Early Childhood Programs and Services:

Report and Recommendations

A REPORT OF THE BIRTH TO 5 EARLY CHILDHOOD SERVICES PROJECT WORKGROUP

MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF ADMINISTRATORS OF SPECIAL EDUCATION

Project Participants
MAASE Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Membership Thomas Koepke MAASE Project Co-Leader Assistant Superintendent for Special Education Monroe County ISD MAASE Project Co-Leader Director of Special Education Muskegon Public Schools Supervisor of Special Education Washtenaw ISD Director of Special Education Branch ISD Director of Special Education Menominee ISD Supervisor of Early Childhood Services Van Buren ISD Director of Special Education Waterford Public Schools Director of Special Education Kent ISD Assistant Superintendent for Special Education Eastern UP ISD Director of Special Education Livingston ISD Supervisor of Early Childhood and Special Education Support Services/ Early On Coordinator Ingham ISD Supervisor of Special Education Clare-Gladwin ISD

Larry D. Foster

Jovina Coughlin Michele Cutcher Connie Davidson Daris Delsi Catherine Herzog Lucy Hough-Waite Susan Kabat Joseph Kulkulski Stephanie Peters

Elaine Smiley

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE

June, 2004

Early Childhood Consultants Cheryl Granzo Carl Ill Perry Lopucki Early On Coordinator Ionia ISD Director of Early Childhood Education Allegan ISD Director of Early Childhood Education Muskegon and Oceana ISD

Michigan Department of Education Representatives Jacquelyn Thompson Director, Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services, Michigan Department of Education Supervisor, Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services, Michigan Department of Education Supervisor, Early Childhood, Michigan Department of Education Program Staff, Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services, Michigan Department of Education Early On Trainer and Technical Assistance, Clinton ISD Lead Consultant, Michigan School Readiness Program, Michigan Department of Education

David Brock

Lindy Buch Dianne Easterling

Sister Barbara Cline Connie Robinson

The contents and recommendations within this report reflect the opinions of the MAASE Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup and the MAASE Executive Board. MAASE recognizes the special efforts and expertise of the individuals and their organizations listed on this page. We are especially thankful for the assistance of the staff of the Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services. By listing the individuals and organizations they belong to does not imply that OSE-EIS, MDE, or any of the ISDs endorse all of the recommendations listed herein. Special appreciation is given to the Monroe County Intermediate School District for the graphic design of this document.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE June, 2004

Introduction
Objective of the MAASE Early Childhood Services Project The initial objective of the project was to propose a comprehensive continuum of educational services for children from birth through five years of age that incorporates the principle of providing services within the natural1 and least restrictive environment in collaboration with other community agencies. This continuum was to be a unified, seamless educational system for all of Michigans preschoolers. The scope of the project was narrowed as a result of the project members concerns about feasibility and funding. The majority of the project workgroups effort and time was devoted to discussion about improving flexibility and integration within early childhood special education classroom programs and services for children and the development of options for three to four year old children who were eligible for Early On (Part C) service coordination, but not eligible for special education. Specific recommendations include (1) expanding opportunities for the integration of disabled and non-disabled preschool children and (2) enhancing flexibility in the provision of programs and services to better address the needs of the children and families served. The Statement of the Problem Michigans current systems for delivering early childhood programs and services to children from birth through the age of five are categorical and inflexible in meeting the individual needs of children and families. The current funding structures of early childhood programs and services are frequently disconnected and discourage the integration of children with disabilities with their non-disabled peers. The lack of flexibility partially results from complex funding and pupil accounting requirements, program guidelines, and certification requirements. The removal of these barriers is critical to meeting the objectives above.

Developing a Shared Vision for Early Childhood Services The MAASE Birth to Five Early Childhood Project workgroup was assembled through a notification process that invited all MAASE members who were interested to contact one of the chairs of the project workgroup. Approximately 30 MAASE members responded to the notice. An attempt was made to encourage workgroup membership from active MAASE members representing ISD and local districts, large ISDs and small ISDs, urban and rural districts, and representative of major geographical regions.

Current funding structures of early childhood programs and services are frequently disconnected and discourage the integration of children with disabilities with their non-disabled peers.

