Acknowledgements This document was the result of the collective effort of the National Early Childhood Transition Center (NECTC), National Early Childhood Technical ...
Text Previews (text result may be not accurate) March 2008
EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSITION PROCESSES
a collaborative partnership of
National Early Childhood Transition Center
This document was the result of the collecti
ve effort of the National Early Childhood
Transition Center (NECTC), National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center
(NECTAC), and the Regional Resource Centers (RRC). It was developed under the
auspices of the National Early Childhood
Transition Initiative, an OSEP-Directed
Technical Assistance activity established in 2007.
The Steering Committee of the Early Childh
ood Transition Initiative includes:
Ann Bailey, North Central RRC
Martha Diefendorf, NECTAC
Ron Dughman, Mountain Plains RRC
Gail Houle, OSEP
Grace Kelley, Southeast RRC
Rich Lewis, Mid-South RRC
Anne Lucas, Western RRC
Julia Martin, OSEP
Karen Mikkelsen, Northeast RRC
Phyllis Mondak, Virginia Section 619
Sharon Ringwalt, NECTAC
Pam Roush, West Virginia Part C
Kathy Whaley, NECTAC
Pam Christy, Colorado Parent Training
Institute
Marilyn Crocker, Facilitator, Crocker &
Associates
Linda Goodman, Connecticut Part C
Gloria Harbin, NECTC
Marilyn Hibbard, Florida Section 619
Maria Synodi, Connecticut Section 619
D’Lo Trejo, Florida Part C
We would like to express appreciation to the following persons for their contributions to
the organization and content of this document:
Introduction
Interagency Structures
– Grace Kelley and Sharon Ringwalt
Interagency Relationships and Communication
– Grace Kelley and Sharon Ringwalt
Content and Scope
Policy Alignment and Continuity
– Ann Bailey
Interagency
greements
Personnel Development
Data Systems
– Anne Lucas and Martha Diefendorf
Monitoring and Evaluation
– Ron Dughman and Rich Lewis
Effective
Transition
of
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................
Purpose and Use of the Document ..............................................................1
Organization of
the Document .....................................................................3
Component I: Content and Scope ........................................................................7
Component II: Interagency Structure....................................................................11
Component III: Interagency Commu
nication and Re
lationsh
ips
Component IV: Interagency Agreements ...........................................................18
Component V: Policy Alignment and Congruence ..........................................2
Component VI: Personnel Development
, Staff Training
and Resour
ces
........2
Component VII: Data Systems and Processes ....................................................3
Component VIII: Monitori
ng and Eval
uation
Content and Scope of Service System..................................................
Interagency Structure...............................................................................
Interagency Relationship
s and Communications................................
Interagency Agreements.........................................................................
Policy Alignment and Congruity.............................................................
Personnel Development, Sta
ff Training & Re
sources...........................
Data Systems and Processes...................................................................
Monitoring and
Evaluation......................................................................
Appendices
A. Conceptual Framew
ork for this Paper ..................................................
B. State of the Evidence in Early Childhood Education .........................
C. References.................................................................................................
D. Organizations and Other
General Re
sources ......................................
The Office of Special Education Prog
rams (OSEP) recognized the need for a
systematic and strategic technical assistance approach to support the states,
territories and jurisdictions in their impl
sition requirements
of the Individuals with Disabilities Ed
ucation Improvement Act (IDEA) (34 CFR
303.148 and 34 CFR 300.124). An analysis of
state performance on the transition
compliance indicators as reported in
their Annual Performance Reports (APR)
demonstrated a need for system im
provement and enhancement (NECTAC,
2007).
Resources were approved for the crea
tion of a National Early Childhood
Transition Initiative to support collabo
rative technical assi
stance activities
focused on improving state lead agencie
requirements of the IDEA. The Initiative
states’ capacity to
This Initiative represents a collaborative
technical assistance
effort of OSEP, the
and
Use
of
the
Document
A primary purpose of this document is
to improve state and local performance
on the Annual Performance Report indicato
rs specifically rela
ted to transition
(Part C Indicator 8; Part B Indicator 12).
There is recognition that transition is
connected to many other APR indicators
. The transition requirements as
outlined in the IDEA oper
ate within the context of
numerous legal requirements
such as child find, child outcomes, chil
d evaluation, family involvement, timely
services, preschool least restrictive
environment (LRE) and individualized
education program (IEP) development an
d implementation. Many of these
implementation practices are also
present within the SPP and APR as
performance and compliance indicators.
Therefore, technical assistance and
training efforts for transition should no
t be conducted in isolation from other
efforts to improve system performance.
When these other indicators are directly
connected to transition from early inte
rvention to preschool special education
services, they have been included in th
is document. See the documents on the
SPP/APR Planning Calendar entitled
Part B SPP/APR Related Requirements
(Office of Special Education Progra
ms, 2008) and Part C SPP/APR Related
Requirements (Office of Sp
ecial Education Programs,
2008) for a delineation of
the IDEA requirements related to tran
sition for Indicato
This document is designed as a framew
ork and tool to be used by states,
territories and jurisdictions when analyzing
their transition system infrastructure
and identifying interventions and stra
tegies for improving early childhood
transition practices at the state and local level. While the primary focus of this
framework is on the transition from Part C to Part B, it also takes into
consideration other key agencies that
The framework was developed specifically
for use by technical assistance staff
of OSEP, RRCs, NECTAC, and NECTC to su
pport strategic planning efforts with
states. It is not meant to be a needs as
sessment, but rather provides a process
for analyzing system and program components. State agencies and their
technical assistance entities will also find
this framework useful in their efforts to
systematically identify and improve lo
cal implementation of
requirements of the IDEA as well as suppo
rting effective local infrastructures for
effective transition practices.
This framework is meant to be useful to
states as they analyze their systems and
select evidence-based improvement stra
tegies reflecting the most current
research and recommended practice. This
systemic approach is necessary in
designing high quality systems and servic
es; this also impacts state and local
performance on APR indicators. At the sa
me time, there is re
cognition that the
local, state and national climate, political realities and availability of resources
For the transition of young children with
disabilities, an underlying spirit and
critical component in regulatory mandat
es for both Parts C and B of IDEA is
collaboration. This responsibility falls
the national, state
and local level. Integral partners in this
process are the families of children who
receive services through IDEA programs.
For the transition of children at age
three, the major responsibility for transi
tion falls to the st
ate lead agencies to
facilitate collaboration across prog
rams. Interagency efforts require
collaborative leadership, resource co
mmitment and participation by all
agencies providing services to children and
their families. Havi
ng a shared vision
and key principles to guide transition effo
rts is vital both wi
thin (intra-agency)
of
the
Document
This document describes broad, but essential components for an effective
infrastructure to develop, support an
d maintain early childhood transition
practices (Harbin & Rous, 2007;
McCullough & Whaley, 2007). A
component
represents a major aspect of a system or
framework that is integral to the
efficacy of the system. Each compo
nent contains a list of sub-components
which are then operationalized with specific evidences. Table
essed in this document. It should
be noted that while all of the components and elements are considered
necessary for an effective infrastructure
, a state lead agency might be unable
to attend to all elements at once. Reco
gnizing this fact, states may opt to
thoughtfully consider which elements best
address their unique context, address
their most critical transition issues, an
sired transition and
system outcomes.
is an observable policy, produc
t, training strategy, event, or
practice that can be measured or produced to document or demonstrate that
a component or element is in place. It
is an indicator of accountability for a
component and its elements. Therefor
e, the evidences provided for each
element are simply a list of possible
processes and action
s demonstrating the
existence of a practice and
are not intended to be a required or exhaustive list.
Evidences are described as possibly occu
rring at different levels: interagency,
interagency, state and/or local. Fo
r example, for some components, an
evidence may be present at an inte
ragency level indi
cating that the
participation of more than one program or
agency is required for the practice
to be effective. For other compo
nents, an evidence may need to be
implemented at a local program and/or
state agency level. Evidences could,
and in fact many times should be pr
esent at more than one level, thus
demonstrable in a local program, a
state agency and as an interagency
activity.
