EI/ECSE Contractor MeetingMinutes–March 14, 2012

Website: Next Meeting: May 16, 2012

X / A1 IMESD Michael Lasher / X / A4 LBLESD Debbie McPheeters / X / A6 MESD Nancy Anderson / X / A7 LESD Kelly Oatman
A1 IMESD Ami Muilenburg / X / A4 LBLESD Lila Kuykendall / X / A6 MESD Pat Moffitt / X / A8 NWRESD Nancy Ford
X / A2 HDESD Diane Tipton V-Tel / A5 WESD Stacey Sibley / X / A7 LESD Sue Mathisen / X / A9 CLESD Barbara Bolstad
X / A3 DESD Susan Graham / X / A5 WESD Devora Gramson / X / A7 LESD Judy Newman / X / Dan Smellow, ecWeb
X / ODE County Contact: A1, A3
Bruce Sheppard / X / ODE County Contact: A2, A6, A8
Ginna Oliver / X / ODE County Contact: A5
Holly Reed Schindler / X / ODE County Contact: A7, A9
Alan Garland
ODE County Contact: A4
Kara Williams / X / Nancy Johnson Dorn
Director Early Childhood Programs / X / ecData
Dan Smellow
X / Recorder: Teckla Buller / X / Recorder: Laura Allran / X / Guest: Robert Cantwell / Guest: Pat Sublette, Area 3 Klamath subcontractor
Time / Topic / Purpose / Action
09:00-09:10 / Announcements
  • Service Area Plans (Holly)
  • Private preschool data
  • Report Cards
  • Other
/ Updates /
  • Service Area Plans—the template is the same as last year. Holly sent these to contractors on March 16, and they are due May 18, 2012. Check with your County Contactif you have questions.
  • Private Preschool Data. This is the enrollment data we collect from preschool programs that are connected with private elementary schools. Please contact them and ask for enrollment for ages 3-5. The packet was sent March 15 and is due at the end of April.
  • Report Card: the validation window closes March 14. Contractors should review their data. Public release of the Report Card is April 4.
  • There were no changes on Indicator C4(parent survey) regarding federal reporting requirements. Changing the Indicator has been brought up numerous times, but the federal response continues to be,” No changes.” One good option might be to ask the SICC to send a letter to OSEP voicing its concerns.
  • Nancy shared the OSEP letter that she received about least restrictive environment.

09:10-09:15 / Contracts and budget for 2012-2013 (Nancy J-D) / Information /
  • ODE is extending contracts for the 2012-13 school year. Nancy is waiting for funding amounts, then will be able to complete the Form B requests and move them forward to Procurement for processing
  • ODE anticipates flat funding for this year, although there could be some carry over. Nancy Latini will be meeting with Superintendents next week to discuss contracts and funding. ODE has not received the 611 and 619 federal grants, but it is anticipated that they will be flat also.
  • ODE has revised the Assurance Form, which will be included with the contract.
  • The Interagency Agreementwith Dept. of Human Services (DHS) and Oregon Health Authority (OHA) was revised.
  • Rolling averages have shown growth in every area.

09:15-09:20 / OAR Status (Bruce)
  • Need for staff training
  • Form revisions (Medical Condition for EI, etc)
/ Information and discussion /
  • There were a few changes to Part B, but most of the changes were in Part C. The proposed changes were approved by the State Board of Education at their March meeting.Programs are to be in compliance by July 1, 2012. The revised OARs will be published by then.
  • Bruce will put together a guidance/training document and send to programs soon.
  • The group approved the revisions to the Physician’s Statement for EI Medical ConditionsLikely to Cause Delay form. Nurse Practitioners and Physician’s Assistants were added and the name changed to “Medical Statement” rather than Physician’s Statement.