3
In March of 2003, the project workgroups initial task was to compose a letter to Governor Jennifer M. Granholm on behalf of MAASE to express our enthusiastic support for the Great Start initiative, to outline the reasons why MAASE supports this initiative, and to offer our expertise towards the accomplishment of the initiative. A copy of this letter can be found in the Appendix. The second and more complex objective of the workgroup was to identify the problems in the current educational service systems for early childhood programming with the goal to provide recommendations and potential solutions for creating the unified, seamless system for Michigans children. The project workgroup actively sought input from multiple sources to insure that the process and resulting recommendations incorporated components considered as best practice. The recommendations described herein are not complete and will require further scrutiny including a financial impact analysis. The workgroup found the development of the vision of a comprehensive statewide array of early childhood programs and services unexpectedly easy to accomplish. The challenge was the means to fund a comprehensive statewide early childhood initiative. All proposed program models were based, in part, on existing successful programs in Michigan. The MAASE vision of a unified, seamless system for early childhood education in the State of Michigan incorporates the following core principles of quality programming: Early and effective interventions during optimal developmental windows of a childs life; Developmentally appropriate curricula; Holistic focus on the child; Parents are partners in their childrens education; A coordinated system of early intervention services in natural environments; Full continuum of inclusive opportunities for all children.

In addition to core principles, the workgroup members discussions emphasized the need to: Improve preservice and inservice professional training for early childhood service providers; Develop a single set of Quality Standards that would allow a teacher and other staff to serve a variety of students with and without disabilities; Fully fund a universal early childhood system for children birth to five.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE June, 2004

4
Prior Attempts to Address Integration, Inclusion, and Flexibility in Early Childhood Programs in Michigan The Michigan Department of Education has explored issues related to Early Childhood programs and services, to some degree, for the past 10 years or more. In 1998, the Michigan State Board of Education Action Plan Priorities and Goals for Early Childhood Special Education2 included the following: Improve and support parent involvement in early intervention and preschool special education services. Improve interagency coordination of early intervention services and community supports for young children with disabilities and their families. Assure that preschool children with disabilities are educated in settings with their peers to the extent appropriate. Provide options for early childhood education placements for young children with disabilities. Create a coordinated system of early intervention and preschool services using a single system of planning, due process, monitoring and quality assurance; align administrative rules with Part B, section 619, and Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Act.

The Office of Special Education and Early Intervention Services (OSE/EIS) formed a workgroup during 1998 and 1999. The workgroup consisted of professional staff representing several ISDs/ RESAs, local school districts, pupil finance and accounting, Early On, special education, and higher education. The workgroup reviewed practices pertaining to the provision of services in the natural environment, pupil accounting rules, special education rules, and other policies and procedures which may create barriers to the provision of services to children in integrated settings. The workgroup compiled documentation which clearly illustrated rules already existed that allowed for more integration and the provision of services in natural environments. While barriers to integration and collaboration do exist, documents from MDE and other sources indicate that partial solutions are available. Memorandum3 from David J. Brock, Supervisor, OSE/EIS, to Work Group Participants regarding IDEA 97 and Part B/C Integration dated September 16, 1998 covered similar ground as this MAASE project. Letters from Thomas Hehir4, 5, 6, Director, Office of Special Education Programs, USDOE dated April 30, 1999 and March 15, 1994 clarify the use of Part B funds to serve infants and toddlers, stipulate the requirement to address the needs of first priority children, and state that some fees may be charged for services provided under Part H (now Part C of IDEA). These letters further clarify the use of funds under Part B of the IDEA for infants and toddlers. Looking for flexibility in funding these services, the MDE sponsored workgroup found little. The Michigan OSE/EIS Continuous Improvement Monitoring Process (CIMP) Progress Report (12/31/ 02) provided another update on the status of work on the Michigan Department of Education Birth to Five initiative. The strategic directive for this effort was to attain systems reform through policy and funding. Activities arising from this process included an October 2002 Early On LICC Conference, analysis of various service coordination models, the development of a set of competency-based personnel standards, the creation of a Transition Guide and statewide dissemination of the knowledge gleaned from the CIMP process.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE

June, 2004

5
As the State of Michigan entered the new millennium, a new comprehensive initiative was launched entitled All Students Achieve Program - Parent Involvement and Education Program (ASAP-PIE). This grant program targeted for intermediate school districts to enhance collaborative community efforts for programs for families with young children birth to age five was initiated in 2000-2001 and discontinued in 2003. Initial funding was $45 million distributed to 23 ISDs in large competitive grants across the state. The purposes of the program were to increase childrens school readiness, reduce/ prevent the need for special education programs in elementary school, and to foster the maintenance of stable families. Five components were required: home visits, group meetings, developmental screening, community resource network referrals, and referrals to high-quality preschool programs. This program was eliminated and some districts were able to maintain components of the program after funding ceased. The Michigan Association of Intermediate School Administrators (MAISA), Michigan Association of School Administrators (MASA), Michigan Association of Administrators of Special Education (MAASE) and many other professional groups sought continued support of the ASAP-PIE grants during the fiscal crisis of 2002-2003. Awareness is building which supports the notion that the early childhood initiative is a school districts opportunity to positively impact upon the achievement of students that eventually enroll in kindergarten. Most recently, Governor Jennifer M. Granholm proposed and implemented the Great Parents, Great Start grant program with intermediate school districts across Michigan. This initiative will assist in the provision of both universal and targeted early childhood services to children from birth to five. Governor Granholm views this as a way to improve collaboration, enhance services to preschool children, and ensure that more children are ready for school. The goal of the Governors Great Parents, Great Start initiative is far more comprehensive than the overall objective of this project. Prevention is an essential component in the Michigan Early Childhood Comprehensive System or Great Start initiative. A comprehensive statewide prevention program, a requisite feature in the Governors proposal, was not specifically addressed within the context of this workgroup other than to recognize the value of prevention services that are targeted, relevant and universally available to children and families in the State of Michigan.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE June, 2004

6
Adequate Funding: A Major Barrier to Progress The current State of Michigan budget crisis highlights the inadequacy of the revenue stream required to maintain programs and services. The State of Michigans financial structure was altered by Proposal A in 1993 by the legislature and previous Governor. In addition to shifting school funding from local control to Lansing, state sales tax now makes up a large portion of the funding stream. The current projected budget deficit is nearly $1 billion for the general fund. The picture for the School Aid fund is somewhat brighter. However, the School Aid fund is dependent upon a transfer of $200 million from the General Fund for the 2004 school year. Due to this crisis, the membership foundation for K-12 education has not increased in two years and recently was reduced by $84.00 per student. It is also possible that further reductions in the payments to school districts will be made as the crisis continues. Against the backdrop of this discouraging situation, it is nearly impossible to propose a new funding mechanism that will strengthen early childhood services across the State of Michigan. The majority of funds available for early childhood programs and services are limited to Early On (Part C of IDEA), Special Education (Part B of IDEA), Michigan School Readiness Program (MSRP), and Head Start. Each program has categorical restrictions on eligibility.

The current State of Michigan budget crisis highlights the inadequacy of the revenue stream required to maintain programs and services.

The MAASE project workgroup refocused attention to the design of a possible program model that would resolve some issues about integration for four year olds. The workgroup discussed the potential advantages of serving children under a unified, seamless system that allows the education of 12 to 16 four year old children in one classroom who could be eligible for services under Part B or MSRP.

The potential funding sources for this combination are: $55 million of special education funding $12 million in IDEA preschool funding $73 million in MSRP funding $12 million of competitive MSRP funding _____ $152 million total available (estimate based upon 2003 data) The MSRP funding is limited to $3300 per student. The revenue generated per student has been reported by many districts to be inadequate to sustain a program. Frequently, school districts will use money from their general fund to support the preschool initiative. This is less likely to happen in the current fiscal climate where K-12 funds are less today per student than even two years ago. While more and more school districts view birth to 5 years of age as an additional responsibility, decreasing revenues have prohibited school districts who ventured wholeheartedly into comprehensive early childhood initiatives to maintain their programs
A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE June, 2004