The components and elements contained
in Table 1 reflect efforts of the
National Early Childhood Transition Center
to define a conceptual framework for
transition (Rous, Hallam, Harbin,
McCormick & Jung, 2007; Rous, Harbin &
McCormick, 2007; Harbin, Rous, Peeler
, Schuster & McCormick, 2007), and
identify key practices (Rous, 2007). It
also represents the efforts of NECTAC
(McCullough & Whaley, 2007) to identi
fy key considerations for providing
technical assistance to address the APR tr
ansition indicators. Both efforts have
built on the known research and conventional wisdom for effective transition
practices. For more information about
the conceptual framework undergirding
this paper as well as the evidence su
pporting it, please see the Appendix.
Scope of
Families have access to a broad array of child developmental and educational services, supports,
Families have access to a broad array of health an
d medical services to promote overall well-being in
Families have access to a broad array
of services to support their needs.
Structure
An interagency entity (or entities) exists and has membership with the authority to influence agencies’
transition policies and procedures.
A shared philosophy serves as a foundation for tran
A primary contact person for transition is identifie
d within each program or agency at the state and
local level (e.g., Part C, Section 619, LEA).
Communication
Effective, ongoing mechanisms for communicatio
Working relationships among agencies
/programs and staff are effective.
Parent organizations and family consumers meaningfully
participate as partners
in transition planning
efforts at all levels.
Agreements
(IA/MOU/MOA)
The Interagency Agreement provides clear statements
of transition processes in compliance with
federal and state regulations.
Agency roles and responsibilities relate
d to transition are clearly assigned.
Critical policies are specified in the Interagency Agreement.
Format, content, and level of specificity of stat
e-level agreements serve as a model for local
agreements.
Interagency agreements are routinely reviewed
and revised based on data
input from
1 Content for this section was informed by McCullough & Whaley ( 2007)
2 Interagency Agreement, Memorandum of Understanding, and Memora
ndum of Agreement are all used interchangeably under the meanin
g given in 34
CFR 303.523, and also may include documents
of a similar nature at the local level.
Alignment &
Congruence
Transition requirements and timeli
nes are aligned across agencies.
Curriculum development and expectations for child interventions and performance are delineated
and aligned across agencies.
Procedures for coordination of services are
implemented effectively.
Mechanisms to minimize disruption in services be
fore, during, and after transitions are developed.
Development,
Resources
Designated personnel or entities at state, regional
and local levels share responsibility for interagency
training and technical assistance.
Personnel development activities are jointly design
ed, implemented, and evaluated by agencies and
programs involved.
Parents are involved in the design, implementation
and evaluation of professional development.
Mechanisms exist at the local level to inform
personnel development activities and promote
Programs require and support participation of cross ag
ency representation at joint training activities.
and Processes
Data system capacity allows for the collection of necessary data to support effective transition within
Programs have protocols for data entry to suppo
rt accurate and timely collection of data.
Protocols and procedures for data sharing across agencies are clearly defined.
Analysis and use of transition da
ta improves performance across agencies and addresses interagency
transition issues.
Data collected through monitoring regarding transi
tion are analyzed and used for decision-making
within and across programs.
Evaluation
State monitoring of federal and state transiti
on requirements is aligned across agencies.
Interagency participation is an integral
part of state monitoring activities.
Evaluation is an integral part of al
l components of the transition system.
OMPONENT
The scope of the early care and education
systems both across and within states is
diverse and varied. One key component of
the transition process is the ability of
the IFSP/IEP team to make decisions abou
t the service and support needs of a child
at age three based on the child’s uniq
ue strengths and needs. Due to the
individualized nature of fa
mily identified str
engths and needs, children and families
often require access to services and su
pports above and beyond those provided
under IDEA. For example, families with
children receiving early childhood special
education services may also need child ca
re in order to continue to work and
support their fami
lies. Families may also find they
need additional therapeutic or
In addition to understanding the varied
needs of families and children for a wide
range of services and resources, it is also
critical that the IFSP/IEP team consider the
importance of child health and well-being
on children’s overall development and,
ultimately, their outcomes. This includes,
but is not limited to
mental and emotional
health; well child medical/he
alth visits and services;
dental, vision, and hearing
services; specialty medical services; and
other child tracking and developmental
services. This requires that direct serv
ice staff understand the array of services
available at the state and local levels so
they can share this
information with
families. Program staff need to be able to
work with families to coordinate services
and supports that may traditionally have
been provided independently of each
other. Effective transition planning
quires program staff to appropriately refer
and support famil
participation across programs and services.
Elements
HAVE
BROAD
ARRAY
CHILD
DEVELOPMENTAL
AND
EDUCATIONAL
SERVICES,
AND/OR
SETTINGS
CHILD
FAMILY
Level
Level
Interagency Agreements (IA) / Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU)
, are up to date and include information about the specific
State and/or local directories or
lists of programs (e.g., early
intervention program, Head Start, public preschool program) are
.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Staff know key information about a broad array of education
agencies and developmental services within the community to which
child may transition.
State and/or local directories or
lists of programs and community-
based options are used by program staff and shared with families.
IFSP/Transition Plans document that development and education are
addressed based on individual ch
ild and family needs as well as
concerns identified by the family and team.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Interagency Agreement, Memorandum of Understanding, and Memorandum of Agreement are all used
interchangeably under the meaning given in 34 CFR 303.523, and also may include documents of a similar
nature at the local level.
HAVE
BROAD
ARRAY
HEALTH
AND
OVERALL
CHILD
FAMILY
Level
Level
Interagency agreements are up to date and provide specific
information on service arrangements that support non-duplication and
non-supplanting of services.
2. A centralized information/referral system is in place and used that
includes a wide range of resources related to child health, well-being
and overall development (e.g., 1-800 number or web site).
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
State
Level
Level
Staff know key information about a broad array of health and medical
agencies and services within community to which the child may
transition.
State and/or local directories or lists of health and medical resources
are used by program staff and shared with families.
IFSP/Transition Plans document that child health and well-being are
addressed based on individual child and family needs and concerns
identified by the family and team.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
HAVE
BROAD
ARRAY
Level
Level
A directory or list of family resource and support services is available
and is used (e.g., support groups, respite care).
Parent information and training sessions are offered regarding
available resources and supports.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Specific items are included on family evaluation tools and survey forms
to assess:
satisfaction with the supports received during transition planning
the utilization of information about and access to family support
services.
Parent training sessions are offered regarding available resources and
supports for families.
Families report an awareness of available parent training, information,
support and advocacy services and use these services if needed.
The IFSP section on “Other Servic
Both Part C and Section 619 general supervision processes reveal data
that reflect families were offered information on needed
services/supports/resources.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
OMPONENT
Transition, by its very nature, is an inte
ragency process requiring collaboration and
coordination. Rous, Hallam, Harbin, Mc
Cormick, and Jung (2007, 2005) describe a
supportive interagency structure as critic
al to support and sustain relationship
To be effective, a state level interagency
entity (or entities) mu
st be comprised of
members with the authority to influenc
e agencies’ transition policies and
procedures. An interagency entity might be
an existing or newly formed group, but
its charge is that of supporting and main
taining effective and compliant transition
policies and practices. Structurally, the
group might be a counci
l, committee, task
force or work group based on the unique si
tuation of a state. Interagency entities
at the regional or local level can serv
e the same purposes of planning and
coordinating transition practices.
ity is the definition
involved partners and their le
vel of involvement in deci
sion-making. Another key
function of the interagency
velopment of a shared philosophy to
serve as the foundation for transition poli
It is important to consider the involvem
ent and expertise of parents, personnel,
advocates, and community members in designing the structure to support
communication, problem-solving and policy
development for the early childhood
transition process. It should be noted
that while all personnel or stakeholders may
not need to be involved in every deci
sion, a group is needed to ensure that
decisions are made with the appr
opriate stakeholder input.
