Early Intervention Leadership Academy

1
Systems Organization and Management

• Early Intervention System Structure and
  Relationships
• Monica Grant, PT, DScPT, MS
• Program Director
• Frederick County Infants and Toddlers Program

2
The EIS as an Organization

• The early intervention system (EIS) may be
  envisioned as an organization of structures and
  relationships
• These structures and relationships
• Exist on multiple levels
• May be formal or informal

3
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Federal State
• Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)
• dedicated to improving results for infants,
  toddlers, children and youth with disabilities
  ages birth through 21 by providing leadership and
  financial support to assist states and local
  districts.
• provides monitoring and technical assistance to
  the early intervention system in each state

4
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Each state has determined an organizational
  structure for administering their early
  intervention system
• This structure varies from state to state
• Some states have regional (multiple counties,
  boroughs or districts) management
• Some states have a variety of public and private
  agencies administering the early intervention
  system.

5
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• In Maryland, the lead agency for early
  intervention is Maryland State Department of
  Education (MSDE).
• MSDE through the Maryland Infants and Toddlers
  Program provides monitoring and technical
  assistance to 23 Local Infants and Toddlers
  Programs (LITPs) throughout Maryland.
• LITPs are based in each county and Baltimore City

6
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Marylands Early Intervention System
• As the State lead agency, the MSDE has entered
  into interagency agreements with the Department
  of Health and Mental Hygiene, the Department of
  Human Resources, and the Office for Children,
  Youth, and Families to define the roles and
  responsibilities of each agency in the statewide
  system of early intervention services.

7
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Marylands Early Intervention System

8
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• State Interagency Coordinating Council (SICC)
• The role of the SICC is to advise and assist the
  Maryland Infants and Toddlers Program
• The mission of the SICC is to ensure that
  prevention and early intervention services for
  infants and toddlers with disabilities and those
  at risk of developmental delay are
  family-centered, interagency, flexible and
  community based, and coordinated to facilitate
  family and professional collaboration in the
  planning and implementation of comprehensive
  policies and programs that will provide support
  to infants and toddlers and their families and
  to promote the development of accessible and
  responsive early intervention service delivery
  systems in Maryland.

9
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Local Infants and Toddlers Programs (LITP)
• The twenty-three LITPS, composed of local
  departments of education, health, social
  services, and other public and private providers
  identified by each jurisdiction, constitute the
  service delivery component of the statewide early
  intervention system.
• Each LITP has a local lead agency and has entered
  into a formal interagency agreement among the
  local departments of education, health and social
  services, at minimum.

10
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Local Interagency Coordinating Council (LICC)
• Each LITP has an LICC whose role is to advise and
  assist the LITP
• to ensure that early intervention services for
  infants and toddlers with disabilities and
  developmental delays are family-centered,
  interagency, flexible and community based, and
  coordinated
• to facilitate family and professional
  collaboration in the planning and implementation
  of comprehensive policies and programs that will
  provide support to infants and toddlers and their
  families and
• to promote the development of and accessible and
  responsive early intervention service delivery
  system

11
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Within each agency of the LITP there exists a
  formal hierarchal structure
• Each role within the LITP is unique. Each LITP
  Directors responsibility to the statewide system
  is similar. However, the local agency for which
  that director works may assign additional
  responsibilities to the person serving as the
  LITP Director.

12
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Relationships between the LITP Director and
  service providers
• May or may not work for the same agency
• The LITP may or may not have supervisory
  responsibilities as part of the local job
  description.

13
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Relationships among service providers within a
  LITP
• May come from a variety of local agencies
• Some public and private agencies may serve
  multiple LITPs. Examples
• Public
• Maryland School for the Blind
• Maryland School for the Deaf
• Private
• CARE Resources
• PACT
• Coordinating Center
• May have supervisor/supervisee relationships
  among themselves

14
Formal Relationships in the EIS

• Service providers (including Service
  Coordinators) and families
• Part C of The Individuals with Disabilities
  Education Act (IDEA) and its regulations provide
  guidance for the coordination of services for
  young children, birth through three, with
  disabilities and their families
• The IFSP provides a vehicle for formalizing the
  relationship among the family, providers and the
  service coordinator.

15
Resources for Information about Formal
Relationships in the EIS

• Part C of IDEA
• Federal and State Relationships
• COMAR 13A.13
• State Relationships
• Interagency Agreements
• Local Interagency Relationships
• LICC By-Laws
• Role of the LICC to the LITP
• LITP Organizational Charts
• Hierarchal organization of employees and agencies
• IFSP Document
• Provides structure to relationships of those
  offering services and supports to families

16
Communities that Comprise and Influence the EIS

• Some of the communities with whom leaders must
  create and sustain effective relationships
  include

• Research
• Advocacy
• Policy Making

• Families
• Educational
• Medical/Health

Each of these communities brings its own
perspective to the EIS. There are commonalities
and differences among them in priorities,
resources, skills and abilities to influence the
EIS.
17
Communities that Comprise and Influence the EIS

• Some of the relationships with these communities
  are formal
• Some of the relationships are informal

18
Informal Relationships in the EIS

• The informal relationships that comprise and
  influence the early intervention system are just
  as critical as formal relationships to the
  successful provision of services and supports to
  children and families.

19
Informal Relationships in the EIS

• Leaders at all levels in the EIS have essential
  roles in developing the informal relationships
  that knit together the communities and
  individuals that comprise and influence the EIS

20
Systems, Structures and People

• Systems and structures are things. They are
  programs. They have no freedom to choose. So
  the leadershipcomes from people. People design
  systems and all systems get the results they are
  designed and aligned to get.
• Covey, S. (2004) The 8th Habit From
  Effectiveness to Greatness. Simon and Schuster.
  New York.

21
Systems, Structures and People

• Lets look at that statement again
• People design systems and all systems get the
  results they are designed and aligned to get.
• In other words
• The formal and informal relationships that
  comprise and influence the EIS determine the
  results for children and families.