7
The project workgroup discussed several methods to either (1) maintain the funding that is currently received for each student with a disability, or (2) combine funding to provide services and programs to children with and without disabilities in the same setting. Because of the current financial crisis, the project workgroup did not endorse any specific structural change in funding; we simply considered several potential scenarios. The potential loss of protected funds for special education students haunted our discussions. Certain state funds for students with disabilities are protected by the Headlee Amendment to the State constitution. For structural or systemic statewide change to take place, the protection provided by the Headlee Amendment and later clarified by subsequent lawsuits would need to be assured. It is our understanding that states which have been most successful with universal preschool (mostly for 4year-olds) have identified or designated a funding source for it. Although funding is a critical issue right now, Michigans economy will eventually turn around, and we need to plan for the future. The Great Parents, Great Start Program grants provide $3,326,000 for collaborative community efforts to develop parent involvement and education programs. The programs must be designed for the families of children from birth to age five. This grant builds upon the experience gained through the All Students Achieve Program - Parent Involvement in Education (ASAP-PIE) grants. Four components are required:

Information on development of children from birth to age five. Methods to enhance parent/child interaction, including reading for a total of 30 minutes each day. Examples of learning opportunities to promote intellectual, physical and social growth of children birth to five years of age. Promotion of access to needed community services through a community-school-home partnership

Eligibility Estimates Eligibility determination depends upon categorical funding streams and program restrictions. Broadly speaking, there are approximately 655,000 children in the State of Michigan from birth and to five years of age or approximately 133,000 children at each age level. There are about 7,000 children receiving Early On service coordination, 27,655 receive special education services, approximately 23,000 are enrolled in MSRP and about 35,000 children enrolled in Head Start. The December 2003 special education count shows that 27,655 or about 4% of all children birth to five are eligible for special education services. Children may be enrolled in or receiving services from multiple programs.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE June, 2004

Creative Solutions That Are Possible Under Current Rules Newaygo County Denise Gasper, Early On Coordinator at Newaygo RESA, described an integrated model of service through the combination of the MSRP and Early Childhood Special Education (ECSE) Programs. In the 2002-2003 school year, Newaygo County had 15 classrooms in 5 school districts (morning and afternoon sessions). Each classroom educated a combination of students eligible for special education and MSRP. In addition, the districts accepted tuition-based children ($3.00 per hour) in these classrooms. Classroom teachers are certified with ZA endorsement (Early Childhood) and are paid on community education contracts rather than through the teachers contract. Special education related service staff provide services to children within these classrooms which generates membership (.4 FTE or more). Children may be enrolled in these classrooms for two years. Children eligible for special education and children formerly eligible for Early On may begin the program at age 3 or younger. The Parents as Teachers component, equipment and supplies are funded by a community grant. The Newaygo County staff report having an aggressive Child Find system and work in collaboration with seven other agencies. All eight agencies use the Ages and Stages Questionnaire and they collaborate in providing program brochures and trainings/workshops for families. There is a pre-K to12th grade county-wide curriculum in place, and there are essential outcomes for early childhood/pre-K children. The information is entered into a computer system and is passed on to the kindergarten teachers. All children are screened using play-based assessment with parents present. Transportation is provided to those children who are MSRP or special education eligible, but not to children whose parents pay tuition. Joe Gasper, Deputy Superintendent, reported that districts within Newaygo County serve 10,000 K12 students with about 400 being served in the preschool classrooms. There are never more than 16 children in a session at one time. The number of students with disabilities per classroom is held at about 30% or less. Consultants from the ISD meet with teachers and help determine the makeup and class size of these classrooms. Newaygo County no longer has any early childhood special education classrooms. The children who receive special education services under Rule 55 are typically seen 2 to 3 times per week in these classroom programs.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE

