Full Participation InstituteAdministrator’s Track

December 15-16, 2015

1

Administrative Track Presenters

Michael Lovato, Director of Special Education, PED

Brenda Kofahl, PreK Program Manager, PED Literacy and Early Childhood Bureau

Catherine Quick, Special Education/Literacy Coordinator, PED Literacy and Early Childhood Bureau

Suzanne Harper, Consultant, University of New Mexico

Kathy T. Whaley, Technical Assistance Specialist, Early Childhood Technical Assistance

Center (ECTA Center)

2

How are you feeling about inclusion?

1 =Not sure or comfortable about how to implement inclusive practices and programs

2. Somewhat unsure and uncomfortable but interested in learning more

3. Very interested and ready to move forward with TA and guidance

4. Totally ready and implementing some or all inclusive practices in our program

(Gupta, Henninger, & Vinh, 2014)

3

Session B Leading Quality Inclusive Programs

What are the Facts? What are the Laws, Requirements

and Policies?

4

Objectives and Organization

Provide an overview of the Rules and Policies Federal IDEA regulations and policies Federal IDEA reporting requirements NM PreK Statement of Assurances NM FOCUS

Share Results of a National StudyBegin to Assess, Summarize and Discuss NM Challenges &Strategies 5

Self-assessment Inclusion Checklist

Checklist Categories Interactions Specialized SupportsFamiliesInclusive ServicesSociological OutcomesProfessional DevelopmentProgram Evaluation

(Barton & Smith, 2015) 6

Regulations, Requirements & Policies

Federal IDEA 2004 612(a)(5) Part B Regulations (2006)

34 CFR Parts 300 and 301 OSEP Policy Letters (2012)DE/HHS Joint Policy Statement on Inclusion

(2015)DE/HHS Policy Statement on Expulsion &

Suspension Policies (2014)

7

Regulations, Requirements & Policies

State

New Mexico PED Special Education Rule PED NM PreK Statement of AssurancesNew Mexico QRIS - FOCUS

8

Regulations, Requirements & Policies

Other Federal and State

Head Start Performance StandardsChild Care &Development Block Grant

Act 2014 (CCDBG)Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

9

Purpose Overview Foundations of Inclusion

Scientific Base & Benefit Legal Foundations

Challenges Building a Culture of Inclusion Recommendations for State and Local Action

Department of Education and Health & Human ServicesJoint Policy Statement on Inclusion

10

OSEP Policy - Dear Colleague LetterThe Musgrove Dear Colleague Letter on Preschool LRE

February 29, 2012

IDEA Part B LRE provisions apply

Right to be educated in Regular Class defined as preschool program with typically developing peers

LEA may provide services in kindergarten classes, public or privately funded preschools, community-based child care programs or home

If LEA has no public pre-k programs then other options are to be considered 11

Preschool Inclusion is when children (age 3 – 5) with Individual Education Programs (IEP) receive their special

education and related services in settings with at least 50% of peers

without IEPs

Definition for Data Collection Purposes

12

LRE Requirements

Each public agency must ensure that--

(i) To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are nondisabled; and

(ii) Special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

IDEA Part B 300.114

13

Supplementary Aids and Services

“Supplementary aids and services” means aids, services, and other supports that are provided

in regular education classes, other education related settings, and in extracurricular and nonacademic settings,

to enable children with disabilities to be educated with nondisabled children to the maximum extent appropriate in accordance with Sec. Sec. 300.114through 300.116.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1401(33) - §300.42 )14

PlacementsThe placement decision–

(1) Is made by a group of persons, including the parents, and other persons knowledgeable about the child, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the placement options; and (2) Is made in conformity with the LRE provisions Sec.