09:20-09:45 / Changes to Public and Private Insurance (Nancy J-D and Alan)
  • OARs
  • Interagency Agreement with DHS and OHA
  • Contracts and Assurances
  • Notice and Consent form
  • System of Payments
/ Information and discussion /
  • Written Notice and Consent for the Use of Public/Private Insurance for Early Intervention/Early Childhood Special Education (EI/ECSE):The revised consent parts require mandatory notification of parents when programs want to access private or public insurance.
  • For EI services, programs are required to have a document that describes their program’s“system of payments.”When programs want to access a parent’s insurance, they have to give the document to the parents and explain how billing willaffect their insurance. The document will be attached to the consent form.
  • Programs are required to bill for Medicaid (public insurance). They can bill private insurance, but are not required to do so. Medicaid is considered a system of payment.
  • Alan created a combined form (mint green) so there would be less paperwork. The green combined form is for both EI and ECSE.
  • Read the pink handout and email your feedback to Alan Garlandby March 31.Use the subject line Consent Forms.
  • The revised OAR is effective July 1, 2012.

09:50-09:55 / CAPTA referrals (Bruce) / Discussion /
  • The numbers of CAPTA referrals appears to have dropped. Bruce asked whether contractors had noticed a drop, and if so, what they think may be causing the drop. One thought was because more DHS programs are doing the ASQ directly.Systems seem to be working and not all numbers are down. Bruce will do some more review of the data.

09:55-10:05 / Results at 3rd grade benchmark for children who received ECSE articulation services (Diane Tipton) / Information /
  • Diane briefly explained the results for children who received articulation services. She will send her PowerPoint slide to be shared with all the contractors.

10:15-10:30 / Break
10:05-10:15 / Providence Dental Van (Pat M) / Information /
  • Pat Moffitt shared a brochure and poster. Multnomah ESDreceived funding to work with Providence Medical Center Specialty Pediatric Dental Clinic to provide free dental screenings for EI/ECSE children at their sites via the “Dental Van”.Multnomah is piloting this project and they are very happy with the results to date.

10:30 – 10:50 / Hearing Impaired Deaf (Ginna Oliver) / Discussion and recommendation /
  • At the last Contractors meeting, Ginna shared feedback from the ODE Hearing Screening and Evaluation Q&As regarding eligibilitythreshold changes for babies and toddlers. The goal is to get needed services to them sooner.
  • The revised OAR for changing thesethresholds was not submitted to the State Board of Education with the new Part C OARs because Regional Programs had suggested some changes. Nancy Johnson-Dorn has invited Regional Programs to work with Ginna, Susan, Diane and Lila to rework the OAR so it meets the needs for both regional and EI/ECSE services.
  • Hearing Screening forms, which are for all children,need to be revised. The workgroupcould help update those as well.
  • EHDI is piloting electronic access to their information.
  • National Early Childhood Assessment Project (NECAP – “kneecap”) is a national pilot that is also researching acquisition of language skills of deaf children. More information can be found at:

11:00 – 12:00 / ecWeb (Dan Smellow) / Information /
  • Dan shared his handout and discussed current and upcoming projects.
  • Multnomah had a Medicaid audit, through which they learned that the date of the Evaluation Report has to match the date the programbills Medicaid for the corresponding service. They will put together a summary of “critical” points that they learned and share it with all of the contractors.
  • People are using “archival” information more and as data accumulates there will be more available.
  • Contractors asked Dan to try to eliminate having to use two different pages to enter Present Levels of Development information. ecData will continue to work on this.
  • Contractors asked that the Evaluation Report formbe locked so the information can’t be changed.
Most Wanted New Projects By Area:
1-InterMountain11, 13, 12, 14, 10
2-High Desert15, 12, 7, 8, 16
3-Douglas10, 14, 10, 12, 9
4-LBL12, 14, 12, 10, 7
5-Marion13, 14, 12, 13, 9, 7 a given
6-Multnomah7, 14, 12, 2, 13, 8
7-Lane9, 12, 8, 7
8-NWR ESD14, 14, 12, 13, 10
9-Clackamas8, 14, 10, 12, 7
Priority Rank of projects:
12 27.
14 26.
10 10.
13 9.5
07 8.
09 5.
08 4.5
11 0.
Dan would like ODE staff to give their input.
12:00-12:30 / Lunch
12:30-01:00 / Intensity Levels Update (Judy, Kelly and Nancy J-D) / Discussion and recommendation /
  • Judy shared the results they got by using IFSP goals information.
  • She will further break this out by Area and get it to programs after spring break so they can see how their data compares with the breakout data.If the data correlates then it will greatly enhance the integrity of the funding model . Pull records randomly, also, and review whether they match up with the breakout data.
  • Please give your correlation data to Nancy by mid-April.
  • Judy will send updated lists to programs. Area 5 asked for a regional sort. The other areas will be county sort.