June, 2004

9
Branch County Branch County ISD is one of the few ISDs in Michigan that operates the Head Start and MSRP programs within their county. The BISD has a full continuum of programs and services for preschool children. Early Intervention/Home Based services begin the continuum. Children, who are approaching their third birthday, then have several options for early childhood programming after participating in the home-based program. The most restrictive program is the ECSE classroom located at the Waldron Center. This program is a self-contained pre-school program for children with more severe disabilities. The ECSE classroom at Waldron Center has access to two Head Start classrooms for inclusive and mainstreaming activities. Next, on the continuum is a co-teaching pre-school program located at the Branch Area Career Center (BACC). This language-enriched classroom is used as a lab for the childcare program at the BACC and is staffed with a certified speech therapist/early childhood teacher, a regular pre-school teacher and two paraprofessionals. High school students have an opportunity to work in this classroom as their lab experience for the BACC childcare program. There are preschool students with and without disabilities enrolled in the program. Students without disabilities pay tuition to attend. Next on the continuum are six co-teaching Head Start/Michigan School Readiness Programs (MSRP). The six programs are located within close proximity for efficient utilization of support staff and other resources. Children in the Head Start programs are able to receive special education services daily from a certified special education/early childhood teacher or other staff person who provides instructional services under the direction of a certificated special education teacher. Branch County serves preschool students with disabilities through the collaborative efforts of the teacher for the ECSE and Head Start programs working not only in close proximity but also in conjunction with each other. Most of the students are eligible for early childhood programs and services due to an Early Childhood Developmental Delay (ECDD) and/or speech and language impairment. The inclusive nature of Head Start often encourages parents to forego the more restrictive special education classroom placement. Frequently, students with more moderate to severe disabilities will remain in Head Start with the appropriate special education support.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE June, 2004

10
The team consists of one ECSE teacher, two paraprofessionals, a speech therapist, and the Head Start team. The ECSE teachers (1.5 teachers) are responsible for six different inclusive Head Start/ MSRP sites. The special education teachers follow a weekly schedule that places them at each site every other day. The paraprofessional works directly with the Head Start and ECSE teachers to implement instructional strategies with the students. The speech therapist works two days per week with each student and focuses upon speech and language goals. His schedule is on opposite days from the ECSE teacher. Fridays are typically home contact days and the ECSE team schedules home visits. Students must meet the Head Start low income qualification in order to be accepted. There is an exception made for 10% of the students on these criteria. The Head Start program is limited to 5 to 8 students with disabilities. The ECSE teacher works with students on an individual basis and as a coteacher. The speech therapist provides similar services as the ECSE teacher but on the opposite days. Funding is partially provided by a claim of .2 FTE membership for each day of service under rule 340.1755. Therefore, each student generates .8 FTE. Some students also receive instructional service on Fridays. In those situations, a full 1.0 FTE membership is claimed.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE

June, 2004

11 Recommendations of the MAASE Birth to Five Project Workgroup

Recommendations will be organized into four groups: Recommendations that could be acted upon under current rules and regulations. The project workgroup found examples of possible solutions to issues of inclusion and integration. Recommendations that would require rule modifications and regulatory changes in order to achieve greater flexibility in the provision of early childhood services. Recommendations or broad reaching goals that the State of Michigan should strive to attain. Recommendations that include further research for models of best practices.

1.

2. 3. 4.

1.0

Under current rules, the workgroup provides the following recommendations: 1.1 Recommendation - Location of Classroom Programs. Place or locate ECSE (Rule 54)8 classrooms in close proximity to Head Start, MSRP, and other publicly offered preschool programs in order to encourage collaboration. The close proximity of the two or more classroom programs also offers efficiency for teachers and other instructional or related service staff to work with students not directly assigned to an ECSE classroom. Barriers to implementation of Recommendation 1.1. More than one agency is responsible for Head Start, MSRP and special education services. The Head Start, MSRP and ECSE curriculum are frequently different. Teachers may utilize instructional approaches that are incompatible with co-teaching. Lack of suitable space to locate two or more programs in same building or area. Transportation is a key issue for access to programs.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE June, 2004

12
1.2 Recommendation Curriculum alignment. The collaboration between classroom programs would be greatly enhanced if the teachers provided a similar instructional approach and curriculum. Utilizing a researched based preschool or early childhood curriculum would also improve outcomes for students. Barriers to implementation of Recommendation 1.2. Teachers and paraprofessionals adhere to models of instruction and curriculum standards that may provide adequate instruction for some children but not all. Specialized methods may be required for children with disabilities.

1.3

Recommendation Increase opportunities for school districts to provide early childhood special education services (Rule 55)9 in inclusive settings. The majority of 3 to 5 year old children with disabilities are educated in special education classrooms with other children with disabilities. Based upon examples highlighted in this document, alternative settings and models do exist. These alternative models are acceptable to parents and teachers, provide free and appropriate public education (FAPE), and the districts are able to receive the membership. Barriers to implementation of Recommendation 1.3. Educators and parents perceive that the special education classroom program model is the required placement. A lack of collaboration and respect between programs and agencies. Categorical funding restricts flexibility in offering inclusive opportunities.

