technical Assistance and Support........................................................................................................... 17
SSIP Phase II Overview
The Michigan Department of Education (MDE) is the lead agency for the
implementation of Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
Part C of IDEA is commonly known as Early On® within the state. Leadership for
Early On is located in the Office of Great Start/Early Childhood Development and
Family Education (OGS/ECD&FE). MDE extensively collaborates with the Michigan
Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) and the Michigan Interagency
Coordinating Council (MICC), the state interagency coordinating council.
There are 56 intermediate school districts (ISDs) responsible for the administration
of Early On across the state. Each local early intervention program is required to
have a Local Interagency Coordinating Council (LICC) to provide advice for its
system of services. The LICCs are patterned after the MICC, requiring
representative stakeholders as well as parent membership.
A Michigan Part C comprehensive general supervision system is in place to assist in
achieving improved results for infants and toddlers with disabilities and/or a
developmental delay and their families. As of October 2015, the cumulative child
count was 18,376, and the snapshot count was 8,901.
The statewide data for Annual Performance Report (APR) indicators are collected in
the Michigan Student Data System (MSDS), created primarily for handling K-12
educational reporting from the state to federal government agencies. Each of the
56 ISDs maintains its own Early On Student Information System (SIS) for tracking
child activities and services. Some SIS implementations are stand-alone and others
connect with Special Education and/or General Education student tracking. The SIS
implementations operate in real-time; the MSDS does not.
The Michigan Mandatory Special Education Act is a state law passed in 1971,
ensuring special education to resident children with disabilities from birth to age 26.
Services provided under this act are known as Michigan Mandatory Special
Education (MMSE). Michigan is a “birth mandate” state, and as such provides
support and/or services to individuals from birth to age 26 who meet the eligibility
definitions put forth in Michigan Administrative Rules for Special Education (MARSE)
under the Michigan Compiled Laws at no cost to the family. MMSE eligibility criteria
are narrower than those for Early On and thus any child birth to age three who
qualifies under MMSE is also eligible for Early On.
Forty-two stakeholders were part of the SSIP Committee and participated in various
stages during Phase II of the SSIP. Representation from the following perspectives
included: MICC members; parents; service providers from urban and rural
districts; Early On Coordinators from urban and rural districts; Part C contractors
responsible for public awareness, the comprehensive system of personnel
development (CSPD), and the Data Manager from the Office of Innovative Projects
at Clinton County Regional Educational Service Agency (RESA); Part C evaluation
contractors from the Qualitative Compliance Information Project at Wayne State
University (WSU); the Part C contractor responsible for family engagement,
Michigan Alliance for Families at The Arc Michigan, also the Parent Training and
1
Information Center (PTI); interagency partners from MDHHS; experts in the field of
social and emotional development; the MDE Race to the Top Early Learning
Challenge (RTT-ELC) project manager; a coordinator of a local Great Start
Collaborative; a Part B, Section 619 representative from MDE; a representative
from the Michigan Association of Administrators of Special Education (MAASE); a
representative from higher education (offering pre-service education and training);
a representative from the Autism Alliance of Michigan; the SSIP leads for Office of
Special Education (OSE)/Part B; the Director from the OGS/ECD&FE at MDE, the
State Part C Coordinator, and MDE Part C staff.
The committee began meeting in September 2015 and met regularly through March
2016. In addition to the SSIP Committee, a Core Team consisting of a subset of
the SSIP Committee was established to assist the co-leads in planning, preparing,
executing the meetings, assisting with follow up after the meetings, and developing
the final report.
A timeline was developed so that important steps throughout Phase II were carried
out in an orderly and timely manner.
The State Identified Measurable Result (SiMR) determined during Phase I, is:
To increase the social and emotional outcomes for infants and
toddlers in the pilot service areas as measured by Indicator 3a,
Summary Statement 2, by 11.2 percentage points by 2018.
Data for Indicator 3a, Summary Statement 2, FFY 2014, for the pilot service areas
are 41.87 percent, and by 2018 the data for these areas will reflect an increase to
51.6 percent. Progress in FFY 2014, for the pilot service areas was better than
projected when targets were set in March 2015.
Michigan selected four service areas to pilot improvement strategies during phases
II and III of the SSIP. The Early On Coordinators from the pilot sites participated in
the SSIP Phase II Committee and in the workgroups. For Phase II, the Theory of
Action elements were used as areas of focus. From Phase I, four central themes
that emerged were:
• Implementing messaging about social and emotional development,
• Promoting the use of evidence-based practices,
• Providing professional development including training and coaching, and
• Improving data collection, reporting, and effective use of data.
During Phase II, the four areas of focus were used to determine three workgroups—
Messaging, Evidence-Based Practices, and Data. Providing professional
development, training, and coaching were embedded throughout the three
workgroups. The workgroups met regularly to complete their charge, and provided
input into the selection of coherent improvement strategies that will be used in the
pilot sites during Phase III. The ultimate goal is to increase social and emotional
outcomes for all infants and toddlers and accelerated improvement of those in the
pilot service areas across the state of Michigan.
