1 / 11

Adapting ECO Summary Form: State-Specific Changes for Better Outcomes

Learn how Alaska and Iowa adapted the ECO Child Outcome Summary Form to improve outcomes for preschoolers, including new rating scales and processes. Discover implications for families and providers in each state.

kieran-travis
Download Presentation

Adapting ECO Summary Form: State-Specific Changes for Better Outcomes

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Adapting the ECO Summary Form For Specific State Use Erin Kinavey (AK) Part C Dee Gethmann (IA) Birth-5 April 2006 Albuquerque, NM

  2. About Alaska • Building a Part C outcomes measurement system • Received a GSEG in 2004

  3. About Iowa • Building a birth - five outcomes measurement system • Tying outcomes measurement to quality improvement efforts for preschool programs

  4. What prompted your state to adapt the ECOChild Outcome Summary Form (COSF): AK? • Programs and parents reacted strongly against a numbered rating scale -- it seemed to imply the reduction of a child’s status or progress to a number

  5. What prompted your state to adapt the ECOChild Outcome Summary Form (COSF): IA? • Preferred a 3-point scale (rather than a 7-point scale) for reliability purposes

  6. How did you change the Child Outcomes Summary Form: AK? • Replaced the numbers on the scale with the verbage from each rating category • Inserted bulleted skills and behaviors for young children from our standards to help define each outcome

  7. How did you change the Child Outcomes Summary Form: IA? • Rating categories respond to the question, ‘Has the child reached or maintained skills and behaviors across a variety of settings and situations that are comparable to same-aged peers?’ • Rating categories are 1) yes, 2) emerging or 3) no.

  8. What will be your process for using the form: AK? • Five programs are piloting two versions of the AK COSF • Procedures will need to be broad and flexible • Parent role in the rating process may be different across programs

  9. What will be your process for using the form: IA? • Rating process will be part of the annual IEP/IFSP meeting • Emphasis is on the use of multiple sources of information for ongoing assessment • A goal of the outcomes work is to promote the need for and benefit of ongoing assessment

  10. What are implications for communicating with families and providers in your state: AK? • AK Part C will work with the outcomes data and the ICC to promote the need for more EI services • Outcomes data will move the field toward more data-based decision making

  11. What are implications for communicating with families and providers in your state: IA? • Crosswalked the three child outcomes to state early learning standards, as well as to the system used to code goals on IFSPs/IEPs • Emphasizing outcomes as part of a bigger picture – one that includes effective use of curricula, ongoing assessment, and routines- based intervention

More Related