2.0

Recommendations that will require rule changes. 2.1 Recommendation Flexible school year for ECSE (Rule 54)8 classroom programs. The traditional school calendar begins in August or September and ends in early June. Children benefit from comprehensive early childhood programs and services during the full year. Rules should allow programs to operate throughout the summer months without penalty. Distributing the typical 180 day full year program across 12 months instead of 9 months would provide this benefit.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE

June, 2004

13
Barriers to implementation of Recommendation 2.1. 2.2 MDE would need to change pupil accounting rules to support the more flexible model. The operation of classroom programs during the summer may be difficult for some districts due to the maintenance of the facility during the summer months. Transportation for summer programs may present challenges for school districts.

Recommendation - Flexible school year for ECSE (Rule 55)9 services. Part C Regulations of IDEA require year-round services to be available to children, ages birth to three. Typical school programs follow a 9 month calendar and usually stop in June and begin again in September. Young children with disabilities benefit from services full year or year-round services, yet, Rule 55 (b) states that services shall be provided for a minimum of 2 hours per week, but not less than 72 clock hours within 180 school days. Services may be provided in appropriate early childhood community or family settings. In addition, the Pupil Accounting Manual7 stipulates that services must be provided for a minimum of two hours per week. This minimum time allotment provides an incentive and recognition of the 2 hour-long service when families may need and want only 45 minute or 1 hour and 15 minutes per week service. There is no recognition of the benefits of a service tailored to the childs and familys needs. The Pupil Accounting Manual regulations create a program model inadvertently by disallowing any time less than 2 hours per week. This One-Size-Fits-All concept is not driven by the childs or familys needs, but by accounting standards that should be modified and more flexible. This pupil accounting rule discourages districts from the provision of services outside the 180 school day period. Regulations should allow: (a) (b) flexibility to distribute time across 12 months, staff to tailor instructional visits to time allocations that would take into consideration the individual needs of preschool children with disabilities.

2.3

Recommendation Require classroom teachers and para-educators for all state funded early childhood programs to have similar certification and credentials. Barrier to implementation of Recommendation 2.3. Pay or wage differentials between programs may cause inequities.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE June, 2004

14
2.4 Recommendation Allow classroom programs to consist of students with various determinants of eligibility. Students with a disability, tuition pay only students, low income students, and other students at-risk for developmental problems or learning failure may all be enrolled in the same program. Barrier to implementation of Recommendation 2.4. State and local authorities have little control over Head Start. Inadequate funding for most programs creates waiting lists. 2.5 Adopt uniform quality standards for all early childhood preschool programs. The standards would include stipulations for parent involvement/contact, number of days and hours, credentials for staff, nutritional component, and curriculum. By implementing recommendations 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5, the State of Michigan will have designed a fully inclusive, high quality, standards-based preschool classroom program that would be available for any preschool child. The foundation or membership grant provided for students with disabilities would follow the student.

2.6

3.0

MAASE also supports the following recommendations that would have a systemic impact on all preschool children. 3.1 3.2 3.3 Improved training and professional development for all early childhood services staff. Establishment of a set of universal quality standards. Support for a more comprehensive array of accessible and affordable programs for early childhood education and intervention services including: 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 3.3.5 Expanding public awareness. Offering universal developmental screening. Providing for more and improved parent education/parent involvement. Creating universally available preschool options from age three for all at-risk children. Providing ongoing services past the age of three for the at-risk and developmentally delayed children such as an expanded MSRP type option.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE

June, 2004

15
4.0 Future Directions: A Search for National Best Practices Michigan has one of the longest histories of early childhood special education in the nation. We have provided mandatory special education services to children birth to five since 1971. A disadvantage of being pioneers in special education is that we have years steeped in tradition, where funding systems and special education programs are out-of-synch with the principle of least restrictive environment and other national best practices. Our challenge for the future is to begin to implement researched-based practice in our early childhood programs for children birth through preschool age. Some of the practices that deserve our attention include the following: Using routines-based needs assessment as a tool for the development of outcomes for IFSPs.11, 12 Integrating therapy and special instruction in natural and/or inclusive early childhood environments.11, 12 Embedding intervention in daily routines by incorporating a designed intervention into a typical activity or routine.13