2
The SSIP Committee developed a survey during the exploratory Phase II of the
SSIP. The purpose of the survey was to gather information about social and
emotional development and to learn more about how the child outcomes summary
(COS) measurement is implemented. The survey questions pertained to:
• Messaging about social and emotional development,
• The use of evidence-based practices, including professional development,
training and coaching; and
• Data collection, reporting, and effective use of data.
The survey was administered to eight service areas, four pilot sites, and four beta
sites. The four beta sites were selected based on consistently meeting APR
Indicator 3 targets, their high rate of participation in trainings, and their size and
geographic location across the state. The Core Team wanted to learn what was
working well in the beta sites and what strategies may be possibilities for
implementation in the pilot sites.
The SSIP Committee learned valuable information from the survey, which was
instrumental in the development of strategies for improvement related to the SiMR.
The strategies are discussed in section 1(a) of the report.
Component #1: Infrastructure Development
1(a) Specify 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.
Many improvements to the state infrastructure will be made to increase the social
and emotional outcomes for infants and toddlers in the pilot service areas. The
three workgroups completed their charge and recommended three strategies during
Phase II of the SSIP that relate to Infrastructure.
Strategy #1:
Develop and implement a messaging/communication plan regarding the
importance of, and strategies for supporting, social and emotional
development in infants and toddlers in Early On in the pilot service areas.
This strategy would improve the infrastructure around professional development
and technical assistance, and it would also increase public awareness by providing
resources and materials to aid in communication with families and providers about
the importance of and strategies for supporting social and emotional development.
During the Root Cause Analysis in Phase I, the deepest driver of the Influence Map
was the lack of understanding about the importance of nurturing social and
emotional development among policy makers, the general public, parents, and
some providers. Developing a communication and marketing plan will have a
positive effect on increasing the understanding of the importance of social and
emotional development. The target audience will initially be parents and providers.
3
Strategy #2:
Modify the Early On process in the pilot service areas.
A. Integrate the COS measurement into the Early On process.
B. Develop and implement a coaching (Reflective Consultation) model
with technical assistance structure focused on relationship building.
C. Enhance analysis and use of data.
State infrastructure improvements around this strategy include governance,
accountability, and quality standards. This will be addressed by updating policies,
procedures, and forms by integrating the COS measurement into the Early On
process. Starting with public awareness and referral, the COS will be an important
component in all aspects of the Early On process. Professional development and
technical assistance will be utilized to educate the field about the new integration of
the COS. By refining the COS measurement and integrating it into the Early On
process, we will positively impact the quality standards.
Technical assistance and professional development components of the Early On
structure will be improved by the development of a Reflective Consultation model.
By developing a Reflective Consultation model, utilizing mentors and coaches,
relationships will be strengthened between professional staff and families.
It is possible that the Fiscal Infrastructure component will be influenced through
working collaboratively with MDHHS and implementing the electronic Devereux
Early Childhood Assessment (eDECA) in the pilot sites. The eDECA is an on-line
evidence-based tool used to assess infant and toddler social and emotional
development. Funds were put in place during Phase II to support the use of the
eDECA with families in the pilot sites, and anticipating positive results, those results
would be leveraged as evidence toward increasing investment in social and
emotional supports for young children.
Enhancing the analysis and use of COS data would occur through Data Dive training
and technical assistance delivered within the pilot service areas. This would improve
state infrastructure around data, personnel development, and technical assistance
by working with staff to review and analyze data to make decisions around practice
as well as have a better understanding of the COS measurement and data.
Strategy #3:
Increase completeness and accuracy of COS data in MSDS by providing
support to pilot service areas.
This strategy will be accomplished by working with local staff and data vendors to
develop data reports within each local SIS. The reports will be evaluated for
completeness and accuracy of COS reporting. The state infrastructure components
of data and technical assistance would be improved by providing guidance around
developing reports to ensure accurate data. The pilot service areas each have their
own local SIS where they track information about each child in Early On, including
assessment and Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) dates and content. The
Chase Reports will be a new feature and will contain a set of lists that function for
data validation and reminders. For example, the reports will list the children whose
4
third birthday is approaching and an exit COS is needed. The report could also list
children who have an incomplete COS record on file so that the individual inputting
data knows the record needs to be completed.
By implementing the three strategies discussed, the SiMR is attainable. The SSIP
Committee has outlined specific improvement activities, outcomes, resources,
timelines, responsibility, and partners for each strategy in an action plan. The
action plan is uploaded into Grads 360 as part of this report under section 2(b).
1(b) Identify 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.
The SSIP aligns with other key initiatives and programs in the state and will
leverage current improvement plans in a number of ways.