A key element of an effective interagenc
y structure is the presence of dedicated
personnel within state agencies and loca
l programs to focus specifically on
transition. At the state agency level,
agency and its stakeholders by participating in
councils or work groups focusing on
transition system processes. This contac
t person might be involved in the design,
coordination and implementation of tr
aining and technical assistance. A
designated contact person in a regional
or local program might more directly
support effective transition planning for ch
ildren and families as part of the IFSP
process by ensuring that
The mere presence of an interagency entity
may not be sufficient to effect change
and maintain desired efforts. Effe
ctive and productive communication,
relationship building and coordination are also necessary.
Elements
INTERAGENCY
ENTITY
AND
AUTHORITY
INFLUENCE
AGENCIES’
TRANSITION
POLICIES
Level
Level
The interagency group coordinates with the leadership in each
respective agency.
interagency group addresses issues and concerns that are
substantiated by data.
Written documentation of intera
gency group efforts, such as
minutes/recommendations/decisions, exist.
Group members report progress on actions taken.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Key staff in early childhood programs are able to identify the
interagency group/entity.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
PHILOSOPHY
FOUNDATION
TRANSITION
THE
Interagency (across programs) and Within Programs
Level
Level
A clearly stated vision and philosophy for transition exists and is
accessible.
The vision and philosophy address ch
ild and family outcomes related
to their preparation for and adjustment to transition.
Policies and procedures are guided by a common vision and
Policies and procedures include a focus on child and family outcomes
as an impact of transition practices.
Policies and procedures are clearl
y stated and reflect compliance
with federal and state regulati
ons and requirements.
Policies and procedures clearly delineate program-specific
responsibilities as compared to interagency responsibilities.
Policies and procedures are accessible.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Level
Level
Mechanisms are in place for contact information to be available and
easily accessible through multiple venues/formats by families and
service providers.
2.
raining
evaluation and follow-up information
demonstrate that
staff
use primary contact information to support families and children in
transition.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
A PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON FOR TRANSITION IS IDENTIFIED WITHIN EACH
Within Programs
Level
Level
Polices and procedures include the role of coordinating transition as a
staff function.
Job descriptions and responsibilities for specific individuals include
transition roles and functions.
A designated contact person is assigned to communicate with
parents, share information regarding transition and conduct home
visits, when appropriate.
A designated contact person is assigned to coordinate transition
planning activities and communications with other agencies.
IFSPs (transition plan) document the name of the contact person for
the receiving agency and his/her contact information.
Staff have knowledge of who the primary contact person is for
transition within each sending and receiving agency or program.
Training evaluation and follow-up information demonstrate that staff
use primary contact information to support families and children in
transition.
Exit survey/family interview forms contain item(s) about family
knowledge of who the contact person is/was during transition.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
OMPONENT
OMMUNICATION
Effective interagency relationships are cr
itical to ensure the success of both the
interagency structure and the alignment of policies and processes. Collaborative
working relationships are ultimately resp
onsible for the success or failure of an
interagency activity. Even though an interage
ncy entity exists, it will have less than
optimal impact if the members of the gr
oup have not developed functional and
respectful relationships.
The success of interagency efforts
is dependent upon frequent, clear
communication of both individual members an
d agencies. This is facilitated by the
development of ongoing
mechanisms for communica
Leadership is critical in sett
ing the tone for collaboration at
all levels. The individual
roles and responsibilities of participatin
g agencies,
dged. At times, the use of an outside facilitator can
expedite this process and build strong
team support for the work ahead.
Forming strong individual relationships can
also lead to more effective partnerships
and problem solving. Additionally, in
with strong relationships and open communi
cation may be more open to inclusive
and collaborative practices that encourage
the input and involvement of family
members and parent organizations.
Elements
EFFECTIVE
ONGOING
MECHANISMS
COMMUNICATION
BETWEEN
AND
AGENCIES
Level
Level
A shared vision and principles form the basis of communication,
problem solving and decision making.
Responses to questions and public comment are timely and posted
(when appropriate).
A stakeholder listserv provides information and support regarding early
childhood transition.
The mechanisms for interagency communication are regularly
reviewed for effectiveness.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
AMONG
AGENCIES/PROGRAMS
EFFECTIVE.
Level
Level
Communication is frequent and includes both informal and formal
contacts.
Interactions are characterized primarily by constructive problem-
solving.
Members of interagency groups have an understanding and respect
for each other and their respecti
ve agencies
including how they
operate
available resources
constraints and limitations.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Interagency (across programs) and Within Programs
Level
Level
Communication within and across agencies is guided by legal and
Agency and staff roles and responsibilities for transition activities are
clearly defined.
Staff understand protocols for communication and problem-solving.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
ORGANIZATIONS
FAMILY
CONSUMERS
MEANINGFULLY
PARTICIPATE
PARTNERS
PLANNING
LEVELS.
Level
Level
Families receive the information they need in order to meaningfully
participate as partners in interagency transition planning efforts.
Individualized supports are available for family participation in
transition planning, training and other activities.
Family members and parent organizations are actively involved in
transition processes, activities, supports and systems, including the
development of materials and products related to transition.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Families have the information they need to successfully participate in
planning for their children’s transition.
Family members actively participate as
part of their child’s transition
planning team.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
OMPONENT
An Interagency Agreement (IA) is a do
cument developed be
agencies or programs that defines a shared vision, explicit responsibilities and
actions of each agency within a specified time period
. An IA can define how these
agencies share data, train progra
For the transition process to be timely
and effective, Interagency Agreements
For the implementation of Interagency Ag
reements to be successful, stakeholders
should actively participate in their de
velopment. Agencies represented on the
state’s Interagency Coordinating Council
(SICC) and State Advisory Council (SAC)
should be involved in developing and of
ficially signing the State’s Interagency
Agreements. In addition
, Regional or
ocal ICCs, in co
llaboration with local school
districts or LEAs, may develop their ow
n Interagency Agreements that are broad-
based or that relate specifically to transi
The Interagency Agreement formalizes the tr
ansition processes and activities that
initiate determination of program eligibilit
y and facilitate services in appropriate
environments. They outline the specific po
licies and procedures that each program
Interagency Agreement, Memorandum of Understanding, and Memorandum of Agreement are all used
interchangeably under the meaning given in 34 CFR 303.523, and also may include documents of a similar
nature at the local level.
Elements
INTERAGENCY
AGREEMENT
STATEMENTS
TRANSITION
COMPLIANCE
WITH
FEDERAL
AND
STATE
REGULATIONS.
Level
Level
A clear statement of values and philosophy to guide and support
effective transitions for childr
en and families is included.
A statement regarding transition planning exists that addresses who,
what, when, where, and how.
A statement regarding roles and responsibilities of programs and
individual staff is included.
A statement related to the timely notification of the appropriate
agency is included.
A statement regarding timelines for tran
sition activities is included.
A statement regarding the inclusion of
parents and families in transition
activities is included.
Specific information about service arrangements to support non-
duplication or non-supplanting of services is included.
Information about the specific li
nkages and coordination efforts
Program staff understand that specific policies and regulations are
contained within state and local agreements.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
AGENCY
AND
TRANSITION
Level
Level
Roles and responsibilities are clearly assigned to participating agencies
in interagency agreements.
Written information about the agreed-upon roles and responsibilities in
interagency agreements is available to program staff and families in
understandable formats.
Interagency Agreements delineate steps of transition process and
responsibilities of sending/receiving agencies.
An Interagency Dispute Resolution process is described with clear
specification of re-negotiation procedures.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Personnel with responsibility for addressing specific requirements of the
interagency agreement are clearly identified within programs and
agencies.
Program staff can clearly communicate their roles and responsibilities.
Program staff implement their roles an
d responsibilities in a timely and
correct manner.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
CRITICAL
THE
INTERAGENCY
AGREEMENT.
Level
Level
Accountability for the allocation and expenditure of resources is
specified in the interagency ag
.