12:30-01:30 / Family Assessment Tools (All) / Sharing /
  • Area 6 Multnomah ESD: they use the ECO map which helps them identify where intervention is needed and to work with families to develop additional support.
  • They worked asprofessional learning communities for a year, made home visits, researched data, helped families set their outcome goals and built the training into their professional development evaluation of staff.
  • They developed geographical teams and provide induction training for new staff with mentors who are currently using the strategies.
  • These teams also did community mapping last year where they got out and walked neighborhoods to see what resources were actually there.
  • They found that when you start asking questions, seemingly isolated families have richer networks than you might expect.
  • They are working to develop a more integrated Birth-Five approachinstead of having individual Birth-3 and 3-5 silos.
  • All of these activities have helped with Family Outcomes Goals.
  • Area 7 Lane ESD: They have a 5 year plan with the main focus on parent involvement.
  • Judy will share their Talking Points that emphasize why parental involvement is so important.
  • They use a routines base list. Every new family gets a handout with a welcome letter.
  • Before the IFSP meeting parents get a letter explaining what is included and how it’s put together.
  • UO has a new in-service professor whose expertise is in video coaching. She has offered to do training for ecCares and they are currently piloting a session. This does require Internet access and not all parents have it. Let Judy know if your program would be interested in scheduling a training session. Judy will also share her materials with contractors.
  • Area 2 High Desert ESD: Diane Tipson shared that they don’t have a formal assessment tool, but they liked Judy’s graph.
  • Diane also shared an analogy she used. Some parents feel like they need full support all of the time. Diane commented that when you are learning to use a treadmill, it is helpful and good to have a personal trainer. But after you master the skill, you don’t need a personal trainer beside you constantly. The same is true of parents, once they learn the process, they don’t need the same level of support as when they started out.
  • Area 5 Willamette ESD: Devora reiterated the prior comment that it’s best to introduce the Family Outcomes page at the beginning of the IFSP meeting. It’s easier to jot down Family Outcome Goals in tandem with the IFSP goals. Marion County has had very good results using this approach.
  • It’s very important to enter this information into the system early in the process. Dan is working on a potential system reminder. Contractors also said that if anyone notices the information hasn’t been entered, to please contact them. Additional training may be needed for staff.
  • When a child leaves the system, what records are required to be kept and for how long?
  • It is important that staff understandthat ecWeb is nota template for writing an IFSP.

09:45-09:50 / Inclusion project (Alan) / Discussion and recommendation /
  • It’s grant renewal time for the Inclusion Collaboration Project grant with Western Oregon University (WOU). Alan asked how the grant has been working and what would programs like to see for the next year.
  • Several programs have used grant funds for training community partners with Tom Udell.He does a nice job of training.
  • Area 4 work has been going well—Lila will update Alan. Debbie mentioned the new form. It takes longer to fill out, but has more accountability.
  • Much of Multnomah’s training has been done through CCR&Rs. They also applied for a PICC grant.
  • Douglas County used funds toestablish community preschools, helping owners through licensing/registration process.
  • Area 1: Michael will provide Alan with information from his staff.
  • Clackamas has completed the Collaborative Consultationtraining and are planning to do Embedded Instruction next. They will be able to apply for another grant to have more training by CCR&R.
  • NWRESD is enjoying training. Their grant is working well. And they have used funds for incentives.
  • For next year programs would like:
  • to see research from others who are using incentives to purchase time and placements;
  • more information about other states’ policy and training;
  • Oregon is considering more web-based/online training for child care staff who find it hard to take time from work.
  • To linkthe training to TQRIS.
  • Access to OSU evidence-based training for parents and children.
  • Email other suggestions to Alan.

01:30-01:35 / Next meeting date (May 16th or June 6th) / Set date / The group agreed to meet on May 16. If an additional meeting is needed, the date can be decided later.
10:50 – 11:00 / Success by Six Neighborhoods (Judy and Kelly) / Information / The group moved this discussion to the Parking Lot for the May agenda.

J:\Early Childhood\EI-ECSE\Contractor Mtgs\2011-12\2012-0314\12-0315 Minutes.doc