Transcript Title: ?Quality and Inclusion:

BEST FOR ALL KIDS
Infusing Inclusion into TQRIS
(Quality Rating & Improvement Systems)
Edna Collins, Ph. D., Program Specialist,
NC DHHS Division of Child Development & Early Education
Jani Kozlowski, Senior TA Specialist
Zero to Three
Mary F. Sonnenberg, M.Ed., Deputy Director,
Delaware Stars for Early Success, Delaware Institute for Excellence in Early Childhood
Verna Thompson, 619 Coordinator
Delaware Department of Education
Moderator: Pam Winton
FPG Child Development Institute
AGENDA
 National Context and Overview
 Issues Related to an Inclusive Approach to QRIS
 Structures & incentives
 Measurement
 Professional development
 Examples & Perspectives from Two States (DE and NC)
 State context (DE and NC)
 Strategies for addressing issues
 Vexing Questions for Small Group Discussion
NATIONAL
CONTEXT
Focus
on
High
Needs
Children
NATIONAL
CONTEXT
Focus on
Cross
Sector
Systems
Building
NATIONAL CONTEXT
Accountability & Quality
Quality Movement =
Multiple Quality Initiatives
Head Start
Performance
Framework
OSEP Monitoring and
Accountability
program
standards
Accreditation
Criteria
Two Different Quality Initiatives
Quality Inclusion
QRIS
Early
Childhood
US DOE OSEP
State Performance
Plan
Annual Report
(SPP APR)
Early Childhood
Special Education/
Early Intervention
What Is QRIS?
Varies from state to state with all states
participating at some level
Common elements include
 Quality standards
 Process for assessing standards
 Outreach and support to programs to raise quality
 Financial incentives
 Consumer awareness
8
What Is QRIS (CONT.)?
 A method to assess, improve, and
communicate the level of quality in early
and school-age care settings
 May also be called a Tiered Quality Rating
and Improvement System (TQRIS)
9
What Does QRIS Look Like?
Builds on foundation of licensing and adds
multiple steps between licensing standards
and higher quality standards
Offers supports/incentives for
reaching higher levels
Provides easily recognized symbols for
higher levels
10
Why Develop A QRIS?
The overall goal of QRIS is to improve the
quality of programs through system-wide
improvements
Opportunity to do the following
 Increase quality of care for children
 Increase parents’ understanding and demand for higher quality care
 Increase professional development of child care providers
11
Why Develop A QRIS (Cont.)?
Create alignment between licensing, subsidy,
and quality and across early childhood
sectors (e.g., child care, prekindergarten,
Head Start, and others)
Link support and initiatives to a
quality framework
Provide an accountability measure for
funding
12
What Is OSEP SPP APR?
State data on children with disabilities
and their families collected and reported to congress
Includes % of preschool children with
disabilities receiving services in
regular early childhood programs
(Least Restrictive Environment)
States must identify targets for increases
in % in LRE, identify improvement
activities, and explain state progress
13
Three Issues Related to an
Inclusive Approach to
Quality Within QRIS
Structures & incentives
Measurement
Professional development
STATE
CONTEXT
QRIS Development
Delaware
North Carolina
QRIS Development in Delaware
 Initiated in 2007
 Children with Special Needs was a component
 619 Coordinator on the Advisory Committee
 Intention – to provide quality environments for children at risk –
including children with disabilities
 2008—Depart. of Education designated lead agency for QRIS
 Managerial implementation of Stars given to the Delaware Institute for
Excellence in Early Childhood located at the University of Delaware
 2009—Programs not moving up; little fiscal oversight; poor reputation
of program
 2010—State & federal funding for QRIS; Placed moratorium on new
programs while developed strategic plan to revise the state’s QRIS
QRIS Development in Delaware
 2011
 Delaware Governor Markell and General Assembly appropriated $22 million to
boost the state’s child care subsidy system, fund the administration of Stars, and
fund a tiered reimbursement component
 December 2011 – RTTT-ELC awarded

As part of the Early Learning Challenge, public schools could now participate in Delaware Stars
 Established Stars Management Team

619 Coordinator on Management Committee
 Established a strategic plan to revise the QRIS
 Revision of Stars Standards

Practice Principles: Continuity, Inclusion, Intentionality

Stakeholder input & review – State level groups and providers

Reviewed by national experts
QRIS Development in Delaware
 In 2012
January 2012: 178 programs participating
New Points/Hybrid System launched
New programs began to be admitted January 2012
December 2012: 322 programs were participating
Increased numbers of programs at Star Level 3, 4, & 5
Cross-Sector expansion as Stars began to serve public school
programs (619, Title I)
 New Technical Assistance Model