Coordinated child find and notification procedures are described,
including timelines, roles and responsibilities.
The role of the ICC related to child find and notification is specified.
Data sharing procedures are clearly delineated,
e.g., who, what, how,
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
FORMAT,
CONTENT,
LEVEL
SPECIFICITY
LEVEL
AGREEMENTS
AGREEMENTS.
Level
Level
State-level format is adapt
able for local use, including a
sample/example.
State-level Interagency Agreements provide written guidance for
specific local procedures.
Required components of a local Interagency Agreement are
specified by the state agencies.
State provides technical assistance and support to facilitate the
development and implementation of local agreements.
Local agreements are up-to-date and are implemented as written.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
INTERAGENCY
REVIEWED
DATA
INPUT
Level
Level
Interagency
greements are regularly reviewed to assess their
functionality
effectiveness and are updated as needed.
Interagency agreements are updated to reflect changes in federal
and state law.
Evaluation of effectiveness incl
udes feedback from families.
Interagency
greements should be on agenda of SICC and SAC at
least annually.
Interagency
greements are used at major agency planning events.
Partners, including ICC members, parents, and collaborating agencies,
State agencies monitor local Interagency Agreements and how well
they are being implemented
Local interagency agreements are updated to reflect changes in
federal and state law.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Agencies have mechanisms for input into the functioning of the
interagency agreement.
10.
Feedback and input from state and
local staff regarding interagency
agreement implementation are consid
ered by the lead agency in the
review process.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
OMPONENT
Quality transition services for all childr
en exiting the Part C/Early Intervention
program are best defined as
“a carefully planned, proa
ctive, outcome-oriented
process initiated by the primary service
provider who works with the family and
other agencies to develop a coordinated an
d collaborative plan to move children
to a new program” (McNulty,
1989, p. 159). Quality transiti
on is highly dependent on
the participating agencies/systems engagi
ng in a shared vision with shared
policies, procedures and practices.
However, research by Harbin, Dana
her, and Derrick (
1994) and Danaher,
Shackelford, and Harbin (2004) suggested that
many states actually have policies
Policy congruence and alignment of pr
actices across programs has a direct
impact on service delivery systems. Spec
ifically, positive transition outcomes for
children and families are dependent on the
continuity of services, curricula, and
expectations (Entwisle & Alexander, 1998
). Policy alignment and congruence are
particularly important for those early chil
dhood transitions which occur during
LEA calendar breaks in services (e.g.
summer months and holiday breaks).
for these special circumstances is particular
ly challenging. It is
participating agencies
mechanisms to provide services and supports to
children and families
during these times.
Elements
TRANSITION
REQUIREMENTS
TIMELINES
ALIGNED
ACROSS
AGENCIES.
Level
Level
Interagency Agreements address any misalignment or incongruity
A Transi
tion Manual explain
requirements and timelines is
developed by all agencies and provided to parents.
3. Agencies jointly plan and im
plement notification requirements.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Staff have knowledge of how to access referral and enrollment
processes and
timelines of sending and receiving
Training evaluation and follow-up information demonstrates staff use
referral and enrollment information to
support families and children in
transition.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
DEVELOPMENT
AND
EXPECTATIONS
CHILD
AND
ALIGNED
ACROSS
AGENCIES
Level
Level
Receiving agency staff will visit sending programs to
programs that children have attended and to help
plan a smooth
transition.
Staff have knowledge of how curricula, intervention experiences, and
expectations
children are aligned across sending and receiving
Training evaluation and follow-up information demonstrat
e staff use
curricula and guidelines/standards to support instruction and
intervention.
IFSPs/IEPs have outcomes/goals related to alignment of the child’s skills
and knowledge as part of transition planning.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Administrators are provided early childhood training, information on
developmentally appropriate practices, and opportunities to spend
time in early childhood classrooms.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
COORDINATION
SERVICES
EFFECTIVELY
Level
Level
Transition procedures are
y described
.
Transition procedures include opportunities at different points in the
transition process for families, childr
en and providers to visit receiving
agency programs.
Parent orientation is jointly developed and provided at receiving
program and agency sites.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
IEP teams consider the individualized needs of the child and family
and include transition objectives on the IEP as appropriate.
A family services notebook or handbook is created to organize all
papers,( e.g., medical information, IFSPs, evaluation results, early
intervention staff names and contact information.)
Pictures, social stories, child’s
preferences, and videotape of the
child.
Teaching strategies to implement/avoid for child.
Contact information of child’s of previous service
coordinators/service providers.
Primary contact persons are identifi
ed within each program/agency.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
MINIMIZE
DISRUPTION
AND
TRANSITIONS
Level
Level
Agencies consider funding overlap services during the 6 months
prior to child’s third birthday.
For children whose birth date is
during or immediately before the
summer break, procedures are in place to ensure that children
suspected of needing extended school year services are given
appropriate consideration by their IEP Team.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
OMPONENT
AND
All levels and types of personnel in agenci
es should have a basic understanding of
the legal requirements, policies, roles and re
sponsibilities of each
other’s programs.
The more knowledgeable personnel in ag
encies are about each other’s programs,
the more effective they will be at negotiati
ng successful transitions for children and
their families. While knowledge of lega
l transition requirements is critically
important, it may not be sufficient for ens
uring the implementatio
n of high quality
practices. Personnel development must also
picture” related to
the differences and similarities
of the early childhood systems, in particular the roles
and practices of service providers.
Personnel from Part C and Part B involved
in transition activities must know key
information about a broad array of agencies
and services within the community to
which the child may transition, as well as
knowledge of how curricula, intervention
experiences, and expectations for chil
d growth and development are aligned
across sending and receiving
programs. Effective tran
sition planning requires
personnel to be knowledgeable about how to access and conduct referral and
enrollment processes, observe timelines
of sending and receiving programs, and
identify key individuals resp
onsible for functioning as
the primary contacts for
transition within each
agency or program.
Within this broader systems level approa
ch, personnel development systems should
not only be driven by the needs of the
state and local systems responsible for
services, but should also reflect needs id
entified by family consumers. Family
members, as well as parent tr
aining and support organizations, are integral partners
tation of an effective in
frastructure for personnel
development on transition.
Personnel development activities shou
ld be designed using evidence-based
practices. The design should include pre-
service, in-service, on
-the-job training and
technical assistance. A va
riety of strategies, including mentoring and coaching
experiences, should be employed rather than
focusing on single training events.
Systematic and ongoing training and techni
cal assistance
function of
general supervision and on-site monitoring.
It is important that
state-level staff
model behaviors and practices that demo
nstrate effective teaming,
intra-and
interagency coordination and ongoing communication.
evaluating personnel development
activities in order to measure changes in
personnel practices, as well as overall
of personnel deve
lopment activities.
Elements
PERSONNEL
ENTITIES
REGIONAL
RESPONSIBILILTY
FOR
INTERAGENCY
TRAINING
AND
Level
An interagency advisory group that includes representation by family
members informs the coordination of training and TA efforts.
Contracts and interagency agreements include agency roles and
coordination responsibilities for personnel development activities.
Special collaborative training initiatives and projects are established to
coordinate training and TA for transition.
Contact information for designated trainers, consultants or TA providers
responsible for coordinating and providing TA is available.
The Part C CSPD plan includes partner input and addresses the need
for an interagency and coordinated approach to identified transition
issues.
Interests of significant cultural groups in a state are represented on
advisory groups and inform training and TA efforts.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Level
Level
Agencies and programs designate staff as responsible for transition
.
Job descriptions for designated personnel include responsibilities and
time allotted for coordinating and providing interagency training and
TA.
Program staff know who to contact for information, training and
resources.
10.
Program staff understand the importance of a statewide interagency
approach to personnel development regarding transition.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
PERSONNEL
DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES
JOINTLY
IMPLEMENTED,
EVALUATED
AGENCIES
PROGRAMS
INVOLVED.