300.114 through 300.118;

(Part B Regulation 300.116(a))

15

Placements

The child's placement–

(1) Is determined at least annually; (2) Is based on the child's IEP; and

(3) Is as close as possible to the child's home;

(Part B Regulation 300.116(b)) 16

Placements(c) Unless the IEP of a child with a disability requires some other arrangement, the child is educated in the school that he or she would attend if nondisabled;

(d) In selecting the LRE, consideration is given to any potential harmful effect on the child or on the quality of services that he or she needs; and

(e) A child with a disability is not removed from education in age-appropriate regular classrooms solely because of needed modifications

(Part B Regulation 300.116(c)-(d))

17

Decisions must be based on individualneeds as stated in the IEP, not on—

• the child’s disabling condition or label (such as placement in a special class for students with intellectual disabilities just because a child has a cognitive impairment);

• disability program categories (placement in an particular program for students with learning disabilities (LD) just because a child needs LD services);

• the location of staff;

• the funds that are available; or

• the convenience of the school district. 18

Continuum of Alternative Placements

• Include the alternative placements listed in the definition of special education under Sec. 300.38 (instruction in regular classes, special classes, special schools, home instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions); and

• Make provision for supplementary services (such as resource room or itinerant instruction) to be provided in conjunction with regular class placement.

(Part B Regulation 300.115(a) & (b))19

Preschool Transportation

Answer: If the IEP Team determines that transportation is required to assist the preschool child to benefit from special education, and includes transportation as a related service on the child’s IEP, the LEA would be responsible for providing the transportation to and from the setting where the special education and related services are provided.”

When is an LEA obligated to provide transportation for a preschool child with a disability between private day care and the child’s preschool?

OSEP Q & A, Serving Children with Disabilities Eligible for Transportation,.http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cdynamic%2CQaCorner%2C12%2C

20

Permissive Use of Funds

(a) Uses. Notwithstanding 300.322, 300.203(a), & 300.162 (b) funds provided to an LEA under Part B may be used for

(1) Services and aids that also benefit nondisabled children. For the cost of special education and related services and supplementary aids and services provided in a regular class or other education-related setting……. Even if one or more disabled children benefit from those services

(Part B Regulation 300.208(a)(1))21

Technical Assistance and Training Activities

Each SEA must carry out activities to ensure teachers and administrators in all public agencies

(a) Are fully informed about these responsibilities for implementing 300.114 and

(b) Are provided with technical assistance and training necessary to assist them in this effort

(Part B Regulation 300.119)

22

Placement Options Consideration Planning FormConsidering child strengths and needsConsidering program characteristicsCurrent settings; inclusive?Family preferencesLikelihood of achieving child goals in setting

with special education and supports provided there

Accommodations, modifications, supplementary aids and services needed

What other settings/placements are available?(Barton & Smith, 2015)

23

Special Education is not a place, but a service or system of services

to meet  the needs of the child.

24

IDEA Requirements and Accountability

• IDEA 2004 designated the use of a State Performance Plan (SPP) requiring annual reporting (APR) on performance and compliance targets

• Indicator B6 - Part B LRE for Children 3-5

• Annual child count collects educational environments for preschool (618 data)

25

A. Percent of children aged 3 - 5 with IEPs attending a regular early childhood program and receiving the majority of special education and related services in the regular early childhood program.

B. Percent of children aged 3 - 5 with IEPs attending a separate special education class, separate school or residential facility.

SPP/APR Indicator B6 Measurement

26

Definitions• Regular early childhood program (RECP)

• 50% or more typically developing children• Head Start, public and private preschool,

kindergarten, child care

• Separate special education classroom, separate school, residential facility• Less than 50% typically developing