Early On has aligned messaging efforts with the work already completed by a
previous state interagency Social and Emotional Workgroup that created a social
and emotional toolkit and designed a platform for messaging on the importance of
social and emotional health for children birth to age eight. Early On has begun by
utilizing the toolkit in the development of an elevator speech and materials will be
modified to meet the needs of the audience.
Messaging will also align with MDE’s goals to promote literacy, including the Early
Literacy Initiative and the Part B SSIP. The goal is to help the audience understand
the importance of social and emotional development in building the foundation for
reading and learning.
Early On is working with the Michigan Alliance for Families, the state’s Parent
Training and Information Center, to ensure messaging is synchronized with the
existing system for providing supports to parents. At the same time, the existing
CSPD will be enhanced to reach pre-service and in-service providers with the
messaging campaign.
The Child Find and Public Awareness system will be capitalized upon to emphasize
outreach to primary referral sources in an effort to promote the importance of social
and emotional health. This will include connecting with other home visiting
initiatives and Early Head Start. Reaching out to audiences via exhibitions and
presentations to share resources and priorities around social and emotional
development will be continued.
Additionally, the RTT-ELC grant features a component to support an early learning
and development system that meets the physical and social and emotional
development of young children. As part of this work, regional Social and Emotional
Health Consultants are being hired to support home-based child care providers,
which will be beneficial as many infants and toddlers in Early On spend time in child
care settings. Throughout Phase II, the RTT-ELC Project Manager was part of the
5
SSIP Committee. In Phase III we will collaborate with the RTT-ELC team to
maximize training opportunities for home-based child care providers and provide
messaging strategies and support around social and emotional health.
The Michigan Association for Infant Mental Health (MI-AIMH) provides information,
training and technical assistance regarding infant mental health and reflective
supervision. Early On will broaden its relationship with MI-AIMH to become familiar
with available resources, tools, and expertise for supporting providers who work
with families. Early On will examine their model for reflection supervision, as well
as utilize additional resources from other early intervention systems across the
country to create a Reflective Consultation model for Michigan.
Additional home visiting programs in Michigan include Early Head Start, Healthy
Families America, Maternal Infant Health Program, Nurse Family Partnership and
Parents as Teachers™. While working within each pilot area, messaging will be
shared with families about social and emotional development.
Michigan’s early childhood mental health system has focused on social and
emotional development in the past few years and has adopted the Devereux Early
Childhood Assessment for Infants and Toddlers (DECA-I/T) as an assessment tool
to measure initiative, attachment, relationships and self-regulation of infants and
toddlers. This tool is evidence-based, reliable and valid. Early On will partner with
the MDHHS to investigate the use of the eDECA with the pilot sites as a tool to
promote relationship building with service providers, parents and their children.
Michigan will work with the Qualitative Compliance Information Project at WSU, as
well as Michigan’s Early Childhood Special Education, funded in part with Part B,
Section 619 funds to develop child outcome reports for each service area. The
Part B, Section 619 program currently distributes similar reports with a slightly
different set of available characteristics, and have well-documented procedures for
Entry and Exit COS data collection.
The pilot site service areas and the SIS vendors will work to develop data reports
defined through collaboration with the Part B, Section 619 program. As child
outcome reports are developed and implemented, Center for Educational
Performance and Information (CEPI) will be involved and asked to add data
elements and reports to MSDS.
Early On will continue to work with the Michigan Division for Early Childhood (DEC)
to support their professional development offerings and ensure that content that
supports the SSIP is featured in their messaging and professional development.
The 2016 Michigan DEC Conference theme is Social-Emotional Foundations for Early
Childhood Literacy, bridging both the Part C and Part B SSIP work, and supporting
personnel to grow in this area.
Within the state there are service areas that have staff who have participated in
professional development related to the Center for the Social and Emotional
Foundations for Early Learning (CSEFEL) Pyramid Model Framework. Early On will
6
continue to work with these service areas to identify opportunities for leveraging
the knowledge and resources available to share with pilot areas for the SSIP.
1(c) Identify who will be in charge of implementing the changes to
infrastructure, resources needed, expected outcomes, and timelines for
completing improvement efforts.
Infrastructure Components: Governance and Accountability
Who is in charge of implementing changes: MDE Part C staff
Change to Infrastructure: Updated policies and procedures that ensure
the COS measurement is embedded into the Early On process.
Resources needed: MDE Part C staff, CSPD contractor
Expected outcomes:
Better understanding of the importance of social and emotional outcomes
within the pilot areas.
Accountability and assurance that families are involved throughout the COS
measurement within the pilot areas.