Level
Level
An interagency advisory group, including representation by
stakeholders such as family members and parent organizations informs
personnel development design, implementation and evaluation.
2. Personnel development activities
are provided reflecting the
collaboration of Part C and Part B agencies and include other
agencies as appropriate (e.g., Head Start, child care).
3. Personnel development activities reflect a common philosophy and
shared values for transition.
4. Agencies jointly support the development, dissemination and
evaluation of training modules and resource materials.
5. Agencies jointly establish, fund and support special training initiatives
and projects to focus on transition.
6. Professional development activities
teach providers to use culturally
sensitive approaches to transition planning with families.
7. Professional development activities are designed to support the skills
needed to work with specific cultures and populations served by all
agencies involved.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Level
Level
8. Personnel within agencies report confidence in working with specific
cultures or populations in transition planning.
9. Agencies and programs employ personnel who reflect the cultural
populations of their service area.
10. Program staff attendance is encouraged and financially supported for
personnel development activities reflecting interagency collaboration.
11. Attendance at jointly sponsored personnel development activities
stimulates dialogue and problem-solving within programs regarding
collaborative practices and transition.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
THE
AND
EVALUATION
PERSONNEL
DEVELOPMENT.
Level
Level
Family members are represented on
the interagency advisory group
that informs personnel development and TA efforts.
Family members and parent training organizations provide input into
the development of transition activities, products and processes.
3. Specific strategies, resources and materials are developed to support
family participation and leadership in personnel development
activities.
4. Family members receive the training and support they need in order to
participate effectively in designing and implementing personnel
development activities.
5. Family members and parent training organization staff have roles in
training, facilitation and presentations.
6. Parent training, information and
support organizations participate as
partners in personnel development.
7. Family members are able to describe examples of their participation in
professional development activities.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Level
Level
8. Families served within programs receive training resources and
materials on transition that have been developed with parental input.
9. Family members are recruited by and supported within agencies to
participate in designing and implementing personnel development
activities.
10. Family members describe examples of their participation in
professional development activities to
other families within a program.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
THE
LOCAL
INFORM
PERSONNEL
DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES
AND
Level
Level
Local action plans exist and address transition concerns.
Local interagency councils or groups sponsor activities to address
transition issues.
Local and regional teams exist in communities and examine the
efficacy of transition and interagency practices on a routine basis.
Required annual training events on
transition provide opportunities
during the agenda for team discussion and problem-solving.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
A
DEVELOPMENT
KNOWLEDGE
TIME.
Level
Level
Information on effective transition
practices and legal requirements is
embedded in preservice courses, practicum experiences and
curricula.
A variety of training and TA strategies are used, including coaching
and mentoring.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Staff orientation processes include the topic of transition.
Staff development and performance plans include transition when
appropriate.
Supervisors within programs provide support and opportunities to
discuss staff practices.
Practicum and field-based activities are available within programs.
Training and TA is provided on-the-job whenever possible with supports
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
PROGRAMS
SUPPORT
THE
PARTICIPATION
CROSS
AGENCY
TRAINING
ACTIVITIES
Level
Level
Joint activities are designed and implemented by Part C and Part B
programs which include other agencies as appropriate.
Training goals or participant outcomes include cross-agency problem-
solving, discussion, networking or planning.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Level
Level
Program staff from different agencies can describe each other’s rules
and policies accurately.
Program staff know the personnel in other agencies and contact them
when necessary.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
OMPONENT
YSTEMS
ROCESSES
Data systems that provide states with the
capacity to collect the necessary Part C
and Part B child/student level data can hel
p to: a) support effective transition
processes and positive transition outcomes
for children and families; b) respond to
SPP/APR transition indicators; c) inform policies and practices; and d) improve
program performance. The fields
in the data system(s) should assist early
intervention programs with notification
to the LEA and support early intervention
Data collected must be accurate, reliab
le and timely. To help ensure accurate
data entry, state data systems
includ
e error checks to identify computational
bable entries (e.g., transi
tion date before program
start date). Also, the Lead Agency and
SEA, as well as local early intervention
programs and LEAs, must have procedures
in place to verify that data are being
entered correctly and in a consistent
manner. For example, clear data entry
instructions and procedures should be in
place, as well as training and ongoing
technical assistance to ensure that data entry personnel understand the data
fields. Local early intervention programs an
d LEAs must also have an understanding
of how to print reports and use
the data for program improvement.
Data sharing across the SEA and Lead Agenc
y, as well as across early intervention
programs and LEAs, is important for tracking
children who transition from Part C to
Part B. Data sharing across agencies ca
Elements
DATA
SYSTEM
CAPACITY
ALLOWS
THE
COLLECTION
NECESSARY
DATA
SUPPORT
EFFECTIVE
TRANSITION
Within Programs
Level
Level
Specific data fields are included in the data system to respond to APR
transition indicator measurements including:
notification to LEA [Part C],
timely transition conference or reasons for delay including
exceptional family circumstances [Part C],
FAPE at age three or reasons for delay including parental refusal
[Part B].
2. Specific data fields are included in the data system to ensure timely
and effective transitions including:
deadline date for making notification to LEA (Part C),
latest date that transition referral can be made to ensure FAPE
at age three (Part C),
earliest and latest date that transition conference can be held
(Part C),
number of days after age 3 that services begin (Part B).
3. The data system is designed to help improve timeliness via electronic
triggers that remind users of timelines.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
PROGRAMS
HAVE
PROTOCOLS
DATA
ACCURATE
DATA
Within Programs
Level
Level
Accurate, timely, and reliable data are available as a result of:
Data entry manuals that describe/define the data entry fields,
Documentation of ongoing training on data collection,
Written processes for validating data accuracy,
State resource personnel that prov
ide TA on data fields, entry,
accuracy,
FAQ documents about data collection.
2. Data are routinely collected throughout the year.
Additional evidences may be
added, as appropriate.
PROTOCOLS
PROCEDURES
DATA
ACROSS
AGENCIES
DEFINED
Level
Level
Mechanisms are in place to share data across Parts C (Lead Agency)
and B (SEA) (e.g., common identifier, data sharing protocol, common
Data sharing agreement (e.g., memorandum of understanding)
addresses procedures related to sharing of data, confidentiality,
Guidance is publicly available that describes what data can be
shared across Part C and Part B and the circumstances when data
cannot be shared (e.g., Part B cannot share Part C data with other
initiatives).
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
ANALYSIS
TRANSITION
IMPROVES
AGENCY
AND
ADDRESSES
INTERAGENCY
TRANSITION
ISSUES
Within Programs
Level
Level
The data system generates reports needed to evaluate the agency’s
transition practices.
Data reports are produced on a regular basis and upon request.
Data is routinely analyzed and used to drill down to root causes of
service issues as well as to track progress in addressing those issues.
Program staff find the data reports useful for making improvements
around transition.
Program staff know how to display the transition data in order to
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
DATA
COLLECTED
THROUGH
MONITORING
TRANSITION
ANALYZED
USED
DECISION
MAKING
PROGRAMS.
Across Programs
Level
Level
Transition data is analyzed across agencies and with parent
involvement.
The development of the APR includes input of other relevant agencies.
The decisions and recommendations of the State Interagency
Coordinating Council (SICC) and State Advisory Council (SAC)
are
data-driven based on documented monitoring results.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Transition is chosen for focused
monitoring if indicated by data.
Analysis of data includes a broader look at transition beyond just
indicator measurement.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
OMPONENT
State systems are accountable for enforcing
the transition re
quirements of IDEA
and for ensuring continuous improvement of
program performance. SPP Indicators
C-8 and B-12 clearly delineate expectations for measuring transition compliance.
However, accountability should also in
clude a focus on improving results and
functional outcomes for infants, toddlers,
preschoolers and their families. This can
be achieved through monitoring that syst
provide management and providers with
an understanding of the extent of
progress, achievement, and use of allocated funds.