• Home

• Service provider location27

8%

Indicator 6A: Percent of children with IEPs attending a RECP and receiving the

majority of services in the program

Each bar represents a state or territory, 618 data, Dec 1 2013

100%

44%

28

62%

26%

Each bar represents a state or territory, 618 data Dec 1, 2013

Indicator 6B: Percent of children with IEPsattending a special education program

0%

29

Educational Environments and Indicator B6 National & New Mexico Data

30

Educational Environments and Indicator B6 National & New Mexico Data

RECP 10+ Ma-jority Service

in RECP

RECP 10+ Services

Other Loca-tion

RECP <10 Ma-jority Service

in RECP

RECP <10 Services

Other Loca-tion

Special Educa-tion Class

Separate School

Residential Facility

Home Service Provider Loca-

tion

National 0.381269655564739

0.175013685103094

0.0540615239301469

0.0484600233988429

0.23251258492814

0.0264967746090354

0.000348835961230908

0.021256185129928

0.060580731374843

New Mex-ico

0.39 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.3 0.1 0 0 0.09

Educational Environments 3-5, 2013-14

31

B6 Data Reporting Tools

Source: EDFacts, File CO89

32

33

34

Using the B6 App for coding Educational Environments - Faun

35

IDEA Data Center APP

B6 Data Reporting Tools: Educational Environments, Ages 3-5

Interactive Application:• https

://ideadata.org/resource-library/545d18f6140ba052308b456f/

Companion Toolkit:• https://

ideadata.org/files/resources/545d18f6140ba052308b456f/55ccb945140ba0f36a8b4621/41893_b6_toolkit_508_revised/2015/08/13/41893_b6_toolkit_508_revised.pdf

36

New MexicoSpecial Education

Rule

NM PreK

FOCUS

37

NM PreK Statement of Assurances

4. All NM PreK classrooms will provide inclusive settings for children with developmental delays and disabilities: Amount and location of services is decided by the child’s

IEP team Special education services and equipment required by the

child’s IEP, including the costs of therapists and special education staff can be funded by the district or charter school’s special education budget that includes both or either state operational funds and IDEA B funds (basic or preschool)

Ensure appropriate information and assessment data for each child with an IEP in entered in both the NM PreK and STARS databases.

38

NM PreK Statement of Assurances

5. Unless the IEP is modified to indicate a different placement, children with special and/or behavioral needs must not be dismissed from the NM PreK Program solely because of their special and/or behavioral needs.

39

NM PreK Statement of Assurances

13. Written transition policies and procedures that assist families of children moving into the program, exiting the program and/or transitioning into kindergarten Transition procedures must reflect the diversity

and uniqueness of the children and community in which they reside

Procedures include a series of transition activities throughout the year but do not replace the child’s individual transition plan required by IDEA for children with IEPs

40

NM PreK Statement of Assurances

17. NM PreK programs must adhere to the maximum group size and ratios at all times:

• The maximum group size is 20 children. For inclusive classrooms, the group size will be lower, based on the needs of the children.

• The teacher-child ratio is 1:10 with one lead teacher, and—if the group size is between 11 and 20—an assistant is assigned to the classroom. Both the teacher and assistant must be district or charter employees

41

42

• New Mexico’s systematic approach acknowledges and respects the uniqueness of each community, each family, and each child and has led to the establishment of the Guiding Principles for the Full Participation of Young Children in New Mexico’s Early Learning System. The FOCUS: Essential Elements of Quality reflects these Guiding Principles.

43

44

• The majority of children with developmental delays and disabilities will attend class for the majority of the day with same age peers without disabilities with supports and services provided in the classroom setting (see LRE guidelines).

• Preschool program integrates ancillary services (e.g., occupational, speech/language, and/or physical therapy) within regular program activities and routines to the maximum extent appropriate as indicated in the child’s IEP.

45

Preschool program personnel must modify the indoor and outdoor physical and learning environments (soliciting support from facilities department) to accommodate the needs of children with disabilities and developmental delays, with supports from appropriate service providers, as indicated for the child with an IEP.

46

Self- reflection on Barriers

Types of Barriers & Challenges Attitudes & Beliefs Policies Resources

47

In 27 years, the practice of providing special education and related services in regular early childhood settings to

preschoolers with disabilities has increased only 5.7% and many young children with disabilities continue to be

educated in separate settings.

