1 / 11

Data System Evolution

Data System Evolution. Jamie Thomas Kilpatrick, Director Early Childhood Programs Division of Special Education. istory. Old Quantitative Database (QD) was developed to collect early intervention data circa 1990 QD was a File Maker Pro System that was not consistent across all POE’s

cynthiasimpson
Télécharger la présentation

Data System Evolution

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. Data System Evolution Jamie Thomas Kilpatrick, Director Early Childhood Programs Division of Special Education

  2. istory • Old Quantitative Database (QD) was developed to collect early intervention data circa 1990 • QD was a File Maker Pro System that was not consistent across all POE’s • No consistent data manual • No clear approach to system training

  3. istory • Local decision on data entry & interpretation • Difficulty in making statewide compilations • QD served primarily as data dump • Previous Annual Reports were primarily case example- human interest stories

  4. ennessee’s Early InterventionData System • Web-Based Real time Database • Early intervention staff and vendors have password protected user accounts, & log-in access to the data base & to their own data entry • System designed so service coordinator’s can enter their own data • Canned Reports designed at State, POE and Vendor level-related to Indicator #1 Timely Delivery of Services

  5. eporting • TEIDS has canned reports that can be run at the employee level, service coordinator level, child level, agency level, therapist level • Each POE utilizes features to run their own ad hoc reports for local decision making, e.g. caseload distribution, therapy assignments, referrals • TEIDS directly produces validated data reports for local, state and federal reporting, e.g. 618 reports, SPP and APRdata

  6. Indicator 1 • Indicator 1-Timely Delivery of Services • First time (Part B or C) that OSEP has ever asked for delivered services data • Previous reporting related to services was specifically planned service detail from the IFSP • An off-the-shelf IFSP “writing” tool will not answer this indicator. Must have delivered service detail

  7. Indicator 1 • Previous to TEIDS-only way to gather this data was “traditional” monitoring • Traditional monitoring meant-the car-the hotel-bad restaurants-the files-the sample size… • TEIDS ties all services to a specific IFSP • Service Providers report all delivered services data-regardless of payor source

  8. Indicator 1 • Service Providers report all delivered services data-regardless of payor source • Validations programmed into the system to insure that the frequency, intensity, duration, setting, and services must be consistent with the IFSP

  9. Lessons Learned • Do your Intra-Agency work FIRST! • Do your Inter-Agency work related to the delivered service data • Develop Policies & Procedures-First-Then develop your data system to enforce your policies (do not have your data system make the policies)

  10. Lessons Learned • Data Collection Systems no longer are warehouses for IFSP’s. You need an interactive system that includes demographic elements, fiscal components, delivered services data, canned reports and ad-hoc features that are customized to accommodate your state!

  11. Questions?

More Related