Guidance Related to Implementing Birth to Five System to ...



Florida Department of Education

Division of Public Schools

Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Service (BEESS)

Department of Health

Children’s Medical Service

Early Steps State Office (ESSO)

Working Document

Guidance Related to Implementing the Birth to Five

System to Measure Child Outcomes

This document has been prepared to assist school districts and Local Early Steps in the implementation of our shared system to measure outcomes for the children we serve. The references to the assessment instrument specifically refer to the Battelle Developmental Inventory, Second Edition (BDI-2™).

Child Population Included/Entry and Exit Considerations

1. Who are the children included in the child outcomes measurement system?

Early Steps Population

Entry and exit data will be reported for all infants and toddlers who are evaluated, determined eligible, and have an individualized family support plan (IFSP) for six months.

Preschool Population

Entry and exit data will be reported for all preschool children who have been evaluated, determined eligible for special education, enroll in school, and have an individual educational plan (IEP) for six months.

2. How are “entry” and “exit” defined?

Early Steps Population

Entry is defined as the date of the initial IFSP - not when services begin.

Exit is defined at the date of termination of services per notice.

Preschool Population

Entry is defined as the date of the initial IEP or preschool IFSP - not when services begin. Exit is defined as the date of dismissal from special education or May 31st prior to kindergarten entry (whichever comes first).

3. If a child has not been served in Early Steps, must the child be included in the measurement system during preschool?

Yes. See the criteria in the question above. If the child meets the criteria above, the child is included in the child outcomes measurement system.

4. If the child remains in the prekindergarten program an extra year and is kindergarten age, when is the exit assessment administered?

If the child remains in the prekindergarten program an extra year then the child is considered to be a prekindergarten child. The exit assessment should be administered in accordance with the flowchart - 90 calendar days before to 30 calendar days after exit.

5. Are children who have an IFSP or IEP and attend a charter school

included in the child outcomes measurement system?

Yes. All children who have an IFSP or IEP and who are anticipated to be in

the program at least 6 months are included in the child outcomes

measurement system.

6. Are preschool age children who attend private preschool included in the child outcomes measurement system?

Children who attend a private preschool school and who have an IEP are included in the child outcomes measurement system and should be assessed using the BDI-2 at entry and exit. Children who have a services plan (SP) are not included in the child outcomes measurement system.

7. Must the full assessment instrument be used with all infants, toddlers, and preschool children, including “speech only children?”

Beginning July 1, 2008, the BDI-2 screening instrument may be used in specific circumstances. Additional information has been provided in a joint memo to be released by the Departments on July 14, 2008.

8. If the BDI-2 Screening Test is administered at entry for the preschool

program and the child is found to be typically developing in all

domains, may the BDI-2 Screening Test be administered in place of the

full BDI-2 when the child exits the preschool program?

Yes.

9. If the BDI-2 Screening Test is administered at entry (the child is a

“speech only” child) and the child is subsequently found eligible for

services other than speech, may the Screening Test be used at exit?

If data from the Screening Test were submitted for the entry assessment point, the Screening Test may also be used at exit.

10. What is the entry date when the child’s IEP/IFSP is written but the services don’t begin right away?

The date of the IEP or IFSP is considered the entry date for the child.

11. If a child moves to another Early Steps Program or school district, is this considered exiting the program and does the new district/LES do a new assessment?

No. Moving to another LES or school district is not considered exiting the program. The new LES or school district would not be required to re-administer the instrument to obtain “point of entry” data.

12. Who completes exit evaluations for children who transfer to another Early Steps Program or school district?

The exit evaluation will be completed by the LES or school district for the new county.

13. If a parent does not wish to be referred to the school district and exits to another community provider, must the LES conduct an exit evaluation?

Yes. The exit evaluation would be conducted provided the child had an IFSP for at least 6 months.

14. Are children who move into the district from out-of-state

considered a part of the child outcome measurement system even if

they have been receiving services in the other state?

Yes. The BDI-2 assessment should be administered as an entry assessment

for the child as long as the child is anticipated to be in the program in Florida

at least 6 months. If the district uses the out-of-state IEP, the BDI-2 should be

administered within 30 days of accepting the out-of-state IEP. If the district

writes a new IEP, then the BDI-2 should be administered within 30 days of

the new IEP. For Early Steps, the BDI-2 should be administered within 30

days of the development of the Florida IFSP.

15. Does the child’s planned participation or lack of participation in

extended school year (ESY) affect the exit testing window?

No. The assessment widow does not change based on the child attending

ESY. For the child going to kindergarten in the fall, the exit window is

still 90 calendar days before May 31st to 30 calendar days after this date.

