1 / 6

Enhancing Performance Measures for Assistive Technology Outcomes in Education and Employment

This document outlines essential performance measures, development requirements, and strategies to enhance outcomes related to assistive technology (AT) in education, employment, telecommunications, and community living. It discusses how states can set measurable goals and quantify achievements, providing insights into stakeholder involvement and data collection methods. The text addresses performance targets for access and acquisition in various sectors and suggests strategies to improve performance, such as systematic data collection and robust follow-up processes to ensure accurate reporting.

korbin
Télécharger la présentation

Enhancing Performance Measures for Assistive Technology Outcomes in Education and Employment

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. Understanding Performance measures • Performance Measure Requirements • Performance Measure Development • Targets – Met/Not Met • Strategies to Increase Performance

  2. Performance Measure Requirements AT Act Requirements • “measureable goals . . . related to – • education, • employment, • telecommunications and information technology, • community living” and • “how the State will quantifiably measure the goals”.

  3. Performance Measure Development • Development Activities • stakeholder group – RSA, CSAVR, Family Center on Technology and Disability, RESNA, State AT Programs (2 Directors) • rejected secondary outcomes like - • obtained job subsequent to obtaining AT • improved grades/graduated by using AT • move to independent living by using AT • developed concept of “access” and “acquisition” • ratio measure (percentage) rather than count • count favors larger programs, eventually will max out • percentage more equitable for all states

  4. Performance Measure Development • Access Measure • Purpose of device demo and loan? • Decision-making covered majority of purposes • N = Demo/loan sufficient to allow decision to be made • D = All demo/loans reported • Acquisition Measure • Why is SFA or Reuse program used? • N = Only way can obtain (affordability/availability) • N = Could use other program but too complex or long wait • D = All SFA/Reuse recipients reported.

  5. Targets Access Target • FY11 set at 70% • Education – 47 of 55 met; 31% lowest reported • Employment – 46 of 55 met; 27% lowest reported • Community Living – 45 of 55 met; 18% lowest reported • IT/Telecommunications – 37 of 44 met; 33% lowest Acquisition Target • FY11 set at 75% • Education – 48 of 55 met; 1% lowest reported • Employment – 38 of 48 met; 4% lowest reported • Community Living – 43 of 53 met; 32% lowest reported

  6. Strategies to increase Performance Low percentage causes • No Decision Made (Access) or None of the Above (Acquisition) • Non Responders (Access and Acquisition) • Reporting events before complete Strategies • Collect Performance Measure data at time of event • Identify areas (ed, employ) as part of “intake” for event • Allows you to report non-respondents accurately • Do not accept data records without performance measure data • In-house data system has a validation rule • Data record from contractors rejected without performance measure • Device Loan – Report when all follow-up complete • Systematic follow-up, know when 35% allowance is reached • Consequences for borrowers not submitting • Other Ideas?

More Related