Emphasis on relationship-based TA
Focus on classroom-based assistance to programs
More effort to better prepare TAs
Lower caseloads (40:1) leading to increased TA time with programs
(twice a month on average)
Stars Plus Cohorts – More intensive TA model
QRIS (Star-rated License) in NC
 Implemented in 1999
 Embedded in licensure
 Minimum licensing requirements = 1 star
 5-star system
 Primarily points-based
 2-component rated license
 Program quality (ERS, ratio & group size, quality points)
 Staff education
 Star rating linked to subsidy rates
 Developmental Day (all) and Public School (many) sites are
required to be licensed
QRIS Advisory Committee
Recommendations
 Met September 2009 – June 2012
 Recommended change to a hybrid system





Blocks at Levels 1, 3, 5
Points at Levels 2, 4
Specializations leading to Program of Distinction
Raise the floor and raise the ceiling
Many specific recommendations about inclusion


New quality indicators for all programs
Inclusion Specialization
 Process recommendations
 Map specific recommendations onto conceptual framework
 Collect feedback from providers
 Test new levels using existing and new data
TQRIS Validation Study
(Funded By RttT-ELC)
 Purpose: To validate revised TQRIS before recommending
changes to Child Care Commission and NC Legislature
 Study the impact of recommended changes
 Gather feedback from the field
 Use results to develop blocks, points, weighting, and standards
for each level
 Identify quality features that distinguish between
programs at higher levels
 Relate program features and quality ratings to children’s progress
Structures & Incentives
Issues
 What is a structure for bringing sectors together
around program quality within a QRIS framework?
 What are incentives for ensuring buy-in
across sectors and ensuring a fair and equitable
QRIS for all?
 How do you address the
“What’s In it For Me?” question?
DE Stars
Structures & Incentives
619 Program Participation in DE Stars
▶
619 Workgroup

Completed alignment document
-

▶
Stars standards and 619 federal regulations; state procedures
Will revise 619 Procedures Manual to align to DE Stars standards

Will lead to clearly defined procedures for 619 programs

Will lead to improved inclusive settings for 619 programs
RTTT ELCG Target for participation and # children with disabilities