16. If a child is initially evaluated in February and will receive extended school year services in June and July and then is going to kindergarten in August, does the child need to be evaluated before he leaves extended school year in the summer?

No. June 30th is the end of the assessment window for preschool children. In this example, the child will not receive six months of services by the close of the assessment window.

17. What must be considered when the child does not speak English or Spanish?

The following information is excerpted from pages 11-12 of the Battelle Developmental Inventory Examiner’s Manual.

“Assessing a child whose first language is not English raises a concern when administration requires oral instructions, because the child may not comprehend what he or she is being asked to do. In such circumstances, test results many not accurately reflect the behaviors that the test intended to measure nor the actual abilities and skills of the child. … A child may present any one of a vast array of unique language backgrounds. Examples include regional dialects, bilingualism, varying degrees of proficiency in two different languages, use of the native language in one situation (e.g. social or religious) but uses of English in another (e.g. in school or with peers), or use of one language for oral communication and another for written communication. The examiner must determine the best means for addressing each during administration and test interpretation.”

If the examiner does not believe that a score obtained for a child who is an English language learner is valid, a notation to this effect will be included in the BDI-2 Data Manager in a field that we will designate to be used for this purpose. Further guidance on use of the Data Manager will be provided in a subsequent document.

18. What accommodations are available for visually impaired (VI) children?

As explained in Chapter Two of the examiner’s manual for the BDI-2 (pages 38-39), accommodations are permitted such as:

• allowing the child to use tactile exploration (feeling

the manipulatives)

• allowing the child to use magnifiers and a brailler

• allowing the examiner to give explicit descriptions of what he/she is doing as the manipulatives are placed on the table, are permitted.

As with all developmental assessments, there will be certain test items which

cannot be adjusted to accommodate all disabilities. In making

accommodations, the examiner needs to be sure the construct being

measured is not altered.

Consent

19. Is written parent consent required to administer the instrument used for the accountability system to measure child outcomes?

If administration of the instrument is a part of the child’s initial evaluation or, for preschool-age children, is a part of the reevaluation process, then parent consent is required, consistent with the same procedures that are in place now for written notice and parent consent.

However, if you are using the instrument as part of the assessment process related to child outcomes measurement system (e.g. at the close of the preschool year for all preschool children with disabilities exiting the program outside the reevaluation process) parent consent would not be required. The following information is from the “Frequently Asked Questions” document prepared by the Office of Special Education Programs.

In general, if the SEA or LEA [or lead agency] collects, uses, or maintains information about an eligible child to meet the requirements of Part B [Part C], including reporting on child outcomes, prior written parental consent is not required under Part B [Part C].

20. Must parent consent be obtained by the Local Early Steps (LES) to provide the testing data (“shared data point”) to the school district?

Yes. Any information that the LES provides to the school district requires written parental consent.

21. If we administer the instrument as an end-of-the-year assessment, outside the reevaluation process, and we have not obtained consent, is it permissible for us to consider this information at a later time when making a determination regarding dismissal?

Yes. Title 34 §300.305, Code of Federal Regulations, entitled “Additional requirements for evaluation and reevaluation” requires that IEP teams review a wide array of information as part of the reevaluation process when determining what additional data, if any, are needed to determine whether a child is still a child with a disability. The data sources cited include classroom-based, local, and state assessments, classroom-based observations, observations by teachers and related services providers, and input from the parent.

22. Can Local Early Steps release evaluations conducted by a private

provider?

LES that have obtained prior written parental consent can release evaluation reports conducted by a private provider. The consent form must list the specific documents that will be released and to whom they will be released. Confidentiality provisions and prior written consent to release information provisions apply to all of the Early Steps records and it does not matter how those records were acquired (i.e., through a provider who the Local Early Steps has paid to provide the service vs. an entity that they did not pay) or whether specific services were paid for through Part C funds.

23. What information should be shared with the parent? What information cannot be shared with the parent?

Parents have the right to receive information concerning their child’s assessment results and test scores. Graphs on the front page of the Record Form can be a useful tool in explaining results to parents. In addition, the BDI-2 provides computerized reports that can be given to parents. Copies of completed protocols, record forms, and test booklets should not be given to parents as this would result in compromising the test.

Administration of Instrument/Data Reporting

24. Will we be required to administer all five domains and report item level data on all five domains?

Yes. At this time, you will be required to report data on all five domains of the instrument – adaptive, personal-social, communication, motor, and cognitive.

25. Should BDI-2 scores be adjusted for prematurity?

No. When the BDI-2 is used for accountability purpose, the child’s score must be calculated based on actual chronological age.

For the purpose of determining eligibility, scores for premature children less than 24 months chronological age at the time of testing should be compared to peers of their adjusted age.