Selected monitoring activities must ensur
e continuous examination of performance
for compliance
and
Element
MONITORING
FEDERAL
AND
STATE
TRANSITION
REQUIREMENTS
ALIGNED
ACROSS
AGENCIES.
Level
Level
Monitoring of transition requirements by the Lead Agency is aligned
with monitoring of all appropriate agencies.
The monitoring protocol includes a broad look at transition that goes
beyond just indicator measurement.
Interagency structures (e.g., interagency agreements, ICC, SAC and
communication protocols) are monitored regularly to ensure
implementation fidelity
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
The agency’s monitoring protocol
recognizes the involvement of
parents and other agency personnel.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
INTERAGENCY
PARTICIPATION
INTEGRAL
MONITORING
ACTIVITIES.
Level
Level
The monitoring by Lead Agency in
cludes other agency involvement.
The State Interagency Coordinating Council (SICC) and State Advisory
Council (SAC) have monitoring schedules and monitoring results
included as part of their agendas.
The mechanisms for interagency communication are regularly
reviewed for effectiveness.
Stakeholders, including families and receiving agencies, participate in
monitoring transitions and selecting improvement strategies.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
EVALUATION
INTEGRAL
COMPONENTS
TRANSITION
Level
Level
When transition elements and evidences are designed and
developed, mechanisms are put in place to ensure that they are
implemented with fidelit
y and are effective.
Evaluation systems are designed with stakeholder input to ensure that
what is measured is also what is important to measure.
Evaluation systems measure effect or impact of transition services on
children and families and not just the transition process.
Results of evaluations are used to improve the quality and efficiency of
transition systems and services for children and families.
Results of evaluations are shared with stakeholders and the public.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
Within Programs
Level
Level
Training evaluation data demonstrate that staff have access to
information and have used information to support families in transition.
Additional evidences may be added, as appropriate.
BY
OMPONENT
ONTENT
COPE
ERVICE
YSTEM
Early Head Start National Resource Center. (n.d.).
Transition strategies: Continuity
and change in the lives of infants and toddlers.
http://www.ehsnrc.org/pdffiles/MPStransitions.pdf
This guide describes factors influencin
g the transition from the Early Head
Start program into Head Start or other
community services
including a child’s
health and developmental status and fa
mily circumstances. The need for
practices that promote family identifica
tion of goals and program assistance
for locating resources reflecting indi
vidualized planning and a process for
family partnership agreement is descri
bed. Citations from the Head Start
Program Performance Standards for tr
ansition planning are included.
Harbin, G., Herrmann, S., Wasik, B., Dobbins, D., & Lam, W. (2004). Integrating
services for family literacy. In B. Wasik (Ed.),
Handbook for Family Literacy
373-397). York, PA: Tech Books.
This chapter illustrates a broader view
of potential resource categories for a
system of services for chil
dren and their families.
OSEP TA Community of Practice – Part C Se
ttings: Services in Natural Environments.
http://www.nectac.org/topics/families/families.asp
On behalf of the OSEP Community of
Practice on Natural Environments, a
work group of researchers, trainers, st
ate and local Part C personnel, parents
and TA personnel reached consensus on
the mission, principles and key
practices for providing early interventi
on in natural environments. Research
supporting each principle has also been compiled.
Workgroup on Principles and Practices in Natural Environments (Final Draft
November 2007)
Mission and principles for providing services in natural
OSEP TA Community of Practi
http://www.nectac.org/~pdfs/topics/families/Finalmissionandprinciples11_
26_07.pdf
Workgroup on Principles and Practices in Natural Environments (Final Draft
November 2007)
Seven key principles: Looks
like/ doesn’t look like.
TA Community of Practice-Part C Se
http://www.nectac.org/~pdfs/topics/families/Principles_LooksLike_Doesnt
LookLike11_26_07.pdf
Workgroup on Principles and Practices in Natural Environments (Final Draft
November 2007)
Agreed upon practices for providing services in natural
http://www.nectac.org/~pdfs/topics/families/AgreedUponPratices_FinalD
Smith, B. (2000).
Administrator’s essentials:
Creating policies and procedures that
support recommended practices in ea
rly intervention/early childhood
special education
http://www.dec-
sped.org/pdf/recommendedpractices/adminessen.pdf
This checklist contains relevant recommended practices from the seven
DEC Recommended Practices in Early Intervention/Early
Childhood Special Education
that give specific direct
ion to administrators.
Tracking, Referral and Assessment Center
http://www.tracecenter.info/index.php
TRACE is funded by the US Department
of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. The major goal of
TRACE is to identify and promote the
use of evidence-based practices and
models for improving child find,
referral, early identification and eligibil
Describes a broader resource-based approach to services and supports for
young children and their families.
OMPONENT
TRUCTURE
Hayden, P., Frederick, L.
& Smith, B. J. (2002).
A road map for facilitating
collaborative teams.
Frederick, CO: Sopris West.
Chapter III describes activities and
resources for establishing shared
leadership commitment and a team structure for collaboration. Chapter V
focuses on establishing a shared vision
among stakeholders. While originally
developed to support collaborative incl
usive practices and build local early
care and education systems, the process can be adapted for transition
system change.
Hayden, P., Smith, B.
& Askew, L. (2001).
Tasks, tips and tools for promoting
collaborative community teams.
Denver, CO: Collaborat
ive Planning Project
for Planning Comprehensive Early Ch
ildhood Systems. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service ED455627). Re
trieved December 27, 2007 from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/00
Describes a process and provides resources for creating and facilitating
interagency teams to promote changes in
early childhood systems. Originally
developed to support a collaborative a
pproach to designing effective early
care and education systems but the
change and developing an intera
gency structure for transition.
Head Start Information and Publication Center. (2005).
Head Start self-assessment
http://www.headstartinfo.org/self_assessment/community_partnership.htm
Johnson, L.J., Zorn, D., Tam, B.K.Y., La
montagne, M., & Johnson, S.A. (2003).
Stakeholders’ view of factors th
at impact successful interagency
collaboration.
Exceptional Children
, 69(2), 195-209.
This journal article focuses on factor
s related to successful or unsuccessful
interagency collaboration.
Kraft-Sayre, M.E., & Pianta, R.C. (2000).
Enhancing the transition to kindergarten.
Charlottesville: University of Virginia,
National Center for Early Development &
http://discovery.wcgmf.org/r
esources/sps_resource_363.pdf
This manual describes a framework an
d key principles for developing a
community transition plan. While this manual is based on research and
experiences for the transition into
kindergarten, many of the concepts,
practices and resources may be adapted for the transition into preschool at
age three. Specific strategies are de
scribed for establishing team structures
and transition coordinators.
National Early Childhood Transition Center.
http://www.ihdi.uky.edu/NECTC/
The center’s Web site provides a list
ing of presentations, publications and
research describing the evidence for interagency structures and validated
transition practices.
Rous, B.
& Hallam, R. (2006).
Tools for transition in earl
y childhood: A step-by-step
guide for agencies, teachers, and families.
Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.
http://www.brookespublishing.com/store/books/rous-7357/index.htm
Chapters in this guide provide an overview of and resources for developing
interagency structures and building teams.
Rous, B., Hallam, R., McCormick, K. & Jung
, L. (2005). The transition process for
young children with disabilities: A co
Lexington, KY:
Human Development Institute, University
http://www.ihdi.uky.edu/nectc/DOCUMENTS/PROJECTINFO/Conceptual_Fra
mework_Web_Version.pdf
This report provides an extant review of the literature supporting key
interagency components. Specific info
rmation is provided on interagency
for understanding transition from an
ecological perspective.
OMPONENT
NTERAGENCY
ELATIONSHIPS
Early Head Start National Resource Center. (n.d.).
Transition strategies: Continuity
and change in the lives of infants and toddlers.
http://www.ehsnrc.org/pdffiles/MPStransitions.pdf
A process for developing a Family Part
nership Agreement is described as a
mechanism to promote relationship buil
ding, family identification of goals
and program assistance for locating
resources reflecting individualized
planning. Citations from the Head St
art Program Performance Standards for
transition planning are included.
