Phase I: Infrastructure Analysis

1. Phase I: Infrastructure Analysis Part C/619 State Accountability Priority Area May 1st , 2014

2. Disclaimer This SSIP presentation and supplemental materials were developed prior to OSEP’s publication of the final SPP/APR package

3. Webinar Goals • Participants will leave the webinar with a basic understanding of: • Phase I: Infrastructure Analysis process • Resources and strategies that can support states in the Infrastructure Analysis process • How other states are approaching infrastructure analysis

4. What is the SSIP? Multi-year, achievable plan that: • Increases capacity of EIS programs/LEAs to implement, scale up, and sustain evidence-based practices • Improves outcomes for children with disabilities (and their families)

5. Infrastructure Analysis Purpose of the Infrastructure Analysis • Determine the capacity of the current state system to support improvement and build capacity in LEA/EIS’s to implement, scale up, and sustain evidence-based practices to improve results for children and youth with disabilities

6. Infrastructure Analysis Address State system components including: • Governance • Fiscal • Quality standards • Professional development • Data • Technical assistance, and • Accountability

7. Phase I Components Theory of Action Coherent Improvement Strategies What will we do about it? In-depth Data Analysis In-depth Infrastructure Analysis Why is it happening? State Identified Measurable Result Broad Infrastructure Analysis Broad Data Analysis What is the problem?

8. Infrastructure Analysis The infrastructure analysis is a two step process • Broad analysis of the overall system that identifies strengths and weaknesses of the system • In-depth analysis of each of the components as they relate to the identified measurable result

9. Broad Infrastructure Analysis SWOT Analysis – NCRRC SSIP State Infrastructure Analysis Guide – SERRC Systems Framework – ECTA Center State Infrastructure Analysis Tool Part C - MPRRC • Determine the strengths and weakness of each of the system components • Identify system components that appear to be associated with: • High performance of children with disabilities • Low performance of children with disabilities

10. SWOT Analysis – State Infrastructure (NCRRC) Provides questions to stimulate thinking about various system/ infrastructure components: • Strengths • Weaknesses • Opportunities • Threats

11. Infrastructure Analysis Guide (SERRC) Supports both broad and in-depth infrastructure analysis Helps to identify systemic barriers and system components that can be leveraged to improve results

12. System Framework (ECTA) http://www.ectacenter.org/sysframe/ • What it means for system to be of high quality • Guide states in evaluating system, identifying areas for improvement, and developing effective, efficient system to support effective practices

13. State Infrastructure Analysis Tool Part C (MPRRC) Guide states in describing and conducting broad and in-depth infrastructure analysis Organized around Implementation Drivers Framework

14. Self Reflection As you think about your state’s infrastructure what are some of the strengths that you can leverage to support development and implementation of the SSIP? What are some of the weaknesses that you will need to address?

15. Bureau of Family Health Special Health Services Section Infant Toddler Services 1-800-332-6262 or 785-296-6135 www.ksits.org Sarah Walters, L.B.S.W, M.S.Ed. Coordinator

16. Where are we with Infrastructure Analysis in Kansas? • Strategic Plan • Development of Results Driven Accountability Conceptual Framework • Implementation Science Extravaganza • Looking at Infrastructure analysis through Implementation Science lens • SSIP Infrastructure Analysis Questionnaire

17. RDA Conceptual Framework

18. How do we know where we stand with the ability to operationalize this framework? The Big Drill Down

19. Here is a glimpse at the document

20. Next Steps Continue to gather input from various stakeholders including but not limited to… • State ICC • State Agency Early Childhood Leadership Team • Local tiny-k program coordinators • Parents/families • tiny-k practitioners

21. Next Steps Narrow in on our topic and do further drill down to identify our SSIP Target

22. Next Steps More Tools • Local Contributing Factor Tool for SPP/APR Indicator C-3/B-7 (ECTA Center) • System Framework – Finance and Governance (ECTA Center) • Gantt Chart (RRCP, ECTA Center, and DaSy Center)

24. The End We try really hard to stay in our Happy Place!

25. Massachusetts – SSIP Infrastructure Analysis

26. Stakeholder Engagement • Stakeholder Engagement started early on in the process – October 2013 EI Program Director Session • ECO Stakeholders – already existing stakeholder group advising state on improving approach to measuring child & family outcomes • State Leadership Team • Interagency Coordinating Council

27. Infrastructure Analysis Tool SWOT Analysis – State Infrastructure • MA modified the SWOT toolto increase the focus on integrating existing initiatives: • What aspects of the MA EIP current initiatives make it unique? • How does the MA EIP system leverage its resources (fiscal, material, personnel, etc.) to build capacity at the local system level? • What are challenges with regard to the MA EIP ability to support local systems in efforts to implement sustainable new initiatives?

