Phase I: Infrastructure Analysis

1
Phase I Infrastructure Analysis

• Part C/619 State Accountability Priority Area
• May 1st , 2014

2
Disclaimer

• This SSIP presentation and supplemental materials
  were developed prior to OSEPs publication of the
  final SPP/APR package

3
Webinar Goals

• Participants will leave the webinar with a basic
  understanding of
• Phase I Infrastructure Analysis process
• Resources and strategies that can support states
  in the Infrastructure Analysis process
• How other states are approaching infrastructure
  analysis

4
What is the SSIP?

• Multi-year, achievable plan that
• Increases capacity of EIS programs/LEAs to
  implement, scale up, and sustain evidence-based
  practices
• Improves outcomes for children with disabilities
  (and their families)

5
Infrastructure Analysis

• Purpose of the Infrastructure Analysis
• Determine the capacity of the current state
  system to support improvement and build capacity
  in LEA/EISs to implement, scale up, and
  sustain evidence-based practices to improve
  results for children and youth with disabilities

6
Infrastructure Analysis

• Address State system components including
• Governance
• Fiscal
• Quality standards
• Professional development
• Data
• Technical assistance, and
• Accountability

7
Phase I Components
Theory of Action Coherent Improvement
Strategies What will we do about it?
In-depth Data Analysis
In-depth Infrastructure Analysis
Why is it happening?
State Identified Measurable Result
Broad Infrastructure Analysis
Broad Data Analysis
What is the problem?
8
Infrastructure Analysis

• The infrastructure analysis is a two step process
• Broad analysis of the overall system that
  identifies strengths and weaknesses of the
  system
• In-depth analysis of each of the components as
  they relate to the identified measurable result

9
Broad Infrastructure Analysis

• Determine the strengths and weakness of each of
  the system components
• Identify system components that appear to be
  associated with
• High performance of children with disabilities
• Low performance of children with disabilities

SWOT Analysis NCRRC SSIP State Infrastructure
Analysis Guide SERRC Systems Framework ECTA
Center State Infrastructure Analysis Tool Part C
- MPRRC
10
SWOT Analysis State Infrastructure (NCRRC)

• Provides questions to stimulate thinking about
  various system/ infrastructure components
• Strengths
• Weaknesses
• Opportunities
• Threats

11
Infrastructure Analysis Guide (SERRC)

• Supports both broad and in-depth infrastructure
  analysis
• Helps to identify systemic barriers and system
  components that can be leveraged to improve
  results

12
System Framework (ECTA)

• What it means for system to be of high quality
• Guide states in evaluating system, identifying
  areas for improvement, and developing effective,
  efficient system to support effective practices

http//www.ectacenter.org/sysframe/
13
State Infrastructure Analysis Tool Part C (MPRRC)

• Guide states in describing and conducting broad
  and in-depth infrastructure analysis
• Organized around Implementation Drivers Framework

14
Self Reflection

• As you think about your states infrastructure
  what are some of the strengths that you can
  leverage to support development and
  implementation of the SSIP?
• What are some of the weaknesses that you will
  need to address?

15
Bureau of Family Health Special Health Services
Section Infant Toddler Services 1-800-332-6262
or 785-296-6135 www.ksits.org Sarah Walters,
L.B.S.W, M.S.Ed. Coordinator
16
Where are we with Infrastructure Analysis in
Kansas?

• Strategic Plan
• Development of Results Driven Accountability
  Conceptual Framework
• Implementation Science Extravaganza
• Looking at Infrastructure analysis through
  Implementation Science lens
• SSIP Infrastructure Analysis Questionnaire

17
RDA Conceptual Framework
18
How do we know where we stand with the ability to
operationalize this framework?

• The Big Drill Down

19
Here is a glimpse at the document
20
Next Steps

• Continue to gather input from various
  stakeholders including but not limited to
• State ICC
• State Agency Early Childhood Leadership Team
• Local tiny-k program coordinators
• Parents/families
• tiny-k practitioners

21
Next Steps

• Narrow in on our topic and do further drill down
  to identify our SSIP Target

22
Next Steps

• More Tools
• Local Contributing Factor Tool for SPP/APR
  Indicator C-3/B-7 (ECTA Center)
• System Framework Finance and Governance (ECTA
  Center)
• Gantt Chart (RRCP, ECTA Center, and DaSy Center)

23
(No Transcript)
24
The End

• We try really hard to stay in our Happy Place!

25
Massachusetts SSIP Infrastructure Analysis
26
Stakeholder Engagement

• Stakeholder Engagement started early on in the
  process October 2013 EI Program Director
  Session
• ECO Stakeholders already existing stakeholder
  group advising state on improving approach to
  measuring child family outcomes
• State Leadership Team
• Interagency Coordinating Council

27
Infrastructure Analysis Tool

• SWOT Analysis State Infrastructure
• MA modified the SWOT tool to increase the focus
  on integrating existing initiatives
• What aspects of the MA EIP current initiatives
  make it unique?
• How does the MA EIP system leverage its resources
  (fiscal, material, personnel, etc.) to build
  capacity at the local system level?
• What are challenges with regard to the MA EIP
  ability to support local systems in efforts to
  implement sustainable new initiatives?