Hayden, P., Frederick, L.
& Smith, B. J. (2002).
A road map for facilitating
collaborative teams.
Frederick, CO: Sopris West.
Chapter II describes resources for understanding team stages and facilitator
roles and tasks. Chapter IV provides
insights into developing meaningful
relationships, fostering team commitm
ent and engaging stakeholders. While
originally developed to support collabo
rative inclusive practices and build
s, the process can be adapted for
transition system change.
Hayden, P., Smith, B., Rapport, M. & Frederick, L. (1999).
Facilitating change in
comprehensive early childhood systems.
Denver, CO: Collaborative Planning
Project for Planning Comprehensive
Early Childhood Systems. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service ED
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/00
This document describes a comprehens
ive approach to systems change
based on a review of the research li
terature. Specific attention in the
planning process is devoted to facilita
tor roles and processes most likely to
support effective interpersonal relati
Kraft-Sayre, M.E., & Pianta, R.C. (2000).
Enhancing the transition to kindergarten.
Charlottesville: University of Virginia,
National Center for Early Development &
http://discovery.wcgmf.org/r
esources/sps_resource_363.pdf
This manual describes a framework and key principles for developing a community
transition plan. While this manual is
based on research and experiences for the
transition into kindergarten, many of the concepts, practices and resources may be
adapted for the transition into preschool at age three. Specific strategies are
described for developing key relationsh
ips among personnel and with families.
Rous, B. & Hallam, R. (2006).
Tools for transition in earl
y childhood: A step-by-step
guide for agencies, teachers, and families.
Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.
http://www.brookespublishing.com/store/books/rous-7357/index.htm
Chapter 5 in this guide provides an
overview to group
decision making.
Strategies for building effective rela
tionships among personnel and families
are provided as well.
Smith, B. J. (2002).
The collaborative planning ou
treach project: Building
comprehensive early childhood systems. Final Report.
Denver, CO:
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/00
This final report of the Collaborative Planning Outreach Process provides
information on lessons learned for faci
litating local systems change through
collaborative teams. Copies of briefs
and manuscripts are included that
provide information that can be adapted
for facilitating team
s in the area of
transition including a manuscript
on developmental facilitation.
OMPONENT
NTERAGENCY
GREEMENTS
Crane, K., Gramlich, M., & Pe
terson, K. (September 2004).
Putting interagency
agreements into action
(Issue Brief: Examining
Secondary Education and Transition, 3(
This issue brief includes key component
s of effective interagency agreements
and implementation strategies.
Fink, D. B., Borgia, E., & Fowler, S.A. (1993).
Interagency agreements: Improving the
transition process for young children
with special needs and their families
(FACTS/LRE Information Series No. 1). Cham
paign, IL: University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, FACTS/LRE Project.
http://facts.crc.uiuc.
edu/facts1/facts1.html
This publication focuses on ways
in which interagency agreements can
facilitate the transition process for youn
g children with disa
bilities and their
families as they move from early in
tervention into preschool services.
Hadden, S. Fowler, S.A., Fink, D.
B., & Wischnowski, M.W. (1995).
Writing an
interagency agreement on transition: A practical guide
(FACTS/LRE
Information Series #5). Champaign, IL
: University of Illinois at Urbana-
http://facts.crc.uiuc.
edu/facts5/facts5.html
This publication provides the steps to
consider in developing, implementing
and monitoring interagency agreements among agencies involved in the
transition process for children
exiting the Part C program.
Harbin, G. L. & Van Ho
rn, J. (March 1990).
Elements for inclusion in interagency
Chapel Hill, NC: UNC-Chapel Hi
ll, Carolina Policy Studies
Program, FPG Child Development Instit
http://www.nectac.org/~pdfs/topics/intercoord/ElementsforIncl.pdf
This policy brief provides a checklist of possible elements to consider in
developing an agreement.
Hayden, P., Frederick, L.
& Smith, B. J. (2002).
A road map for facilitating
collaborative teams.
Frederick, CO: Sopris West.
This book includes a format for de
veloping an interagency agreement.
Johnson, L., Zorn, D., Tam, B., LaMontagne
, M., & Johnson, S. (2003). Stakeholders’
ccessful interagency collaboration.
Exceptional
Children
(2), 195-209.
This journal article focuses on factor
s related to successful or unsuccessful
interagency collaboration.
National Early Childhood Technical Assi
stance Center. Interagency Agreements
Related to Transition Web Page.
http://www.nectac.org/topics/transition/stateex.asp#inter
This Web site contains examples of
and Part B state agencies, Head Star
t, and other agencies specific to
transition responsibilities. Resources
for developing local agreements are
provided.
OMPONENT
OLICY
LIGNMENT
ONGRUITY
Rous, B., & Myers, C. T. (2006).
Strategies for supporting transitions of young children
with special needs: National focus gr
oup findings technical report #1.
Lexington, KY: University
of Kentucky, Human Development Institute, National
Early Childhood Transition Center.
http://www.ihdi.uky.edu/nectc/DOCUMENTS/technicalReports/Technical%20
National focus group findings describe
the need for continuity and alignment
across programs. Other findings relate
d to desired transition practices are
provided.
Rous, B. (2007).
A conceptual framework and outcomes model to support
transition.
University of Kentucky, National
Early Childhood Transition Center.
http://www.ihdi.uky.edu/nectc/Documents/PRESENTATIONS/RRC-
This presentation provides descript
ions of the key interagency components
such as alignment and continuity of policies and practices. Specific
information is provided on a conc
eptual framework for understanding
transition from an ecological perspective and preliminary findings related to
validated transition practices.
Smith, B. (2000).
Administrator’s essentials:
Creating policies and procedures that
support recommended practices in ea
rly intervention/early childhood
special education
http://www.dec-
sped.org/pdf/recommendedpractices/adminessen.pdf
This checklist contains relevant recommended practices from the seven
DEC Recommended Practices in Early Intervention/Early
Childhood Special Education
that give specific direct
ion to administrators.
OMPONENT
VI:
ERSONNEL
RAINING
ESOURCES
Council for Exceptional Children.
Division for Early Childhood Web Page on
Recommended Practices.
http://www.dec-sped.org/recommendedpractices.html
This publication does not specifically address early childhood transition but
provides information on practice
s relevant to the designing and
implementation of personnel development
activities. Prac
tices influencing
the transition process such as child assessment, evaluation, teaming and
inclusion are described.
Fixsen, D. L. (2006).
Implementing Evidence-based Education.
OSEP Project Directors’ Conference.
This is a power point presentation th
at includes information on evidence-
based practices for scaling up and impl
ementation of practices in the field.
Hayden, P., Frederick, L.
& Smith, B. J. (2002).
A road map for facilitating
collaborative teams.
Frederick, CO: Sopris West.
Describes a process and provides resour
ces for creating collaborative teams
to promote changes in early childhood sy
stems. The book can be used as a
training resource for facilitators. While developed to support collaborative
inclusive practices and build local early care and education systems, the
process can be adapted for transition system change.
Head Start Information and Publication Center.
Effective Transition Practices:
Facilitating Continuity.
http://www.headstartinfo.org/publications/effective_transitions/irresources.ht
This is a training guide for the Head Start Learning Community which
introduces readers to concepts, is
sues, and ideas associated with
implementing effective transition practi
ces. The web site includes a list of
resources that can provide addition
al information and ideas to help
implement these practices.
Head Start Information and Publication Center
. Infant and Toddler Transition
http://www.headstartinfo.org/cgi-
This technical training gui
de can be used to assist staff and families to
examine infant and toddler transition
s from a developmental perspective
that includes practices to support in
dividualized routine-based planning.
Information is considered for implem
enting measures for evaluating the
quality and effectiveness of transitions.
n Accountability Monitoring. (2007).
Developing and implementing an effectiv
e system of general supervision:
Part B.
