Review of Summary Statements for Target Setting

on Indicators C3 and B7

Lynne Kahn and Christina Kasprzak ECO/NECTAC

June 9, 2009

Plan for two calls

• Today, June 9, 2009 on “Review of Summary Statements”

• Next Tuesday, June 16 on “Considerations for Setting Targets”

2

What we’ll cover today

• Background on the summary statements

• Calculating the data for the summary statements

• Attaching meaning to the data

• Communicating about children’s progress- the summary statements and other information

3

The problem . . .

• Progress data included– 5 progress categories – For each of 3 outcomes– Total of 15 numbers reported each year

• Too many interrelated targets to make sense of

• OSEP asked for a recommendation4

Thinking through the summary statements

• ECO presented options to states and ECO work groups via conference calls

• Two sessions at December, 2008 EC Conference

• Posted on the ECO web site for comments

• ECO made recommendation to OSEP

5

Final Deliberation

• OSEP put the summary statements out for public comment

• Comments came in that were thoughtful, but not necessarily consistent with one another

• Advantages and disadvantages to all options

6

• Paper documenting the process on the ECO website

• Setting Targets for Child Outcomes

7

The Summary Statements

• Of those children who entered the program below age expectations in each Outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they exited the program.

• The percent of children who were functioning within age expectations in each Outcome by the time they exited the program.

8

Example of State Progress Data for 2008-2009

Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships):

Number of

children

% of children

a. Percent of infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning

40 4

b. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers

150 15

c. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach

270 27

d. Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers

300 30

e. Percent of infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers

240 24

Total N=1000 100%

Summary Statement Data

• Required Summary Statement 1:

Of those children who entered the program below age expectations in each Outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they exited the program= 75%

 

• Required Summary Statement 2:

The percent of children who were functioning within age expectations in each Outcome by the time they exited the program= 54%

10

Where do the #s come from?• Measurement for Summary Statement 1:

Percent = # of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (c) plus # of infants and toddlers reported in category (d) divided by [# of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (a) plus # of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (b) plus # of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (c) plus # of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (d)] times 100.

11

Where do the #s come from?

12

Prog cat

# %

a 40 4b 150 15c 270 27d 300 30e 240 24

760 (a, b, c, and d) or 76% of the children entered the program functioning below age expectations

240 (e) or 24% of the children entered and exited functioning at age expectations

Where do the #s come from?

13

Prog cat

# %

a 40 4

b 150 15

c 270 27d 300 30e 240 24

570 (c and d) of the 760 (a, b, c, and d) changed their growth trajectories (made greater than expected progress)

270 +300= 570 760

= 75%

Where do the #s come from?

14Summary Statements Calculator -April 14, 2009

Where do the #s come from?

• Measurement for Summary Statement 2: Percent = # of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (d) plus [# of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (e) divided by the total # of infants and toddlers reported in progress categories (a) + (b) + (c) + (d) + (e)] times 100.

15

Where do the #s come from?

16

Prog cat

# %

a 40 4

b 150 15

c 270 27

d 300 30e 240 24

300+240= 540 1000

= 54%

30% of the children reached age expectations by exit and 24% of the children entered and exited at age expectations

So remind me again what this means

What can we say about the children’s progress?

17

What can we say?

• Part C Outcome 1: successful social relationships with peers and adults, following rules for social interactions

• 96% of children participating in Part C made progress in their social relationships while they were enrolled.

• The 4% of children who did not make progress included children with the most severe disabilities and/or degenerative conditions. Can you describe them?

18

• 24% of the children participating in Part C were functioning at age expectations at entry and at exit in this outcome area. Can you describe them?

• 54% of the children were functioning at age expectations in this outcome area when they exited the program. (summary statement 2)– 30% started out behind and caught up– 24% entered and exited at age expectations

19

• 75% of the children who entered the program below age expectations made greater than expected gains, made substantial increases in their rates of growth. i.e. changed their growth trajectories (summary statement 1)

20

What other data might you want to share?

• The public likes to see scores going up!

• Increase in mean scores from entry to exit– e.g. 4.3 to 5.6 on the COSF– Increase in raw scores– Increase in scale scores

• What else?21

Next Call

Tuesday, June 16, at 3:30 ET

Covering considerations for setting targetsIdentifying red flags for problem data

Identifying where improvements are most needed

The-ECO-Center.org

22