Timelines for completion: May 2016-April 2018
Infrastructure Component: Personnel Development, Quality Standards,
Fiscal
Who is in charge of implementing changes: CSPD Contractor, MDE
Part C staff, Part C Data Manager
Change to Infrastructure:
1. New and updated resources and materials around social and emotional
development
2. Reflective Consultation Model
3. Personnel development and training and technical assistance around
embedding the COS measurement into the Early On system
4. Family Survey enhancement
5. Marketing and Public Awareness campaign around the importance of
social and emotional health
6. A standard social and emotional assessment tool (eDECA) used uniformly
throughout the pilot service areas
7
Resources needed: CSPD Contractor (training, coaching, and technical
assistance), MDE Part C staff (support to implement additional activities),
SSIP survey results, contract with a marketing firm to help develop
comprehensive marketing campaign, Early On Public Awareness Marketing
contractor, WSU, Virginia Consultation Model, MI-AIMH, MDHHS Reflective
Supervision model, eDECA tool, local planning teams
Expected outcomes:
Increased knowledge of, and communication with, parents and providers
around the importance of social and emotional development in the pilot
areas.
Increased knowledge of strategies by parents and providers for supporting
social and emotional development.
Improved relationships (provider-provider and provider-family) as a result of
Reflective Consultation and the use of the eDECA.
Better understanding of the importance and value of the COS measurement.
As a result of the eDECA, improvement in identification of, measurement of
and development of skills, such as: initiative, attachment, relationships, and
self-regulation skills for infants and toddlers.
Timelines for completion: June 2016-April 2018
Infrastructure Component(s): Data
Who is in charge of implementing changes: Part C Data Manager, MDE
Part C staff, CSPD Contractor
Change to Infrastructure:
1. Development of tracking data reports within local SIS.
2. Training and technical assistance on how to complete a Data Dive.
3. Training and technical assistance on how to analyze the data and make
decisions for programmatic improvements based on the data.
Resources needed: Part C Data Manager, CSPD contractor, MDE Part C
staff, local SIS, local data teams, MDHHS
Expected outcomes: Improvement in completeness and accuracy of COS
data reporting as well as a better understanding of the COS measurement
and how to analyze and use data for program effectiveness in the pilot areas.
Timelines for completion: April 2016-April 2018
8
Infrastructure Component: Technical Assistance
Who is in charge of implementing changes: CSPD Contractor, MDE
Part C staff, Part C Data Manager
Change to Infrastructure:
1. Reflective Consultation Model
2. Data Dive training, workshops, and technical assistance.
3. Communication and marketing plan is in place around the importance of
social and emotional development.
4. Increased technical assistance around the completeness and accuracy
around COS data.
Resources needed: CSPD Contractor, MDE Part C staff, Part C Data
Manager, local data staff in pilot service areas, content experts from state
universities, contract with marketing firm
Expected outcomes:
Improved relationships (provider-provider and provider-family) as a result of
Reflective Consultation.
Improvement in completeness and accuracy of COS data reporting as well as
a better understanding of the COS process and how to analyze and use data
for program effectiveness.
Improved communication with parents and providers around the importance
of social and emotional development.
Increased knowledge of strategies by parents and providers for supporting
social and emotional development.
Timelines for completion: May 2016-April 2018
1(d) Specify 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.
The SSIP promotes collaboration between multiple offices within MDE, as well as
other state agencies. Part B, within OSE at MDE, supports Early On by providing
funding for staff positions within ECD&FE, where Early On is housed. The leads for
Part B SSIP supported the Part C SSIP work throughout Phase I and Phase II by
facilitating a Root Cause Analysis meeting and presenting the work of the Part B
SSIP to the committee.
Within MDE/OGS, the Part B, Section 619 Coordinator from the Office of Preschool
and Out-of-School Time Learning (POSTL) was part of the SSIP Committee.
Collaboration between Early On and Part B, Section 619 to provide birth to five child
9
outcomes trainings will continue. Likewise, collaboration regarding data collection
will also be ongoing.
Leadership of RTT-ELC is housed at MDE. The project manager is part of the SSIP
Committee and will be a partner in facilitating linkages and collaboration related to
promoting children’s social and emotional heath with parents and child care
providers. Specifically, RTT-ELC funding will allow for the hiring an individual to
ensure deployment of social and emotional health consultants statewide.
MDHHS partners with MDE and the SSIP since the focus is on social and emotional
development. Several MDHHS staff members participated in stakeholder groups to
develop Phase II of the SSIP. Their expertise was valuable and instrumental in
developing strategies and activities related to the Messaging and Evidence-Based
Practices workgroups.
MDHHS receives Part C funds through an interagency grant to provide training and
technical assistance to the Early On field. Webinars and face-to-face trainings are
offered statewide to provide training on social and emotional development,
assessment tools, and specific topics requested by providers. The scope of this
work is closely aligned with the SSIP to support the Early On field.
