Data System Evolution

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 POEs
• 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
ennessees 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 coordinators 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 APR data

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 IFSPs. 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?