28. Infrastructure Analysis Tool • Current Initiatives & Practices • Facilitated a loosely structured group brain storming session with ECO Stakeholders • Strengths • Weaknesses • Opportunities • Threats

29. MA SWOT Analysis

30. Next Steps • Continue to identify linkages from the SWOT analysis • Develop a Data Analysis Plan that includes our hypothesis, inferences, etc. prior to viewing additional data which will include the SWOT Analysis as well. • Need for further drill down/data analysis

31. Lessons Learned • Need for more reflection on the process • SSIP components are not a linear process

32. In-depth Infrastructure Analysis As the state identified measurable result is decided, an in-depth analysis of the state infrastructure is conducted to determine: • The functions of each infrastructure component in relationship to the focus area for improvement. • Identify contributing factors to low and high performance within the focus area for improvement.

33. In-depth Infrastructure Analysis (System Framework – ECTA Center) (SSIP State Infrastructure Analysis Guide) Local Contributing Factor Tools – TA Providers SISEP State Initiative Inventory - SERRC The state might also complete an inventory of current initiatives to determine how the initiatives (in total or in part) can be leveraged in the SSIP. It will also be helpful to review past initiatives to determine if they will support the SSIP (in total or in part).

34. Local Contributing Factors Tools http://ectacenter.org/~docs/eco/ECO-C3-B7-LCFT.docx http://ectacenter.org/~docs/topics/gensup/14-ContributingFactor-Results_Final_28Mar12.doc http://therightidea.tadnet.org/searches?commit=Search&search=Investigative+Questions

35. Initiative Inventory for SSIP Helps states identify current and previously implemented initiatives that can be leveraged to support the identified measurable result Adapted from NIRN and SISEP

36. Colorado’s Story

37. CDE’s Strategic Goals

38. State IdentifiableMeasrueable Results • Literacy & math achievement (with an emphasis on prek-3) • Graduation • Post-school outcomes • Family Involvement

39. School Age Data • Very low proficiency rates in math (20%) and literacy (23%) • Students with Specific Learning Disabilities have lowest achievement • High drop-out rate (28%) • Low graduation rate (54%)

40. Preschool Data • Child outcomes; Indicator 7 – in the 80%s • LRE; Indicator 6 – 84% Question: what happens between preschool and 3rd grade?

41. 619’s Involvement in the SSIP • Emphasizing the importance of the pre-k to 3rd grade years • Invited to attend with the “Big B” team to the MPRRC planning/TA meeting last month • Research on the connection between pre-K vocabulary to 3rd grade reading to graduation

42. Infrastructure Analysis • Our primary concerns are aligned with CDE’s strategic goals • Data supports our identified primary areas of concern

43. Infrastructure/Capacity Leadership: • CDE’s strategic goals • Heightened recognition of the importance of early childhood • Preschool special education is an integral part of the larger special education unit • Partnering with CDHS who manages the RTTT-ELC

44. Infrastructure/Capacity Funding/Resources: • 611 budget; higher focus on Results Driven Accountability (RDA), following OSEP’s shift from compliance to student outcomes • RTTT-ELC; partnering with PD team on PD opportunities • Partnering with Higher Education; Early Literacy Summit • DaSy • ECTA Center

45. Infrastructure/Capacity Other Initiatives: • RTTT-ELC • READ Act (focus on K-3 literacy) • School Readiness • Literacy grants • Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) • Unified Improvement Process (UIP) • New DD eligibility category • Ability to collect more data

46. If/Then • Ifwe focus on students starting strong (preK & K), then students will read by third grade. • If we put a focus on preK & K, then we can prevent future problems in performance by starting strong.

47. If… If we can help students: • start strong, • attain proficiency in reading & math by third grade, • meet or exceed core standards of literacy & math, • graduate from high school

48. Then… Then students will have the skills, knowledge & disposition needed to contribute to society and successfully participate in postsecondary education and workforce.

49. Further Refinement • Lead to focus on students with SLD • Impacted our budget review process • Further data and infrastructure analysis • Collaboration of stakeholder groups of the RTT-ELC & those of young children with disabilities needs to improve • Look for alignment with Part C • Further input from stakeholders

50. Infrastructure Analysis Summarize the results of the infrastructure analysis: • Describe the coordination of the components of the system. • Identify the strengths of each of the components of the system and the overall system. • Identify the overall improvements that need to be made to the system. • Identify the initiatives that can be leveraged for the SSIP.