A content expert, affiliated with the University of Michigan, School of Social Work,
has participated in the Evidence-Based Practices workgroup. She has expertise in
the development of relationship-based reflective consultation models and will be
instrumental in the development of a coaching model in Phase III. Furthermore, a
stakeholder from MI-AIMH will be instrumental in the development of the
relationship-based coaching model that will be developed. Both stakeholders
possess the necessary infant mental health and social and emotional development
expertise to assist the workgroup to ensure fidelity of the work.
WSU administers the Family Survey for Part C. In order to evaluate the
effectiveness of the messaging, communication, and marketing campaign, items
will be added to the Family Survey to measure if parents have an increased
understanding of social and emotional health. An item will also be added to
determine if parents can identify two activities to support the social and emotional
health of their children. WSU will also assist the team to determine the efficacy of
the practices implemented through data collection and prepare reports required for
the evaluation component of the SSIP.
The Parent Involvement Committee (PIC) is a stakeholder advisory body and is a
standing committee for the MICC. Their charge is to ensure family perspectives are
an integral component of the Early On system, including policy, procedures, and
practices. The PIC was instrumental in selecting the current Family Survey
(NCSEAM) and will continue to advise MDE around the additional items to be
included in next year’s Family Survey.
10
Component #2: Support for EIS programs and providers Implementation
of Evidence-Based Practices
2(a) Specify 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.
During Phase II the SSIP Core Team invited the pilot sites and beta sites to
participate in a survey to gather information about social and emotional
development and to learn more about how the COS measurement is implemented.
The survey questions focused on:
• Communication strategies and messaging about social and emotional
development,
• The use of evidence-based practices, including professional development,
training and coaching; and
• Data collection, reporting, and effective use of data.
The Evidence-Based Practices workgroup looked at data from the survey and
analyzed the key areas for improvement related to evidence-based practices among
providers. The key findings of the survey were:
1. Service providers do not find the COS measurement beneficial or useful to their
practice or families.
2. Service providers do not feel confident or competent to work with families on
social and emotional development of infants and toddlers. They would benefit
from some type of training on relationship building with families as well as
reflective consultation.
3. Service areas didn’t have accurate data and were not using the data as an input
to improve their system.
These findings also came up in SSIP Phase I as the Core Team analyzed data from
a statewide perspective. In addressing these elements, the workgroup
recommended using implementation science to initiate change in the pilot sites first
and evaluate progress before adding additional sites.
The workgroup participated in a decision-making process that integrated the best
available research on how to make the COS measurement meaningful in the Early
On process. It was recommended the pilot sites work with technical assistance
providers to begin to implement the COS measurement into the Early On process in
a meaningful way by utilizing stakeholders and the relevant resource materials
through the Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center (ECTA Center). This is one
of the evidence-based practices to be integrated into Michigan’s system.
Embedding the COS measurement into the Early On process will make it more
meaningful to everyone and will put social and emotional development into the
conversations of parents and providers. This will highlight the importance of social
and emotional development, increase the quality of data submitted and improve
upon indicator outcomes.
11
The second finding was around knowledge and confidence related to social and
emotional development when working with families. The survey was clear that
service providers do not feel competent or confident in working with families on
social and emotional development. The workgroup recommended that the pilot
sites have training in relationship building with families, access to reflective
consultation, and utilize the eDECA as an evidence-based practice tool to improve
working with families on social and emotional development. In Phase III, the
workgroup will work with the pilot sites to begin to set a foundation for training in
relationship building and reflective consultation. Many of the staff in the pilot sites
have been trained on the DECA-I/T. Technical Assistance will be provided in using
this assessment tool with families to improve initiative, attachment, relationships,
and self-regulation of their infant/toddler.
To improve data, pilot sites will participate in data dive sessions with technical
assistance to understand the data, how better to collect the data, and determine
what the data are saying to improve practices. The CSPD contractor will utilize
resources from the Kansas In-service Training System (KITS) and the Early
Childhood Outcomes (ECO) Center and adapt them to Michigan. The CSPD
contractor has utilized these materials with success when previously working with
Part B, Section 619 data. Technical assistance providers will work to help pilot sites
improve data and the use of data within their system.
2(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.
Please refer to the action plan, which is uploaded into Grads360, and contains
detailed improvement strategies, key state initiatives that align with each strategy,
how the infrastructure or practice will be improved, the intended outcomes (short,
intermediate, and long term), the needed resources, who will be responsible for
implementing the activities, the projected timeline, and any additional stakeholder
involvement.
The barriers identified during Phase I of the SSIP were uncovered during the
Infrastructure Analysis work. The two areas identified for focus were around
Governance and Data.
To address some of the barriers around Governance, the SSIP work is aligned with
an initiative at MDE called the Early On/MMSE Special Project. Michigan is the only
state that serves two populations of eligible children. One population includes
children who are eligible for Part C only, exhibiting a 20 percent delay in one or
more categories of eligibility. The other population includes infants and toddlers
also eligible for MMSE. MMSE eligibility criteria are narrower than those for Early
On and thus any child birth to age three who qualifies under MMSE is also eligible
for Early On. Infants and toddlers eligible for MMSE receive more services than
12
those with Part C only. APR Indicator 4 reports higher Family Outcome results for
families whose children are eligible for MMSE. Approximately 41 percent of infants
and toddlers enrolled in Early On qualify for MMSE.