26. Will we report two scores for premature infants?

No.

27. For children in the severe/profound range, how do we report

progress/growth?

If proper administration procedures are followed, a raw score of 0 can be a valid score. Raw subdomain scores of 0 typically correspond to a scaled score of 1, or, for very young infants in some subdomains, 2. The minimum possible scaled score in any domain aligns with a standard score of 55. Therefore, the lowest standard score obtainable on the BDI-2 is a score of 55. This score is 3 standard deviations below the mean, and corresponds to a percentile rank of 0.1. Thus, only two possibilities exist in terms of measurement of the most profoundly delayed children. Either the assessment is determined to be valid, in which case any raw scores of 0 (in one or more domains) translate into standard scores of at least 55; OR the assessment is determined not to be valid. The accountability system cannot make use of invalid assessment data. For children with valid assessments, progress will be assessed based on changes in the scaled scores and/or standard scores.

The BDI-2 manual offers the following cautions about using valid 0 scores:

"A total subdomain score of 0 is a valid score that, once obtained, should not be summarily dropped or ignored. Technically, however, a 0 raw score provides an unknown degree of precision in estimating a person's ability. Therefore, use caution when children obtain 0 raw scores." (p. 60).

28. If the child had behavioral difficulties during the assessment, should the score be reported as a part of the child outcomes measurement system?

If the assessor deems the score for a particular domain to be invalid, this will be noted in a specific field in the BDI-2 Data Manager. Further guidance on the use of the Data Manager will be provided in a subsequent document.

29. If a child was assessed using the BDI-2 when he entered the program

and then became very ill and was unable to receive services, should

this child be given an exit assessment?

Yes.

30. If the child has more BDI-2 assessments than the two required ones (one at entry and one at exit), is it necessary to enter these scores into the Data Manager so that they become part of the child outcomes measurement system?

No. The only assessment data that need to be entered for accountability purposes are those for entry and exit, as depicted in the flow chart.

31. What procedure should be followed by LES and school districts if the BDI-2 assessment was not conducted within the established assessment window?

The available BDI-2 assessment data should be entered into the Data

Manager. The date of testing should be the actual date that the assessment

was administered. Decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis by the

state as to use of the data.

32. What is the possibility of conducting arena assessment?

The BDI-2 is appropriate for use in an arena assessment.

33. If arena assessments are used, how would the cost associated with additional staffing be addressed?

Current mechanisms are available for reimbursement for eligibility and ongoing assessment via the service taxonomy.

Qualified Staff

34. What staff can administer the BDI-2?

The following description of user qualifications and professional qualifications is from the Battelle Developmental Inventory – 2nd Edition, Examiner’s Manual.

Preschool, kindergarten and primary school teachers, special educators, and infant intervention providers are the primary user groups for the BDI-2. Related services providers, such as speech-language pathologists, adaptive physical education specialist, psychologist, and diagnosticians are also likely to use the BDI-2 to measure the functional abilities of young children. Educational aides who have considerable experience working with the children being assessed may appropriately use the BDI-2 or parts of it if they have received comprehensive training in its administration and demonstrated proficiency in its use through supervised practice with the instrument.

Using Information for Establishing Eligibility for School District Speech/Language Services or Other Services

35. Can the BDI-2 be used as a part of the evaluation process to determine

eligibility as a preschool child with a disability?

Yes. The BDI-2 is a standardized individually-administered assessment battery of key developmental skills in children from birth through age seven. This instrument may be used as part of an evaluation to determine eligibility. However, it is up to the district to determine the most appropriate instruments to use when evaluating a child. Questions 36-39 provide additional information on use of the BDI-2.

36. Can the BDI-2 be used to diagnose a language disorder?

No. The BDI-2 cannot be used to diagnose a language disorder. The publishers of the BDI-2 clearly state in the examiner’s manual (page 13), that the BDI-2 is designed as an assessment of child development, one that may be used to identify and describe developmental delay, as well as typical or advanced development. “It is not intended as an instrument for diagnosing specific disabilities, such as mental retardation, leaning disabilities…” It is “appropriate for a …team…to use results from the BDI-2 as they determine the nature and extent of a child’s disability.”

In fact, in Case Study 3 (pages 79 through 80), Thomas’s communication scores on the BDI-2, both receptive and expressive, are within the range of significant developmental delay. However, a diagnosis of a communication disorder is not made. Instead, recommendations include a referral for a full speech and language evaluation.

37. Can the BDI-2 be used to determine eligibility for programs for students with speech and language impairments?

Yes. The BDI-2 may be used in eligibility determinations, but only as a portion of the components required to determine eligibility for language impairments.

