A Potential Tree of Influence



|

The WRRC IDEA Part C and Part B Trees of Influence are approximations of how state agencies might envision their early intervention and/or educational systems based on the OSEP State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report indicators. This perspective encourages states to view the SPP/APR as a potential blueprint for improvement where indicators are not approached in isolation from one other. | |

| |Part C Tree of Influence |

| |Using the System of SPP Indicators as a |

| |Blueprint for Program Improvement |

•For related information, visit •

| |Part B Tree of Influence |

| |Using the System of SPP Indicators as a |

| |Blueprint for State Improvement |

-----------------------

1. Percent of youth with IEPs graduating from high school with a regular diploma

2. Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school

5. Percent of children with IEPs served in the regular classroom (removed from regular classroom less than 21% of the time)

3. Participation and performance of children with IEPs on statewide assessments

13. Percent of youth aged 16 or above with an IEP with adequate goals and transition services

14. Percent of youth who had IEPs, are no longer in secondary school and who have been competitively employed, enrolled in postsecondary school, or both, within one year of leaving high school

11. Percent of children evaluated and determined eligible within 60 days.

12. Percent of children Parts C to Part B by 3rd birthday.

9 & 10. Percent of districts with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services.

6. Percent of preschool children with IEPs receiving services with typically developing peers

7. Percent of preschool children with IEPs who demonstrate improved early childhood outcomes

8. Percent of parents who report schools facilitated their involvement as a means of improving services and results for children with IEPs

Arrows indicate potential direction of influence and levels of leverage across systems and indicators.

Outcomes

Intermediate outcomes

Strategies / Effort

Fundamental / high leverage

Other Educational Systems

Other Systems

4. Rates of expulsion and Suspension

GENERAL EDUCATION

PART C SERVICES

Technology * Economics * Political System * Environment * Social Issues

15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. Effective General Supervision

This is work in progress! (Last revision, 5/19/2006)

GENERAL EDUCATION

General Education Services

Part B Services

Technology * Economics * Political System * Environment * Social Issues

Indicator 4:

Percent of families participating in Part C who report that services have helped the family…

Indicator 5:

Percent of infants and toddlers B–1 with IFSPs

Indicator 7:

Percent of eligible infants and toddlers with evaluation and assessment within 45 days of timeline

Indicator 6:

Percent of infants and toddlers B–3 with IFSPs

Indicator 8:

Percent of all children exiting Part C who receive timely transition planning by their 3rd birthday

Indicator 3:

Percent of infants and toddlers who demonstrate improved outcomes (a, b, c)

9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14. Effective General Supervision

Indicator 1: IFSPs include needed services in a timely manner

Indicator 2:

Early Intervention Services are provided with typically developing children

Indicator 1:

IFSP services in a timely manner

[pic]

D R A F T

[pic]

D R A F T

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

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

Google Online Preview   Download