Preschool Inclusion: The FACTS

48

Challenges and Barriers Exist So We Must Look for

Strategies - A National Study by Smith

and Barton (2014)

49

238 people responded to the survey. This included representation from 32 states and 1 territory.

The Survey: Respondents

50

Roles N %

School District Special Education Preschool Coordinator or Child Find Coordinator

50 21.0%

School District Special Education Director

49 20.6%

School District Early Childhood Administrator

38 13.81%

State Section 619/IDEA Preschool Coordinator

35 14.7%

Head Start Administrator 24 10.1%

ECSE/Sped Teacher/Consultant 17 7.1%

State Special Education Director 10 4.2%

School Principal 7 2.9%

School Psychologist 3 1.3%

The Survey: Roles (2% “other”)

51

What are the challenges to preschool inclusion?

Challenges were grouped into 3 areas: Attitudes Procedures/policy Resources

52

• Lack of communication/collaboration• Concerns someone will lose out• Concerns related to preparedness• Awareness of the benefits of inclusion• Turf• Lack of respect• other

Attitude & Belief Challenges

53

• 19 of 70 really policy

• Most identified as local, then state, then federal

• Categories of policy challenges:

1. Ensuring Effectiveness of Personnel and Curricula

2. Fiscal Policies (contracting; $ streams)

3. Transportation Policies

4. Ensuring Quality and other policies

5. Ensuring inclusion as LRE option

Policy Challenges

54

Community programs full; no slots

Lack of resources for transportation for typical kids

Lack of resources for itinerate services

Resource Challenges

55

Solutions and Strategies that Support Preschool Inclusion

56

Two categories

1. Collaboration across regular EC and ECSE personnel; between district and community programs

2. Building awareness/support

Attitude & Belief Solutions/Strategies

57

Establish interagency inclusion teamProvide awareness materials and

opportunities for local administratorsProvide joint PD for district EC, ECSE, and

community personnelEnsure support to community programs for

ECSE and behavior supportBuild culture of collaborative problem

solving

1. A/B Solutions: Collaboration

58

Provide quick to read materials on benefits/laws for preschool inclusion for all stakeholders: administrators, families, providers

Provide models of high quality inclusion for people to visit

Provide opportunities for practitioners, administrators and families to explore concerns, benefits and possible solutions

Arrange meetings with teachers, parents and administrators involved in successful inclusion

2. A/B Solutions: Build Awareness & Support

59

Make public school programs inclusive: create tuition based access to district EC

programs for nondisabled children from community

make district pre-k, Title I programs inclusiveReimburse parents for transportationCreate a state-level inclusion team for “barrier

busting” that responds to local concernsState dissemination to districts of creative ways to

provide inclusion; examples; incentives

Policy Solutions & Strategies

60

Braiding funding streams (pre-k, IDEA, Title I, etc.)

CollaborationRedistribution (itinerate/consultative vs.

segregated)Public awareness of the benefits=$$Literature indicates inclusive services do not

cost more than segregated

Resource Solutions & Strategies

61

Working Lunch Activity

• Use the worksheets and identify or review the barriers and concerns you have noted.

• Share your concerns and challenges with peers

• Put them on post it notes (Print)and place on the flips charts with topics identified

• Print any questions that arise for the state to consider on a post it note.

• Review the worksheet strategies and look for potential strategies that might be a good fit.

• Discuss and share strategies to address your concerns and barriers.

• Print the strategy on a post it note and place on the relevant flip chart paper.

• Print any questions that arise for the state to consider on a post it note. 62

Session E Leading Quality Inclusive Programs

Service Delivery Approaches, Staffing Patterns, and Financing

Strategies

63

Objectives and Organization

Provide an overview of the joint policy statement recommendations for resource allocation to support inclusion.

Provide an overview of federal and state funding requirements and policies.

Share illustrations and examples for funding inclusive service delivery models and staffing patterns.

Share resources for analyzing and understanding funding streams and the relationship to and impact on service delivery models and staffing patterns.

