OVERVIEW OF Designing and Implementing Effective Early Childhood Transition Processes

1. OVERVIEW OF Designing and Implementing Effective Early Childhood Transition Processes Developed by the National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center for the Early Childhood Transition Initiative March 19, 2008

2. History and Context for TA FUNDED BY OSEP Model Demonstration & Outreach Projects Research Institutes National Early Childhood TA System National Early Childhood Transition Center

3. History and Context for TA IDEA 2004 created SPP and APR requirements C8 and B12 Transition Compliance Indicators An analysis of ’05- ’06 state performance on the transition compliance indicators demonstrated a need for system improvement and enhancement.

4. National Issues – Part C Coordination/Collaboration Difficulty scheduling the meeting with required participants Late referrals to the system Clarifying role and level of participation by LEA Clarifying policies for timeline requirements Differentiating between referral and LEA notification policies

5. National Issues – Part C Data Capacity Inability to report on all sub-indicators Missing required data elements (e.g., exceptional family circumstances causing delays in conference timelines) Accuracy of data entry Ability to generate reports to assist with data verification as part of monitoring Data sharing with Part B and processes for notification

6. National Issues – Part B Coordination/Collaboration Child Find and Part C notification procedures Delays in scheduling conferences Part C referral Delays in conducting evaluations Late referrals from Part C created delays in timelines for determining eligibility Timelines for implementation of IEPs Summer birthdays

7. National Issues – Part B Data Capacity Inability to report on all measurement components and requirements Missing required data elements (e.g., range of days beyond 3rd birthday when eligibility determined and IEP developed) Difficulty determining the number of children for whom parent refusal to provide consent caused delays in evaluation or initial services Data sharing with Part C

8. National Early Childhood Transition Initiative • OSEP approved the allocation of RRC and NECTAC resources to support collaborative technical assistance activities focused on improving state agencies’ implementation of transition requirements of the IDEA • TA includes Webinars, meetings, individualized TA to States and the development of resources such as the “Transition Document”

9. Stakeholders Workgroup Meeting • All RRCs • NECTAC • NECTC • OSEP • PACER • State PTI director • Two state Part C Coordinators • Three state 619 Coordinators

10. A Framework Provides a process for analyzing transition system infrastructure and program components Based on past experience, recommended practice, and emerging evidence base Recommends improvement strategies reflecting the most current research and recommended practice

11. Components A componentrepresents a major aspect of a system or framework that is integralto the efficacy of the system. 11

12. TRANSITION INFRASTRUCTURE • INTERAGENCY • Structure • Relationships • Service System • Policy Alignment and Continuity • Interagency Agreements • Personnel Development • Data System • Monitoring and Evaluation SENDING Transition Policies Training Staff Knowledge Data System Monitoring RECEIVING Transition Policies Training Staff Knowledge Data System Monitoring

13. Relationship of Transition Components Content & Scope of Services Policy Alignment/Continuity I-A Structure Personnel Dev. Broad I-A Agreements Specific I-A Agreements Policy Align. Data System I-A Relations/ Commun. Monitoring ( Financing ) Quality Assurance

14. Elements Each component contains a list of sub-components called elements. which are then operationalized with specific evidences. 14

15. Evidences observable policy, product, training strategy, event, or practice indicator of accountability for a component and its elements. list of possible processes and actions demonstrating the existence of a practice. not intended to be a required or exhaustive list.

16. Evidences, continued Across Programs: participation of more than one program or agency is required for the practice to be effective. Within Program: may be present within one state or local program/agency System Level: may need to be implemented at a local program or state agency level. could be present at more than one level, thus demonstrable in a local program, a state agency and as an interagency activity.

17. Realities While all of the components and elements are considered necessary for an effective infrastructure, a state might be unable to attend to all elements at once. States may opt to thoughtfully consider which elements best address their unique context, address their most critical transition issues, and may best support desired transition and system outcomes.