The Early On Special Project is a joint effort by OSE and ECD&FE to ensure that all
categories of eligibility are being considered for infants and toddlers. This
Governance measure will ensure infants and toddlers are properly identified for
MMSE.
The strategy of modifying the Early On process to integrate the COS measurement
will also address Governance. In order to embed the COS measurement into the
Early On process, policies and procedures will have to be developed and updated.
Once developed and updated, communication and training to the field will take
place and local service areas will be monitored to ensure the COS measurement is
an integral component within the Early On system.
Related to barriers around Data, a workgroup was formed to determine the best
plan for improving all aspects of data. Since COS data is the only source used to
report progress in APR Indicator 3, the workgroup determined ways to ensure the
COS data were accurate, complete, and reliable. Details can be found in the
uploaded action plan.
2(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 evidencebased practices once they have been implemented with fidelity.
The Lead Agency, MDE Early On Part C, will work with RTT-ELC social and emotional
consultants to support messaging around the importance of social and emotional
health. As part of this work, Social and Emotional Health Consultants are being
hired to support home based providers, which will be beneficial as many infants and
toddlers in Early On spend time in child care settings. Workgroups will establish
communication between initiatives to ensure support for goals of each project are
being achieved.
MDE Early On will also align with OSE’s goals to promote literacy, including the
Early Literacy Initiative and the Part B SSIP. The intended outcome is to help foster
an understanding of the importance of social and emotional development in building
the foundation for reading and learning.
Also, Part B, Section 619 is housed within POSTL at MDE. Early On will partner with
Part B, Section 619 to better analyze data, utilizing data resources to construct data
dive sessions with the pilot sites.
MDE Early On will contract with MDHHS to provide DECA-I/T and eDECA training
and support as needed to the pilot sites during implementation to ensure fidelity
and validity of the tool. MDE will invite MI-AIMH and other expertise within the
state to partner to construct a Reflective Consultation model that is based on
13
principles of the evidence-based reflective supervision and fits with the workforce in
Early On.
Component #3: Evaluation
3(a) Specify 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.
The evaluation is aligned with Michigan’s Part C Theory of Action. Components of
the Theory of Action include: messaging, evidence-based practices/professional
development, and data. The theory indicates that if specific strategies are
implemented in these areas, the result will include public support and
understanding of social and emotional development, increased competence in early
intervention personnel, better data collection, and use of data for planning and
improvement. These will lead to increased family outcomes, which, in turn, will
result in an improved performance on the social and emotional outcome indicator.
Each component (messaging, evidence-based practices/professional development,
and data) has a clear evaluation design, including short-term, intermediate, and
long-term objectives and measures of success in meeting those objectives. For
each of the four pilot service areas, in the short-term, we will be examining
measures of success in:
• awareness of social and emotional development among parents,
• participation in professional development opportunities and technical
assistance,
• changes to local data systems, and
• better understanding of child outcomes data.
Success in meeting intermediate and longer term objectives will be indicated by
measures of:
• ability to incorporate knowledge into practice, including family members
ability to recognize social and emotional concerns in their children and seek
appropriate resources/implement strategies,
• family members feeling supported by providers in implementing strategies
for their child’s social and emotional development,
• provider feelings of competence in supporting families,
• provider integration of COS measurement into Early On process,
• provider participation in Reflective Consultation,
• provider use of COS data to plan for improvement, and
• increase in COS data accuracy and data completion (response rate).
Michigan’s early intervention system needs to be addressed in a multifaceted,
integrated manner. This evaluation will measure the extent to which our
concentrated integration of messaging, evidence-based practices, and data
14
strategies in our four pilot service areas will meet objectives that we believe will
result in improved outcomes for infants and toddlers and their families.
3(b) Specify how the evaluation includes stakeholders and how information
from the evaluation will be disseminated to stakeholders.
The evaluation of improvement strategies will include stakeholders from the
workgroups formed during Phase II of the SSIP. The workgroups: Messaging,
Evidence-Based Practices, and Data each contain various perspectives related to
the specific charge. The many perspectives include MICC members, parents, CSPD
contractors, Early On Public Awareness contractors, Part C Data Manager, Part C
Evaluation contractors, staff from MDHHS, staff from MDE, Part C Family
Engagement contractor, local planning teams, Early On Coordinators from pilot
service areas, data specialists from pilot service areas, and faculty representing
higher education.