64

Federal Sources to Use

• Joint Policy Statement• Federally funded research and TA

projects• IDEA• EDGAR – Education Department

General Administrative Regulations• OMB –Office of Budget and

Management Circular65

Joint Policy Statement and

Federally funded Research and TA Projects

66

What does Research and Experience Say?

Preliminary research shows that operating inclusive early childhood programs is not necessarily more expensive. (3, 43)

Promote a mixed delivery system of high quality inclusive early learning opportunities by establishing partnerships with private early childhood programs and ensuring that all programs can support the learning and development of all children. 67

Examine Resource AllocationAt the State LevelReview how existing resources are allocated and how they

may be reallocated to better support increased access.

Consider using funds across multiple early childhood programs , particularly IDEA funds with other early childhood funding streams

Determine how to most efficiently and effectively utilize funds from different funding streams.

Provide technical assistance and guidance to LEAs and early

childhood programs on allocating resources and braiding

68

Questions to Examine Resource Allocation

How might we support early intervention, early childhood special education, related services providers, and other specialized providers in providing consultative services to early childhood programs?

How can we optimize the distribution of specialized providers, materials, and equipment across early childhood programs?

How are PD/TA resources being used to expand access to training/coaching, specific to supporting children with disabilities to all staff? 69

Questions to Examine Resource Allocation

How are IDEA funds used to provide services in inclusive programs typically developing peers?

How are we allocating funds and formalizing partnerships with community-based early childhood programs, including child care, to establish a mixed delivery system, where children can receive inclusive early learning opportunities in different settings?

How might resource allocation support some early childhood special educators shifting from full time teachers to providing consultative services?

70

Additional Recommendations

Establish an Appropriate Staffing Structure and Strengthen Staff Collaboration

Ensure Access to Specialized Supports

Develop Formal Collaborations with Community Partners

71

DefinitionsAt the program level:Blended funds are funds from two or more

separate funding sources wrapped together within one full-workday, full-year program budget to pay for a unified set of program services to a group of children.

Costs are not necessarily allocated and tracked by

individual funding source.

(Wallen & Hubbard, 2013, Ounce of Prevention)

72

DefinitionsAt the program level:Braided funds are two or more funding sources

coordinated to support the total cost of services to individual children, but revenues are allocated and expenditures tracked by categorical funding source.

Cost allocation methods are required to assure that there is no duplicate funding of service costs and that each funding source is charged its fair share of program and administrative costs.

(Wallen & Hubbard, 2013, Ounce of Prevention)

73

•What Does the IDEA Say?•What Does OMB say?•What Does Edgar Say?

74

Use of Funds to Support Braiding

EDGAR• 76.760 more than one program may assist a

single activity• 76.761 Federal funds may pay 100% of cost

IDEA - Maintenance of Effort• 300.203 Maintenance of Effort• 300.204 Exceptions to Maintenance of Effort• 300.205Adjustments to local fiscal efforts in

certain fiscal years75

Use of Funds to Support BraidingIDEA – State Maintenance of Financial Support• 300.203 State Maintenance of Financial Support• 300.163 Maintenance of state financial support

IDEA – Excess Costs• 300.202 Use of Amounts• 300.16 Excess Costs

IDEA – Prohibition Against Commingling of Funds• 300.162 Supplementation of State, local and

other Federal Funds

76

OMB CIRCULAR A-87 revised 05/10/04

Pertains to Support of Salary and Wages

77

NM PreK Funding

• NM PreK is state-funded through a special legislative appropriation (HB 2).

• Districts and charters must apply for funding.• Funding is on a “per child” basis for all

children who are four-years-old prior to September 1 of the school year and are not age-eligible for kindergarten.

78

NM PreK Funding

• FY16 funding: $3,206.20 per child for half-day programs (450 instructional hours)

• FY16 Funding: $6,412.40 per child for extended-day pilot programs (900 instructional hours)

• Districts/charter schools may receive both NM PreK and special education funding for the same child if the child with an IEP is placed in an NM PreK classroom.