The efficacy of these methods is partially based on the principle that most intervention occurs between specialists visits. Therapy and instruction are most effective when they take place in the environments where the child needs to use skills, and that regular caregivers (such as parents and preschool teachers) need to have more ownership of the process in meeting the goals of these children with disabilities. We will need to embrace substantive change in Michigan to be able to take our early childhood programs and services to a new, more effective level.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE June, 2004

16

Suggested Next Steps

The Michigan Association of Administrators of Special Education (MAASE), a professional group of more than 500 school administrators, is in a unique position to effect change in the delivery of early childhood programs and services within the State of Michigan in collaboration with other stakeholders. Following the approval of the Executive Board, MAASE through advocacy in public education and early childhood forums can and should encourage the adoption and implementation of the recommendations in this report. The project workgroup identified a partial list of activities that would accomplish this overall goal.
Seek answers and solutions from MDE about implementation of recommendations that only require minor rule or policy adjustment (such as flexible calendars). Obtain MDE support for implementation of pilot best practice models so that schools are not penalized by a loss in student membership. This report is by no means comprehensive nor conclusive, further research identifying best practices would be warranted. Fully investigate national best practices occurring in other states. Identify national demonstration sites and consultants that could serve as resources to policy holders and potential change agents in Michigan. Visit other national sites to observe alternate practices. Seek support for recommendations from other professional educational organizations such as MAISA. Encourage MAASE representation, as a major stakeholder on statewide and regional boards and committees, to further the recommendations of this report.

A Report of the Birth to Five Early Childhood Services Project Workgroup MAASE

June, 2004

17

Gov. Granholm letter

References
1. Early On Michigan State Interagency Coordinating Council, Implementation Guide for Natural Environments, March 31, 2004. 2. Michigan State Board of Education Action Plan Priorities and Goals for Early Childhood Special Education. 3. MDE Memorandum from David Brock to the IDEA 97 and Integration of Part B and C Workgroup Participants, September 16, 1998. 4. Memorandum to Birth Mandate Coordinators from Ms. Jo Shackelford and Ms. Shelley deFosset regarding letters from Mr. Thomas Hehir clarifying the use of funds under Part B of IDEA to provide services for infants and toddlers. 5. Letter to Ms. Julie Curry, Iowa Department of Education from Mr. Thomas Hehir regarding the use of special education funds to serve infants and toddlers. 6. Letter to Dr. Gillung, Department of Education, Connecticut regarding the permissibility of parents paying for services. 7. Michigan Department of Education, Pupil Accounting Manual, Special Education Early Childhood Programs and Services, Revised 08/02. Pages 5K-1 to 5K-3. 8. Rule 340.1754, Early childhood special education programs. Michigan Administrative Rules for Special Education, OSE-EIS, MDE, 2002. 9. Rule 340.1755, Early childhood special education services. Michigan Administrative Rules for Special Education, OSE-EIS, MDE, 2002. 10.Memo from Jacquelyn J. Thompson, Ph.D., Director, OSE and EIS, MDE, February 6, 2004, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part C, Transition Guidelines from the Early On System. 11.Jung, L.A. (2003). More is better: Maximizing Natural Learning Opportunities. Young Exceptional Children, 6 (3), 21 - 26. 12.McWilliam R.A., & Scott, S. (2003). Integrating Therapy into the Classroom. National Individualizing Preschool Inclusion Project, Center for Child Development, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 415 Medical Center South, Nashville, TN. (August 2003). 13.Cripe, J.W. & Venn, M.L. (1997). Family guided routines for early intervention services. Young Exceptional Children, 1 (1), 18 - 26.

18

Birth to 5 Early Childhood Services

Project Workgroup
Copies of this document are available through the Michigan Association of Administrators of Special Education (MAASE) by contacting the Monroe County Intermediate School District at 734.242.5799, ext. 1410. It is also available on our website:

A Report of the

www.maase.org