Through Phase III, stakeholders will be involved in the development of and
progress with the evaluation through workgroup meetings and frequent
communication so that the effectiveness of the strategies can be evaluated. Those
strategies that are successful will be considered for scaling up to additional service
areas in Michigan. Those strategies that prove ineffective will be revisited and
revised or abandoned with the support of our wide network of stakeholders.
The MICC will continue to be a constant stakeholder group. Throughout Phases I
and II of the SSIP, the MICC was provided with an update and/or presentation at
each meeting around the progress of the SSIP Committee. Many MICC members
are part of the SSIP Committee, but not all, so the regular communication with the
Council served as a method to keep the MICC stakeholders informed.
In addition to the MICC, the PIC is a standing committee and meets every six
weeks. This active group of parents are responsible for advisement around APR
Indicator 4, Family Outcomes. They will be instrumental during Phase III as
additional questions are developed for the Family Survey. From the PIC, four
parent members are part of the SSIP, and the PIC receives regular updates at their
committee meetings.
3(c) Specify 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).
Please refer to action plan for detailed information around evaluation.
Michigan will use a variety of methods to evaluate the effectiveness of the
strategies.
Strategy #1:
Develop and implement a messaging/communication plan regarding the
importance of, and strategies for supporting, social and emotional
development in infants and toddlers in Early On in the pilot service areas.
15
To evaluate the effectiveness of this strategy:
• Questions will be added to the NCSEAM Family Survey (APR Indicator 4)
• A survey will be sent to providers in the pilot service areas
• SSIP survey results from re-surveying the same people
Strategy #2:
Modify the Early On process in the pilot service areas.
A. Integrate COS measurement into Early On process.
B. Develop and implement a coaching (reflective consultation) model with
technical assistance structure focused on relationship building.
C. Enhance analysis and use of data.
To evaluate the effectiveness of this strategy:
• Review sign-in sheets from COS trainings
• Review feedback forms from COS trainings
• SSIP survey results from re-surveying the same people
• Self assessment
• Technical Assistance logs
• Self reporting
• Pre and post tests for trainers with six month follow up surveys
• Documentation of attendance records
Strategy #3:
Increase completeness and accuracy of COS data in MSDS by providing
support to pilot service areas.
To evaluate the effectiveness of this strategy:
• Pilot sites confirm availability of reports in local SIS
• Pilot sites run and submit reports
• Compare Baseline Local SIS Response Rate Report to current Local SIS
Response Rate Reports
• SSIP survey results from re-surveying the same people
Data from APR Indicator 3 will also be evaluated for improvement in the pilot
service areas.
3(d) Specify 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.
Data will be reviewed four times a year, in conjunction with MICC meetings, by the
SSIP Core Team, workgroup members, and local planning teams. Data will be
shared with the MICC.
If a strategy is not proving effective, team members will engage in dialogue and
decision making for improving the strategy. The Core Team and MDE will also
evaluate the effectiveness of professional development and technical assistance by
16
reviewing training materials, records from trainings, surveys, and APR data.
Adjustments will be made by working together with the CSPD contractor, utilizing
national resources around best practices, and learning from other states about what
is working well.
If the SSIP or SiMR needs to be modified due to not making progress towards the
targets for APR Indicator 3a, Summary Statement 2, it will be done with
stakeholders from the SSIP Committee and Core Team.
Phase II Technical Assistance and Support
Describe the support the State needs to develop and implement an effective
SSIP. Areas to consider include:
Infrastructure development; Support for EIS programs and providers
implementation of EBP; Evaluation; and Stakeholder involvement in
Phase II.
As Michigan moved from Phase I of the SSIP into Phase II, a team participated in
the Idea Data Center (IDC) Interactive Institute on High Quality Data & the SSIP on
May 27-28, 2015, in Chicago. Upon return to Michigan, the team met with the MDE
Early On Team and other key SSIP leaders to provide an overview of the
information gleaned from the Institute. The team also presented a proposal
recommending next steps for moving forward with Phase II of the SSIP.
While making further plans for how to approach the SSIP Phase II work, Michigan
made direct contact with several national technical assistance providers. Included
were Cornelia Taylor and Lauren Barton, early childhood researchers from Stanford
Research Institute (SRI) International, technical assistance providers through the
ECTA Center, the Center for IDEA Early Childhood Data Systems (DaSy), IDC, and
the National Center for Systemic Improvement (NCSI). Michigan also worked with
Kathi Gillaspy from Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute at the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, technical assistance consultant with the
ECTA Center, DaSy and the ECO Center. This technical assistance was received via
phone and email contacts during July, August, and September 2015. Michigan had
a conference call meeting with these three technical assistance providers to seek
guidance and discuss our planned approach to the work. Suggestions were
provided for refining our plans. Follow-up email conversations resulted in our
receiving resources specific to the plans we discussed and a template to use for
development of our action and evaluation plans.