• A limited amount of funding is available for transportation of students.

79

NM PreK Funding

• The NM PreK funding covers the “general education” preschool program

• NM PreK ratios are 10 to 1, which may not meet the needs of all children in the classroom. Special education funding may be used to lower ratios or provide additional supports to meet the needs of the children in the classroom

• All NM PreK classrooms must follow the NM PreK Program Standards 80

A Cost Calculator to Examine Service Delivery Models

81

Using the Calculator

•This is for comparing costs for different models

•This is only for the cost of the specific # of children with IEPs (green)

• This does not include all costs; just main ones

82

Thoughts and Considerations

• Hire Ancillary vs. Contracting with Agencies• Consider charging tuition for peers • Pursue NM T.E.A.C.H. Scholarships to support staff in

attaining Early Childhood Education degrees.• Work with outside agencies to support student learning: New Mexico School for the Blind and Visually Impaired

provide staff and training New Mexico School for the Deaf provides consultation UNM Center for Developmental Disabilities provides training and coaching, Head Start, Birth-Three agencies.

83

Considerations for Making Finance Decisions to Promote Preschool Inclusion (April 2012) Developed by the National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center

http://ectacenter.org/~pdfs/topics/inclusion/financeinclu.pdf

84

Key ConsiderationsMotivation and Partnerships• Is there administrative support for inclusion?• Have you identified partners for collaboration?

Settings, Staffing and Service Delivery • In what settings will children receive services?• How will the program be staffed to provide special education

supports and services?• How will funds and in-kind contributions be used to support the

inclusive program?

Funding Streams and Accountability• Which funding streams may be used to support inclusive

programs and special education services?• What is the administrative and /or funding structure?

85

Time to Reflect and Talk

• Activity – Self reflection and small group discussionUse the handout from the tool kit that

has the questions from the previous slide.

• Place key issues, strategies and questions for the state on the sticky walls before leaving 86

Session G Leading Quality Inclusive Programs

Continuing the Conversation on Service Delivery Approaches and

Family Engagement

87

Objectives and Organization

Gain information on and share perspectives for effective collaboration and teaming with families.

Gain information on and share perspectives for effective collaboration and teaming within programs.

Receive information on designing and operating inclusive service delivery models and staffing patterns.

Gain and consider ideas for administrative support for designing and implementing inclusive practices and programs

88

Collaboration and Supporting

Engagement with Families-

Key Members of the Team 89

Summary of the ResearchIn order to promote optimal development for all children, early childhood education programs and policy decisions must be respectful of the cultural and ethnic ideals of the families they serve, not just those that fit within the preconceived beliefs of teachers, administrators, and policymakers.

90

Provide a Welcoming Environment

Make navigating the school easy by having staff greet families near the entrance and ensuring that signs are posted and clear. Ensure there are clear continuous channels of communication. Encourage families to provide feedback through a variety of venues.

91

Strive for Program-Family Partnerships

Include families in decisions related to both their own child’s education and the early childhood education program as a whole.

This includes on-going, collaborative goal-setting of children’s outcomes between teachers and families.

Facilitate complementary learning by providing families with information and resources to connect activities being conducted during the program with the home.

92

Make a Commitment to Outreach

Conduct home visits, if families are comfortable, where teachers can learn from families about children’s home environments and best learning styles.

Model educational activities that families can do at home to support children’s learning.

Ask families for their communication preferences at the beginning of the school year.

93

Perspectives on Inclusion

Special Quest Video –

Together We are Better

94

Collaboration and Teaming

Within Programs

95

Collaboration Within Programs

The Administrator’s Role for Helping Staff Work Together in Inclusive Preschool Programs

“Collaboration is the cornerstone of effective preschool inclusion.”

(Wolery and Odom, Early Childhood Research Institute on Inclusion)

Collaboration is the relationship or partnership between two or more individuals, programs, or agencies.

