Wisconsin EC-LDS Project: Tracking Child Outcomes for Improved Decision-Making

1. THE WISCONSIN EARLY CHILDHOOD LONGITUDINAL DATA SYSTEM (WI EC-LDS) PROJECT Briefing for Department of Children and Families December 12, 2011

2. Presentation Overview • Background • What is an EC-LDS? • What can an EC-LDS do? • The WI EC-LDS Project • What have we done so far? • Project objectives • Next Steps—get involved! • Data Round Table • Data Systems Survey • Questions/Discussion

3. How are the children of Wisconsin doing?

4. Key Policy Questions • Are children, birth to 5, on track to succeed when they enter school and beyond? • Which children and families are and are not being served by which programs/services? • Which children have access to high-quality early childhood programs and services? • What characteristics of programs are associated with positive child outcomes for which children? • What are the education and economic returns on early childhood investments?

5. Background • Governor’s Early Childhood Advisory Council • 2010 Wisconsin Early Childhood System Assessment Report reported: “While the state collects many types of data related to early childhood, we don’t have the capacity to connect it, track children’s progress, or use it to assess the system.” • Key Objective for 2011-12: • Create a comprehensive longitudinal data system to track child outcomes and improve decision-making

6. What can a comprehensive early childhood longitudinal data system do? • Collect and maintain detailed, high-quality child-, staff-, and program-level data • Link these data to one another across entities (collections or data warehouses), over time • Enable the data to be accessible through reporting and analysis tools

7. Foundation upon which to build • WI Act 59 (2009) • Requires establishment of a P-20 longitudinal data system (LDS) • 3 federal grants awarded to WI-Department of Public Instruction (DPI) • US Department of Education LDS Grant Program • Latest grant includes funding to develop a high quality plan for incorporating early childhood data

8. Components of DPI’s Current LDS • A comprehensive data warehouse storing student and school data from a variety of sources • Links to post-secondary data • A security application (Access Manager) that ensures only authorized personnel view confidential data • Secured reporting tools; e.g., Multi-Dimensional Analytic Tool (MDAT) that allow authorized users to analyze and provide access to data, including student records • Public reporting on WI Information Network for Successful Schools (WINSS) and in School Performance Reports • Professional development

9. Other States: Maryland • 32-point jump in readiness • 81% of kindergarteners fully school-ready, up from 49% in 2001-2002 and 78% last year. Source: Maryland State Department of Education

10. Other States: Maryland • Major increases among African-American & Hispanic children • 76% of African-American kindergarteners fully school-ready in 2010-2011, up from 37% in 2001-2002 • 70% of Hispanic children are now fully school-ready, a 31-point readiness gain from 2001-2002

11. Other States: Rhode Island

12. Potential DCF Questions • DECE: • Do children receiving WI Shares subsidies who attend higher quality child care (as designated by YoungStar) have better educational and health outcomes than those who attend lower quality child care? • DFES: • Do children of families who receive TANF benefits fare better in school than children in poor families who do not participate in TANF? • Do they receive more preventative health services? • DSP: • How do infants and toddlers in foster care fare when they enter school? • Is participation in prevention programs such as home visiting associated with better educational outcomes? • DES: • How can we improve data sharing methodologies between departments? • How can we leverage technology advances from other data systems?

13. The WI EC-LDS: First Steps • EC-LDS Project Team • DCF, DPI, DHS, DWD • ECAC Steering Committee • Hired staff at DPI • Project Coordinator, Carol Noddings Eichinger • Data Analyst, June Fox • Project Charter • Signed by DCF, DPI, DHS Administrators

14. Project Charter Objectives • Analyze current early childhood data environment • Establish data sharing methodologies • Create a work plan to begin data sharing and analysis process • Develop strategies for data governance, long term system usage, and sustainability

15. Key Policy Questions • Are children, birth to 5, on track to succeed when they enter school and beyond? • Which children and families are and are not being served by which programs/services? • Which children have access to high-quality early childhood programs and services? • What characteristics of programs are associated with positive child outcomes for which children? • What are the education and economic returns on early childhood investments?

16. Existing Data Sources • Subsidized Child Care (WI Shares, YoungStar) • Licensed Child Care • Individuals with Disability Education Act: (IDEA) Part B and Part C • Individual Student Identifier System (DPI) • Head Start/Early Head Start • Home Visiting • Health (immunization, Vital Records, etc) • Tribal Health Data Collection • AFDC/TANF (CARES) • Child Support (KIDS) • SNAP/Food Stamps (CARES) • Child Protective Services (WiSACWIS) • Medicaid/BadgerCare (CARES) • Workforce and Corrections data

17. Fundamental Data Components • Unique statewide child identifier • Child-level demographic and participation information • Child-level data on child development • Link child-level data with K-12 and other key programs • Unique program identifier to link with children and workforce • Program site structural and quality information • Unique EC workforce identifier to link with sites and children • Individual-level data on EC workforce demographic, education and professional development information • Transparent privacy protection and security practices and policies • State governance body to manage data collection and use

18. Expected Outcomes • High quality information about young children and the services they receive • Ability to measure children’s progress across programs and over time • Ability to document which services are effective for which children and target resources accordingly • Increased cross-agency collaboration and communication • Increased accountability

19. Next Steps: Data Round Table • Bring together diverse group of EC stakeholders • Facilitated by national EC-LDS experts • Proposed Goals • Provide information and garner buy-in • Make recommendations re: data governance • Create/review communication plan • Draft underlying policy questions • Begin to align data elements to policy questions • Identify next steps

20. Next Steps: Data Systems Survey • June Fox, EC-LDS Data Analyst • Objectives • Identify what data elements are collected by which systems • Gather data dictionaries • Explore inter-operability and potential data linkages • Identify data gaps

21. What we need from you... • Who should attend the February data round table? • ~10 people per department • Mix of executive, program, high-level data people • Who can provide June with information about your current data systems and data elements? • Who knows the nitty-gritty details about your systems? • How is data collected and accessed? • Existing data connections? • Hilary will send out a follow-up email

22. “The simple act of describing something can galvanize action. What gets counted gets noticed. What gets noticed, gets done.” --Glenn Fujiura, University of Illinois

23. Questions/Discussion

24. Contacts: • Rod Packard, DPI, LDS Project Director • Rod.Packard@dpi.wi.gov • Carol Noddings Eichinger, EC-LDS Project Coordinator • Carol.Eichinger@dpi.wi.gov • June Fox, EC-LDS Data Analyst • June.Fox@dpi.wi.gov • Hilary Shager (DCF), EC-LDS Project Team Member • Hilary.Shager@wisconsin.gov • Jane Penner-Hoppe (DCF), EC-LDS Project Team, ECAC Steering Committee • Jane.PennerHoppe@wi.gov • Coral Manning (DCF), EC-LDS Project Team Member • Coral.Manning@wisconsin.gov