Michigan also participated in the Social & Emotional Cross-state Learning
Collaborative (SE-CSLC) being coordinated by NCSI and the ECTA Center. A team
of seven attended the SE-CSLC onsite meeting held in Chicago, September 29-30,
2015. The team consisted of an Early On Consultant from MDE, the CSPD Training
and Technical Assistance Manager, the MICC Liaison, the Part C Data Manager,
MDHHS Social and Emotional Expert, an MICC Parent, and a local Early On
Coordinator.
17
This onsite training event provided the Michigan team with guidance including a
review of SSIP Phase II expectations and process; selection of social and emotional
evidence-based practices; continuous improvement through systems change;
infrastructure development and professional development; and fiscal support for
planned activities. The meeting format included a balance of information sessions,
cross-state sharing and time for the state team to work on planning. Information
gleaned from this SE-CSLC onsite meeting was shared with the full SSIP Committee
and the MICC. Michigan had strategically selected participants for the SE-CSLC
making sure that representatives from each of the SSIP workgroups were included.
This allowed the learning from the SE-CSLC to be infused into the SSIP work of
each of the workgroups throughout the Phase II process.
Michigan continued participation in the SE-CSLC through attendance in webinars,
use of the Ning site and the many resources provided through it, and SSIP lead
conference calls. Webinars addressed various topics related to the Phase II
process, including selection of evidence-based practices, data collection and use,
and development of the action and evaluation plans. The SSIP Lead conference
calls provided the opportunity to network with SSIP leads from other states with
similar SSIP foci regarding the Phase II SSIP work.
Various SSIP Committee members participated throughout the year in web-based
training opportunities provided by several of the national technical assistance
centers, including NCSI, ECTA Center, DaSy, and IDC. Again, participation by
members from each of the three SSIP workgroups ensured that the learning was
infused into each workgroup as appropriate. Resources posted on the websites of
these national technical assistance providers were also useful as Michigan moved
through the process of creating both action and evaluation plans.
Three MICC/SSIP parents participated in the Data Family Institute provided by
DaSy on October 5-6, 2015, in Atlanta, Georgia. In preparation for this training
event, Michigan’s Part C Data Manager met with the parents and provided an
overview of current data and guidance on how to use the data. The parents have
also been actively engaged throughout Michigan’s SSIP process in both Phase I and
Phase II, and had a first-hand understanding of our SSIP work. They returned from
the Data Family Institute with a strategic action plan with steps and timelines for
mentoring LICC parents in the SSIP pilot sites. The mentorship by these parents
within the pilot sites will begin in Phase III when the pilot sites create local planning
teams.
Michigan was selected to participate in the Infant and Toddler Coordinator’s
Association (ITCA) Fiscal Initiative, which is a partnership between ITCA and the
NCSI to build capacity to support Part C fiscal infrastructure. An MICC Ad Hoc
Committee was formed and will receive intensive technical assistance to form a
strategic approach to Part C fiscal planning and implementation.
Michigan benefited from several phone conversations with Janine Rudder, Michigan
state contact from OSEP, along with Judy Gregorian from OSEP. These calls
provided an opportunity to share progress with the SSIP Phase II work, receive
18
feedback on the work, and to clarify expectations. On February 10-11, 2016,
Janine Rudder and Leslie Fox from OSEP came to Michigan and provided face-toface technical assistance to the SSIP Core Team. This onsite visit provided an
opportunity for the SSIP Core Team to devote focused time to progress toward
finalization of the Phase II SSIP Action and Evaluation Plans. The visit was also an
opportunity to clarify expectations for the Phase II SSIP report.
As the transition occurs from Phase II into Phase III, Early On looks forward to
continuing to glean from the various national technical assistance opportunities and
resources as they become available. Ongoing needs include direct and timely
support via phone, email, and webinar-based learning opportunities with technical
assistance providers at the national level.
Continued involvement in the SE-CSLC is anticipated to take place on several
levels. Michigan will be sending two participants to the SE-CSLC meeting for State
SSIP leads being held in Phoenix on April 13-14, 2016. Through participation in
this meeting, staff expect to gain tools and knowledge to move into the
implementation stage of the SSIP.
Leaders and other SSIP Committee members will participate in virtual SE-CSLC
offerings throughout Phase III in order to have opportunities for reflection and to
gain greater understanding of the implementation process. It is anticipated that a
team will again participate in the fall 2016 onsite meeting of the SE-CSLC.
An area for which Michigan currently has a perceived need for technical assistance
is in relation to Implementation Science, including operationalizing the stages and
phases of implementation. It is important to enhance understanding in the move
from state-level planning to local-level planning and implementation. Michigan also
will be seeking technical assistance about the Continuous Quality Improvement
process, including the Plan, Do Study, Act cycle. Additional technical assistance will
be sought in embedding the COS measurement into the Early On process. It is
anticipated that additional specific topics for which technical assistance support is
desired will arise throughout Phase III.
19