no gseg low budget data initiative with high dollar impact
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
No GSEG? Low Budget Data Initiative with High Dollar Impact

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 41

NoGSEG - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 236 Views
  • Uploaded on

No GSEG? Low Budget Data Initiative with High Dollar Impact. Lisa Backer 619 Co-Coordinator/ECSE Specialist MN Department of Education [email protected] The Context. A bit about Minnesota…. Minnesota is the birthplace of…. Water-skiing SPAM Bob Dylan Judy Garland Target Stores

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'NoGSEG' - ryanadan


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
no gseg low budget data initiative with high dollar impact

No GSEG?Low Budget Data Initiative with High Dollar Impact

Lisa Backer

619 Co-Coordinator/ECSE Specialist

MN Department of Education

[email protected]

the context

The Context

A bit about Minnesota….

minnesota is the birthplace of
Minnesota is the birthplace of….
  • Water-skiing
  • SPAM
  • Bob Dylan
  • Judy Garland
  • Target Stores
  • Prince
we are home to
We are home to…
  • The Mall of America
  • The first professional wrestler to hold the office of Governor
  • The headwaters of the Mississippi River
  • The world’s largest ball of twine
      • Yes, I that says “twine”
mn is birth mandate state
MN Is “Birth Mandate” State
  • Education is the lead agency for Part C
  • Interagency agreements with MN Depts. Of Health and Human services
  • Free, Appropriate Public Education provided to young children from birth
  • Local efforts driven by Interagency Early Intervention Committees (IEIC’s)
mn s continuous improvement process
MN’s Continuous Improvement Process
  • 2000: Completion of Self Assessment & Identification of 12 Priority Areas
  • 2001: Planning year for Areas 1-5
  • 2002: Implementation of Areas 1-5 Planning year for Areas 6-8
  • 2003: Implementation for Areas 1-8 Planning year for Areas 9-12
identified priority areas
Workforce

Diversity

Child Find

Mental Health

Service Coordination

Educational Results

Inclusion

Assistive Technology

Transitions

Accountability and Compliance

Family Involvement

Geographic Disparities

Identified Priority Areas
continuous improvement monitoring process self review mncimp sr
Continuous Improvement Monitoring Process: Self Review (MnCIMP:SR)
  • Alternative to traditional compliance monitoring
  • 80% of all districts participate
  • Uses baseline data and tracks improvement in key areas
    • Graduation/dropout rates
    • Suspension/expulsion
    • Standardized test scores & Alternate Assessments
    • Least Restrictive Environments
mncimp sr process
MnCIMP: SR Process
  • Planning Phase
    • Initial program evaluation
    • Compliance self-review
    • Planning report submitted to MDE
  • Implementation
    • Data analysis
    • Impact of initiated improvement strategies
    • Report submitted to MDE
mncimp sr process11
MnCIMP: SR Process
  • Verification Visit by MDE monitor and trained “peer” monitors
  • Report of visit generated by MDE and provided to district leadership and staff
  • Children served through Part C and 619 were planfully included in verification visit activities.
questions posed by osep
Questions Posed by OSEP
  • Is Minnesota identifying all eligible infants Birth to Age 1?
  • Do the identified infants & toddlers reflect the demographics of the local area ?
  • How effective are primary referral sources ?
and more questions
And More Questions…..
  • Do primary referral sources differ by age (<1, 2, 3) ?
  • Are IEICs and their member agencies effectively identifying young children and their families?
  • Is there variability from one part of the state to another?
and finally
And Finally….
  • The APR
  • Minnesota’s data SNAFU
    • Age on December 1 rather than September 1
  • OSEP Verification Visit
qbq the questions behind the question
QBQ: The Questions Behind the Question
  • Who’s to blame?
  • Why are we so disorganized/dysfunctional?
  • Why won’t our administration fiscally support a better data system?
  • What can I do?
mn s existing data system
MN’s Existing Data System
  • MARSS System
    • Minnesota Automated Reporting Student System
  • Unique identifier assigned at time of enrollment
    • Initial evaluation
    • Determination of eligibility
key data elements in marss
District

Race/Ethnicity

Instructional Settings

Gender

Economic Indicator

Mobility Indicator

Home Primary Language

Primary Disability

Status End Codes

Hours of Service (membership)

Key Data Elements in MARSS
missing data elements
“Missing” Data Elements
  • Services by individual child
  • Child and Family Outcomes
  • Primary and Secondary Referral Sources
part c enhanced data collection
Part C Enhanced Data Collection
  • Added to existing “rogue” website
  • Set-up cost absorbed by existing State Improvement Grant
  • Data analysis done by staff from Department of Education
  • Mandatory participation by districts
areas of quality
Areas of Quality
  • Child Find/Determining Eligibility
  • Functional Child Goals or Outcomes
  • Instructional Settings/Inclusion
  • Comprehensiveness & Intensity of Service
  • Routines-based, Transdisciplinary Intervention
  • Measuring Child Progress
  • Family Outcome Measures
ecse quality indicators
ECSE Quality Indicators
  • Child Find/Determining Eligibility
  • Instructional Settings/Inclusion
  • Comprehensiveness & Intensity of Service
  • Measuring Child Progress
  • Family Outcome Measures
child find indicators
Child Find Indicators
  • Percent of general population <1
  • Percent of general population 0 through 2
  • Percent of general population 0 through 4
  • Proportion of identified children from a racial/ethnic group compared to the racial/ethnic makeup of the general population
additional child find indicators
Additional Child Find Indicators
  • Use of a variety of disability criteria
  • Proportion of kindergarten enrollment initially determined eligible and the primary disabilities of those children.
  • Proportion of referrals made by specific primary and secondary sources
child progress
Child Progress
  • What percent of children served under age 3 demonstrates improved and sustained functional abilities?
    • Cognitive development;
    • physical development, including vision and hearing;
    • communication development;
    • social or emotional development; and
    • adaptive development.
child outcomes
Child Outcomes
  • Young children with disabilities entering kindergarten demonstrate increased levels of proficiency in the areas
    • Physical well-being and motor development
    • Social and Emotional Development
    • Approaches to learning
    • Language Development
    • Cognition
    • Creativity and the Arts
comprehensiveness intensity
Comprehensiveness & Intensity
  • Local areas comprehensively identify needs and provide a full array of early intervention services.
  • A range of intensity is evident within each district’s ECSE program
    • By age?
    • By Primary Disability?
natural environments lre
Natural Environments/LRE
  • Proportion of infants/toddlers served in natural environments
    • At home
    • In programs designed for children without disabilities
  • Proportion of children age 3 through 5 served in Early Childhood Settings or at Home
family participation
Family Participation
  • Supports, services and resources provided to each family increase the family’s capacity to enhance the development of their child.
putting data to work
Putting Data to Work
  • Easy access
  • Ease of use
  • Meaningful comparisons
    • State
    • Region
    • Strata
    • To the individual district as trends over time
  • Accuracy
2003 2004 ecse district profile
2003-2004 ECSE District Profile
  • Based on Excel 2000
  • Utilized “Lookup” functions
  • Displayed data on those indicators for which accurate data was available
  • Annually updateable
  • Will “live” on MDE website on the Continuous Improvement landing page
ad