State Board of Education Rule 6A-6.03012(2)(a)1., Florida Administrative Code (FAC.), states,

“1. For students below age five (5), there is a significant language delay based on criteria presented in the test or evaluation manual and at least one (1) of the following is met:

a. There is a significant difference between language performance and other developmental behaviors; or

b. There is a significant difference between receptive and expressive language abilities.”

The significant language delay mentioned above as the first criterion must be determined through an evaluation using a test designed specifically for measuring language skills in young children. The scores from this test may then be compared to the BDI-2 scores in other developmental areas, such as adaptive and/or personal-social domains, to meet the second criterion – “option a.” “Option b.” allows for a different criterion where the receptive and expressive language scores from the language test may be compared to one another. In other words, the scores from the BDI-2 may be used in determining eligibility, but the BDI-2 may not be the only instrument utilized.

38. If the IEP team concludes that the child has a significant language delay, but the child does not meet all of the criteria for eligibility for programs for students with speech and language impairments, can the child still receive speech/language services?

Yes. If the IEP team feels that the child is in need of speech/language services, but does not meet eligibility criteria for the program, he/she may receive services through speech/language as a related service.

Various issues may arise with regard to eligibility determination that should lead to a discussion of the need for speech/language as a related service. For example, when the language scores from a language test are compared to the cognitive and/or personal-social scores from the BDI-2, there often is not a significant difference. This is due to the fact that several developmental areas are interrelated or associated with one another. In other words, as many test items in the cognitive domain relate to language, a child with a language disorder often obtains a cognitive score below the average range, or commensurate with his/her language score. This also may occur with the personal-social domain, as a child with a language disorder may obtain a score below the average range in the personal-social domain due to difficulties communicating and interacting with peers and adults. This commensuration of scores often prevents a child from meeting the “option a.” criterion.

Thus, speech/language as a related service may be an option the IEP team explores.

39. Is the instrument considered a “test of intellectual functioning?”

No. The BDI-2 is considered a developmental assessment. If a preschool-age child is being considered for eligibility for a program that requires a “test of intellectual functioning” then an additional instrument would have to be administered for eligibility purposes.

The following information is found on page 13 of the BDI-2 Examiner’s Manual.

“The BDI-2 is designed and constructed as an assessment of child development. It may be used to identify and describe developmental delay, as well as typical or advanced development. It is not intended as an instrument for diagnosing specific disabilities, such as mental retardation, learning disabilities, or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. However, it is appropriate for a multidisciplinary assessment team to use results from the BDI-2 as they determine the nature and extent of a child's disability.”

Data Collection

40. What should be submitted to the state for the child outcomes system?

The procedure that LES and school districts used to submit data for children entering or exiting programs as of June 30, 2008 is no longer in effect. We will soon be using the Web-based BDI-2 Data Manager for collection of data and specific procedures for data submission will be provided at a later date. Assessment data for children who enter or exit programs as of July 1, 2008, should not be submitted to Piedra Data Services (PDS). Beginning with assessment data for these children, LES and school districts will be responsible for entering their own assessment data into the Data Manger. Until procedures have been identified, each LES and school district should keep a copy of the entire assessment protocol for each child that is assessed.

41. Is it possible to extend the exit assessment window past June 30, to the end of July so additional time is available to complete the testing?

No - for children exiting 619. Children exiting Part C between 6/1 and 6/30 will continue to have 30 days for exit assessment.

Transfer of Scoring Booklets

42. If a child was evaluated in Part C and is transitioning to Part B, who keeps the original scoring booklet? Is just the scoring sheet shared with Part B?

The original scoring booklet should be filed in the child’s record maintained by the individual(s) who evaluated the child. A copy of the protocol may be provided to the LEA if the parent has signed an authorization for release of information that includes this information specifically.

Reporting Outcomes to OSEP

43. How does the state determine in which of the five OSEP categories

each child is placed for purposes of reporting the child outcomes

indicators?

a. “Percent of children who did not improve functioning.”

These are the children who came into the program below the typical range and did not show any raw score gain from entry to exit. This category also includes children who came into the program in the typical range and did not show any raw score gain from entry to exit.

b. “Percent of children who improve functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers.”

These are the children who came into the program below the typical range and made some raw score gain, but no gain in standard score. This category also includes children who came into the program in the typical range, made some raw score gain, but had a standard score at exit in the below-typical range.

c. “Percent of children who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it.”

These are the children who came into the program below the typical

range, made a gain in both raw score and in standard score, but were still

below the typical range at exit.

d. “Percent of children who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers.”

These are children who came into the program below the typical range,

Made both raw score and standard score gain, and were in the typical

range at exit.

e. “Percent of children who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers.”

These are children who came into the program in the typical range and

remained in the typical range at exit.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download