18. I. Content & Scope of Services Access to a broad array of: Child developmental and educational services, supports, settings Child health and medical services to promote overall well-being Family services 18

19. Content & Scope of Services Concepts for Consideration • Ability to understand and respond to individualized child and family strengths and needs • Access to services, resources and supports above and beyond those provided by IDEA • Capacity to understand, locate and refer to other services, resources and supports

20. II. Interagency Structures Interagency entity has membership with authority to influence agencies’ policies and procedures. Shared philosophy is foundation for policies and determination of responsibilities Primary contact person for transition is identified within each program/agency (C, 619) at the state & local level

21. Interagency Structures Concepts for Consideration Effectiveness of the entity; existence is insufficient At state, regional and local levels Entity may look structurally different in different states Designated personnel may function in different roles

22. III. Interagency Communication & Relationships Mechanisms for ongoing communication Effective working relationships among programs and staff Meaningful family participation at all levels

23. Interagency Communication & Relationships Concepts for Consideration Relationships are critical to ensure effective functioning of interagency structures Relationships are critical to ensure alignment of policies and practices Collaborative relationships are ultimately responsible for the effectiveness of interagency activities Respectful acknowledgement of system capacity and limitations

24. IV. Interagency Agreements (IA/MOU/MOA) Clear statements of transition processes Clearly assigned roles and responsibilities related to transition

25. Interagency Agreements • Critical policies are specified in the interagency agreement. • Format, content, and level of specificity of state-level agreements serve as a model for local agreements. • Interagency agreements are routinely reviewed and revised based on data and input from stakeholders.

26. Interagency Agreements Degree to which agreement guides policy implementation and system practices Stakeholders actively participate and provide input Address key issues and solve problems with clarity Concepts for Consideration

27. V. Policy Alignment & Congruence Aligned requirements and timelines Delineated and aligned curricula and interventions Procedures for coordination of services Mechanisms to minimize disruption in services

28. Policy Alignment and Congruence Concepts for Consideration Alignment highlights existing and potential shared practices such as curricula, professional development, roles and responsibilities. How the “Different Parts of Systems Can Work Together” (NECTC) Congruence is “ a fit between programs that supports harmony and reduces conflict in approach, intent and outcomes.” (NECTC)

29. VI. Personnel Development, Staff Training and Resources Shared responsibility of designated personnel for interagency training & TA Activities jointly designed, implemented, and evaluated Parents involved in all aspects

30. Personnel Development, Staff Training and Resources Local mechanisms to inform personnel development activities and promote networking and problem solving Variety of personnel development strategies, over time Support for required cross agency participation at joint training activities

31. Personnel Development, Staff Training and Resources Concepts for Consideration • Knowledgeable personnel will be more effective at supporting transition • Annual events while required and necessary may be insufficient • Personnel development activities are driven by needs of state and local systems but should also reflect needs of family consumers • Training and TA is linked to general supervision and monitoring

32. VII. Data System and Processes Data system capacity to collect necessary data to support effective transitions Protocols for accurate and timely data collection and entry

33. Data System and Processes • Clearly defined procedures for data sharing • Analysis of transition data improves performance across agencies • Monitoring data are used for decision-making within and across programs

34. Data Systems and Processes Concepts for Consideration • Beyond responding to APR indicators, data can inform and support effective practices • Development and implementation of effective data systems is complex and requires training and ongoing TA

35. VIII. Monitoring & Evaluation Monitoring of transition requirements is aligned across agencies. Interagency participation in monitoring activities. Evaluation is an integral part of all transition components

36. Monitoring and Evaluation • Statutory basis for general supervision and consequences at federal, state and local levels • Focus on compliance and on program improvement and results Concepts for Consideration

37. Relationship of Transition Components Content & Scope of Services Policy Alignment/Continuity I-A Structure Personnel Dev. Broad I-A Agreements Specific I-A Agreements Policy Align. Data System I-A Relations/ Commun. Monitoring ( Financing ) Quality Assurance

38. Contact Information Martha Diefendorf, NECTAC Martha_Diefendorf@unc.edu Anne Lucas, NECTAC/WRRC alucas3@comcast.net Kathy Whaley, NECTAC Kathy_Whaley@unc.edu