7 of the 16 school district 619 programs volunteered to participate
619 programs recruiting community programs to apply to DE Stars
NC QRIS
Structures & Incentives
 Participation of 619 and Part C stakeholders in
QRIS Advisory Committee
 Use of Validation Study to test recommended new
system, decreasing chances the providers will just
“opt out”
 Idea: Convene expert stakeholders to develop
Inclusion Specialization
Vexing Question Related to
Structures & Incentives
(for small group discussion)
How do you consider ways of including the variety of
programs for children with disabilities
(e.g., Part C services provided in a variety of settings,
or programs that are part-time …
2.5 hrs per day…
or segregated programs
that are licensed but may have
very different goals)?
Measurement Issues
 How do you measure high quality
inclusive practices?
 How do you ensure that the measurement system
in place assesses whether early education
teachers/practitioners are demonstrating that
they are meeting the needs of young children
with disabilities?
 How do you ensure that young children with
disabilities have access to quality learning
opportunities that will lead to increased
child outcomes?
DE Stars
Measurement
619 Programs who apply to DE Stars
 May achieve Star Level 3
 If they have less than 50% typically developing peers in classrooms
 If they have required documentation listed in 619 Procedures Manual
 Score at least a 3 on Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale
(ECERS)
 May achieve Star Level 4 or 5
 If they have at least 50% typically developing peers in all classrooms
 If they have required documentation listed in 619 Procedures Manual
 Score at least a 4 or 5 on Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale
(ECERS)
Crosswalk between Delaware Stars for Early Success
ECE Center Standards & Delaware IDEA Part B Section 619 Program Standards
Domain: Family and Community Partnerships
Maximum 20 points
Rationale: Family involvement and reciprocal family-provider relationships are fundamental to high quality early care and
education services. This dimension of practice emphasizes ongoing, bi-directional communication between families and
programs. Meaningful family engagement in early care and education programs requires attention and sensitivity to the
needs of all families. Further, collaboration between child care programs and schools/other agencies assists programs in
accessing resources to meet the needs of young children and their families.
Categories: Communication (FC), Involvement & Support (FS), Community Partnerships (FP)
Stars Standards
Regulations
619 Program Standards
FS1
Maximum
4 points
Code
Program makes
accommodations for families of
children with identified
disabilities or who are dual
language learners.
 Accommodations for
families of children with
identified disabilities
 Accommodations for
families of children who are
dual language learners
Regulation:
IDEA Regulations - #300.324 Development, review
and implementation of IEP
24.1 Development of IEP, General: In developing each
child's IEP, the IEP Team shall consider:
24.2.2 In the case of a child with limited English
proficiency, consider the language needs of the child
as those needs relate to the child's IEP;
REQUIRED
619 Procedures Manual
 Home Language Survey must be completed at
registration
 Evaluation must be in primary language
 Interpreters must be present at all meetings
Documentation –
 IEP for children with disabilities - use of evaluation
in primary language
 IEP -Interpreter/translator for families,
 Home Language Survey given at registration
FS2
Maximum
2 points
Program systematically gathers
information from families and
uses data to inform program
planning annually.
IDEA Regulations – 925 Development, review and
implementation of IEP
5.1 Review of existing evaluation data: As part of an
initial evaluation (if appropriate) and as part of any
reevaluation under these regulations, the IEP Team
and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, shall
review existing evaluation data on the child, including:
5.1.1 Evaluations and information provided by the
parents of the child;
5.1.2 Current classroom based, local, or State
assessments, and classroom based observations; and
5.1.3 Observations by teachers and related services
providers; and
5.1.4 On the basis of that review, and input from the
child's parents, identify what additional data, if any,
are needed to determine:
5.1.4.1 Whether the child is a child with a disability, as
defined in 14 DE Admin. Code 922.3.0, and the
educational needs of the child; or
5.1.4.2 In case of a reevaluation of a child, whether
the child continues to have such a disability, and the
educational needs of the child; the present levels of
academic achievement and related developmental
needs of the child; whether the child needs special
education and related services; or
5.1.4.3 In the case of a reevaluation of a child,
whether the child continues to need special education
REQUIRED
619 Procedures Manual
 IEP includes family input that informs program for
child
 Survey given to all families in program annually
 Districts can place survey on website to share kind
comments and concerns
 Survey Data must be reviewed, analyzed and any
needed corrections are made to program
Documentation
 Copy of family survey given to families annually
 IEP
 Documentation that leadership team reviews
survey results, analyzed and make any needed
corrections
NC QRIS:
Measurement
 Challenge in current rated license assessment:
ERS and children with disabilities
 Idea for revised TQRIS:
Additional quality indicators related to child assessment
(would help to ensure positive child outcomes).
 Challenge:
Measuring additional quality indicators reliably and efficiently.
 Challenge:
Would implementing an Inclusion Specialization suggest that all
programs need not focus on high quality inclusive practices?
Vexing Question
Related to Measurement
(for small group discussion)
How can QRIS measurement system be kept
as simple, practical, feasible and affordable
as possible to ensure “buy-in” from
practitioners and administrators,
at the same time that indicators
are meaningful within the
context of inclusion?
Professional Development
Issues
 How do you ensure that PD is available to
support improvements within an inclusive
QRIS system?
 How do you ensure that teachers/practitioners
have access to ongoing support that will lead to
changes in their practice that will lead to more
intentional teaching, and learning opportunities
for young children with special needs.
DE Stars
Professional Development
 Inclusion Credential developed by
Interagency Workgroup
 EIEIO (Expanding Inclusive Early Intervention Opportunities)
 Early Literacy/Math Training offered to Stars TA’s,
619 programs, Head Start
 Specific Technical Assistants assigned to
School District programs
NC QRIS:
Professional Development
 Challenge in current system:
Availability of high quality in-service PD;
any training hours meet requirement.
 Idea for revised TQRIS:
Additional criteria for in-service professional
development focused on inclusion.
 Challenge:
Strengthening the TA and PD system
related to inclusion.
Vexing Question
Related to
Professional Development
(for small group discussion)
How do you keep the costs of PD
in line with funding available?
Reflections
 I am
interested
in …
 I want to
know more
about …
Vexing Questions
Small Group Discussion
Questions For Discussion
 Incentives/Structures: How do you consider ways of including the
variety of programs for children with disabilities (e.g., Part C
services provided in a variety of settings, or programs that are
part-time ..2.5 hrs per day…or segregated programs that are
licensed but may have very different goals)?
 Measurement: How can QRIS measurement system be kept as
simple, practical, feasible and affordable as possible to ensure
“buy-in” from practitioners and administrators, at the same time
that indicators are meaningful within the context of inclusion?
 PD: How do you keep the costs of PD in line with funding
available?
References & Resources
 North Carolina QRIS Advisory Committee Executive Summary
http://ncchildcare.dhhs.state.nc.us/PDF_forms/QRIS-Advisory-CommitteeExecutive-Summary.pdf
 Why Program Quality Matters for Early Childhood Inclusion.
Recommendations for Professional Development (2009).
Chapel Hill, NC: FPG/NPDCI
http://npdci.fpg.unc.edu/resources/articles/npdci-quality-paper
THANK
YOU