28
Infrastructure Analysis Tool

• Current Initiatives Practices
• Facilitated a loosely structured group brain
  storming session with ECO Stakeholders
• Strengths
• Weaknesses
• Opportunities
• Threats

29
MA SWOT Analysis
30
Next Steps

• Continue to identify linkages from the SWOT
  analysis
• Develop a Data Analysis Plan that includes our
  hypothesis, inferences, etc. prior to viewing
  additional data which will include the SWOT
  Analysis as well.
• Need for further drill down/data analysis

31
Lessons Learned

• Need for more reflection on the process
• SSIP components are not a linear process

32
In-depth Infrastructure Analysis

• As the state identified measurable result is
  decided, an in-depth analysis of the state
  infrastructure is conducted to determine
• The functions of each infrastructure component in
  relationship to the focus area for improvement.
• Identify contributing factors to low and high
  performance within the focus area for improvement.

33
In-depth Infrastructure Analysis

• The state might also complete an inventory of
  current initiatives to determine how the
  initiatives (in total or in part) can be
  leveraged in the SSIP.
• It will also be helpful to review past
  initiatives to determine if they will support the
  SSIP (in total or in part).

(System Framework ECTA Center) (SSIP State
Infrastructure Analysis Guide) Local Contributing
Factor Tools TA Providers SISEP State
Initiative Inventory - SERRC
34
Local Contributing Factors Tools
http//ectacenter.org/docs/eco/ECO-C3-B7-LCFT.doc
x http//ectacenter.org/docs/topics/gensup/14-C
ontributingFactor-Results_Final_28Mar12.doc http
//therightidea.tadnet.org/searches?commitSearchs
earchInvestigativeQuestions
35
Initiative Inventory for SSIP

• Helps states identify current and previously
  implemented initiatives that can be leveraged to
  support the identified measurable result
• Adapted from NIRN and SISEP

36
Colorados Story
37
CDEs Strategic Goals
38
State IdentifiableMeasrueable Results

• Literacy math achievement (with an emphasis on
  prek-3)
• Graduation
• Post-school outcomes
• Family Involvement

39
School Age Data

• Very low proficiency rates in math (20) and
  literacy (23)
• Students with Specific Learning Disabilities have
  lowest achievement
• High drop-out rate (28)
• Low graduation rate (54)

40
Preschool Data

• Child outcomes Indicator 7 in the 80s
• LRE Indicator 6 84
• Question what happens between preschool and 3rd
  grade?

41
619s Involvement in the SSIP

• Emphasizing the importance of the pre-k to 3rd
  grade years
• Invited to attend with the Big B team to the
  MPRRC planning/TA meeting last month
• Research on the connection between pre-K
  vocabulary to 3rd grade reading to graduation

42
Infrastructure Analysis

• Our primary concerns are aligned with CDEs
  strategic goals
• Data supports our identified primary areas of
  concern

43
Infrastructure/Capacity

• Leadership
• CDEs strategic goals
• Heightened recognition of the importance of early
  childhood
• Preschool special education is an integral part
  of the larger special education unit
• Partnering with CDHS who manages the RTTT-ELC

44
Infrastructure/Capacity

• Funding/Resources
• 611 budget higher focus on Results Driven
  Accountability (RDA), following OSEPs shift from
  compliance to student outcomes
• RTTT-ELC partnering with PD team on PD
  opportunities
• Partnering with Higher Education Early Literacy
  Summit
• DaSy
• ECTA Center

45
Infrastructure/Capacity

• Other Initiatives
• RTTT-ELC
• READ Act (focus on K-3 literacy)
• School Readiness
• Literacy grants
• Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS)
• Unified Improvement Process (UIP)
• New DD eligibility category
• Ability to collect more data

46
If/Then

• If we focus on students starting strong (preK
  K), then students will read by third grade.
• If we put a focus on preK K, then we can
  prevent future problems in performance by
  starting strong.

47
If

• If we can help students
• start strong,
• attain proficiency in reading math by third
  grade,
• meet or exceed core standards of literacy math,
• graduate from high school

48
Then

• Then students will have the skills, knowledge
  disposition needed to contribute to society and
  successfully participate in postsecondary
  education and workforce.

49
Further Refinement

• Lead to focus on students with SLD
• Impacted our budget review process
• Further data and infrastructure analysis
• Collaboration of stakeholder groups of the
  RTT-ELC those of young children with
  disabilities needs to improve
• Look for alignment with Part C
• Further input from stakeholders

50
Infrastructure Analysis

• Summarize the results of the infrastructure
  analysis
• Describe the coordination of the components of
  the system.
• Identify the strengths of each of the components
  of the system and the overall system.
• Identify the overall improvements that need to be
  made to the system.
• Identify the initiatives that can be leveraged
  for the SSIP.

51
Considerations

• Consider the interconnectedness of the in-depth
  infrastructure analysis with the in-depth data
  analysis and how information from both help
  refine the measureable results and identify
  improvement strategies.
• Consider looking at both the state infrastructure
  as well as the local infrastructure.
• Consider involving stakeholders, especially those
  with knowledge about the infrastructure and with
  expertise in the measurable results area.

52
Next Steps
Let us know what you need
53
Contact Information

• Anne Lucas, WRRC/ECTA
• Anne.Lucas_at_unc.edu
• Megan Vinh, WRRC
• Mvinh_at_uregon.edu

• Arlene Russell, NCRRC
• russellb_at_umn.edu
• Carolee Eslinger, MPRRC
• carolee.eslinger_at_usu.edu
• Grace Kelley, SERRC
• gkelley3_at_cox.net

54
Thank you for your attention!

• This is the third webinar in a series on SSIP for
  Part C and Section 619 presented in 2014.
  Resources related to this call and other
  presentations in the series are available at the
  following URL
• http//ectacenter.org/calls/2014/ssip/ssip.asp