96

Factors for Successful Collaboration

Seven Factors for Successful Collaboration

1. Shared philosophy2. Adequate time for staff communication3. Joint participation in program development4. Shared “ownership” of children5. Role clarity6. Stability in relationships7. Administrative support

97

Service Delivery Models

Itinerant Consultation Model of Collaboration

Team Model of Collaboration

Co-Teaching Model of Collaboration

98

Itinerant-Consultation Model

Special Education Consultant Serves a caseload of students with disabilities. The special education teacher/therapist delivers services

directly to the child, indirectly through the child’s teachers, or through some variation of service delivery.

Services occur on a continuum from isolated direct services to complete consultation with the child’s teacher.

Administrator’s RoleFinancial SupportPlanning For Collaborative ConsultationImplementing Collaborative ConsultationEvaluating Collaborative Consultation 99

Team Model of Collaboration

1. Multidisciplinary Team Model2. Interdisciplinary Team Model3. Transdisciplinary Team Model

100

Typically, team members include educators, ancillary staff and when necessary, health care and social service representatives.

Three Team Models

Co-Teaching Model of Collaboration• Two teachers plan together and deliver instruction. • Co-teaching allows the preschool teacher and the special

education teacher to combine their expertise for the benefit of all children.

• The goal of the co-teaching arrangement is to have both teachers share equally in the implementation of a child’s IEP. Requires training and support.

Administrator’s Role• Staffing• Assist in development of Action Plan (space, roles and

responsibilities, schedules, management plan) • Provide planning time• Evaluate; Share successes and provide encouragement.

101

Blended Service DeliveryThese models are not mutually exclusive, and often occur together as services for young children are planned and implemented.

102

Additional Thoughts &Considerations

• Consider increasing adult to child ratio when child has more need for special instruction/supervision.

• Consider staff expertise and experience when developing class lists- vision, autism, physical and developmental delays.

• Provide mentorship for staff in writing and participating in IEP Process, example- Shining Stars Practices.

103

Additional Thoughts &Considerations

• Preschool program integrates ancillary services (e.g. occupational therapy, speech/language, and/or physical therapy within regular program activities and routines to the maximum extent appropriate as indicated in the child’s IEP.

104

Session J Leading Quality Inclusive Programs

Collaboration, Teaming and Partnerships

105

NEXT STEPS: Effective Collaboration & Administrative Support

How will you support program change as administrators and consultants?

What is going well that you want to support, maintain and sustain?

What would you like to examine more closely to see how it is working?

What do you need to change or redesign? What resources will you need?

Who are your partners? In your school? in your district? In your community? 106

Do you have a team? Does your community have a interagency group?

107

Recommendations for Action

• Step 1 Build a team• Step 2 Commit, communicate and

meet• Step 3 Develop an action plan• Step 4 Assess & measure progress• Step 5 Seek external support

(Hayden, Frederick & Smith, 2003 –A Road Map for Facilitating Collaborative Teams)

108

Develop a Shared Vision

• Where do you want to see our (inclusive) program in 3-5 years?

• What are the realistic services and procedures that will support inclusion in our program?

• How will inclusion benefit our children and families?

• Conduct a SWOT Analysis(Hayden, Frederick & Smith, 2003 –A Road Map for

Facilitating Collaborative Teams)

109

Revisiting:How are you feeling about inclusion?

1 =Not sure or comfortable about how to implement inclusive practices and programs

2. Somewhat unsure and uncomfortable but interested in learning more

3. Very interested and ready to move forward with TA and guidance

4. Totally ready and implementing some or all inclusive practices in our program 110

Final Thoughts…….• After yesterday and today, what did you see or hear that

stands out in your mind regarding inclusion?• What was exciting? What concerned or worried you?• What is something that you want to do as an individual

to support and implement more inclusive practices back home?

• What do you want your program to do next? What seems like an important next step?

111