New Orleans, LA: Louisiana State
http://www.monitoringcenter.lsuhs
c.edu/PDF%20Word/1%20EffectiveGeneral
Supervisionfinal%201-16-07.pdf
This document contains a section on
National Early Childhood Te
chnical Assistance Center.
Personnel Development
http://www.nectac.org/topi
cs/personnel/personnel.asp
This Web site does not directly address
transition but contains a section on
National Centers and Grants
which provides evidence-based professional
development practices and resources.
National Early Childhood Te
chnical Assistance Center.
Transition Web Page
http://www.nectac.org/topics/transition/transition.asp
This Web site provides links to
State Resources
which, among other resources,
also includes
Training Materials,
State Initiatives an
d Special Projects.
http://nirn.fmhi.usf.edu/
This Web site includes resources on
the effective implementation of
innovations and the impl
ication for evidence-based personnel development
strategies.
North Central Regional Resource Center. (2007).
Connecting the Dots
. Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota, North
Central Regional Resource Center.
Connecting the Dots
is an online training that
compliance regarding transition prac
tices at age three. The training
developed by the Iowa Department
Regional Resource Center (NCRRC) is de
signed to assist service coordinators
and LEA staff. You must register and login to access the training. For more
information about the traini
ng, contact Ann Bailey (
baile045@umn.edu
) at
Rous, B.
& Hallam, R. (2006).
Tools for transition in earl
y childhood: A step-by-step
guide for agencies, teachers, and families.
Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.
http://www.brookespublishing.com/store/books/rous-7357/index.htm
This guide can be used as a training resource for developing early childhood
transition strategies and approaches.
Smith, B. (2000).
Administrator’s essentials:
Creating policies and procedures that
support recommended practices in ea
rly intervention/early childhood
special education
http://www.dec-
sped.org/pdf/recommendedpractices/adminessen.pdf
This checklist contains relevant recommended practices from the seven
DEC Recommended Practices in Early Intervention/Early
Childhood Special Education
(Sandall, McLean, & Smith, 2000) that give
specific direction to administrators
. The checklist incl
udes information
relevant to supporting personnel development and supervision.
This Web site does not directly addr
ess transition but provides national
resources, state activities and research resources for scaling up program
practices.
OMPONENT
YSTEMS
Data Accountability Center (DAC) –
http://www.ideadata.org
The Data Accountability Center is
an OSEP-funded cooperative agreement
project with a focus on improving the quality of both 616 and 618 data that
States are required to submit/collect/a
nalyze under IDEA. Based on state
needs, the project will be developing te
chnical assistance
products; assisting
Jackson, T. & A
hearn, E. (2004).
Unique student identifiers.
Alexandria, VA: National
Association of State Directors of Specia
http://www.nasdse.org/publications/unique_student_identifiers.pdf
This brief analysis of states' use of uniq
ue student identifiers
to track critical
data provides a summary of various me
thods of assigning unique identifiers,
including the pros and cons of each
Huisken, J. S., Rodin, H. Sharpe, M., Mc
Millan, W., & Hawes, M. (2007). Thinking
through improvement: Tools and strategi
es to guide improvement efforts.
Minneapolis, MN: North Central Region
al Resource Center, Institute on
Community Integration, Univ
ersity of Minnesota.
This document describes a planning pr
ocess developed by the North Central
Regional Resource Center for use by
state and local education agencies.
Emphasis is placed on understandin
g how improvement is achieved and
how educational accountability is de
monstrated. The improvement process
also emphasizes how data are used to
support the improvement planning
process. The materials provide informatio
n and activities on prioritizing areas
n Accountability Monitoring. (2007).
Developing and implementing an effectiv
e system of general supervision:
Part B.
New Orleans, LA: Louisiana State
http://www.monitoringcenter.lsuhs
c.edu/PDF%20Word/1%20EffectiveGeneral
Supervisionfinal%201-16-07.pdf
This concept paper describes the components of an effective state general
supervision system, including evidences related to transition for state or local
agencies.
National Early Childhood Te
chnical Assistance Center.
General Supervision Systems
http://www.nectac.org/topics/quality/gensup.asp
This webpage includes information on data processes and results, including
aligning data across Part C and Part B systems.
National Early Childhood Transition Initiative.
Webinar on State Level Data
Collaboration.
This webinar covers the topic of co
Streifer, P. (2004).
Tools and techniques for effective data driven decision making.
Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publis
http://www.rowmaneducation.com/Catalog/SingleBook.shtml?command=S
earch&db=^DB/CATALOG
.db&eqSKUdata=1578861233
This book provides readers with a comprehensive understanding of what
data-driven decision-making can and cannot tell educators about student
achievement and addresses the relate
d issues for leadership, policy
development, and accountability.
Streifer, P. (2002).
http://www.rowmaneducation.com/Catalog/SingleBook.shtml?command=S
earch&db=^DB/CATALOG
.db&eqSKUdata=0810842149
This book provides information on
how data, including the relationship
U.S. Department of Education, Office
of Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services.
1/elder021104ifsp1q2004.pdf
Westat.
Ideadata.org Web Site.
http://www.ideadata.org
This website includes an array of reso
urces related to data elements, data
collection, and data reporting.
Westat. (July 2006).
Data Accuracy: Critical Elements for Review of SPPs.
critical%20elements%20for%20review%20of%20spps.doc
This resource produced by Westat outli
nes four key principles (e.g., data
collection, data editing and valida
tion, data reporting, and systems
ation) and 16 related critical elements for
ensuring data accuracy.
Westat. (2006).
Taking Your Data to the Laundry.
http://www.ideadata.org/docs/TakingYourDatatotheLaundry.pdf
This resource produced by Westat proposes editing techniques to help those
who collect data to improve data a
ccuracy. One key element in data
accuracy is collecting cl
ean data. Cleaning data is more than applying
clever edits, comprehensive error checking
, or one-time verifi
cation routines.
It is the consistent application of proc
edures that encourage policymakers to
trust the data collected and use the
data to guide and focus decision-
making for improvement.
OMPONENT
ONITORING
AND
VALUATION
lution in Special Education (CADRE) –
http://www.directionservice.org/cadre/
CADRE is funded by the Office of Sp
ecial Education Programs at the US
Department of Education to serve as the National Center on Dispute Resolution
in Special Education. CADRE works with state and local education and early
intervention systems, parent centers, families and educators to improve
capacity for resolving special education disputes and provides a
database for
state special education and early in
tervention mediation systems. A
presentation by NECTAC reviewing
national Part C data related
to procedural safeguards is provided at
http://www.directionservice.org/cadre/nectac07.cfm
Data Accountability Center (DAC) –
http://www.ideadata.org
The Data Accountability Center is an
OSEP-funded cooperative agreement
project with a focus on improving the quality of both 616 and 618 data that
States are required to submit/collect/a
nalyze under IDEA. Based on state
needs, the project will be developing te
chnical assistance
products; assisting
n Accountability Monitoring. (2007).
Developing and implementing an effect
ive system of general supervision:
Part B.
New Orleans, LA: Louisiana St
ate University. Available from
http://www.monitoringcenter.lsuhs
c.edu/PDF%20Word/1%20EffectiveGeneral
Supervisionfinal%201-16-07.pdf
This concept paper describes the compo
nents of an effective state general
supervision system, including evidences related to transition for state or local
agencies.
National Early Childhood Te
chnical Assistance Center.
General Supervision Web
http://www.nectac.org/topics/quality/gensup.asp
A
Conceptual
As states and local programs plan for mo
re effective transition services, it is
important to consider the ecological nature
of the transition process as depicted in
Figure 1. That is, young children with disa
bilities are nested within the child’s family
and their community which includes th
eir individual service providers and
programs. In turn, the providers and prog
rams are nested within
the local and state
service system and the broader local an
d state context (Rous, Hallam, Harbin,
McCormick & Jung, 2007).
Both the state interagency service system,
and individual state agencies’ transition
policies, practices and activities lay the
foundation for, and influence the local
interagency service system, as well as the transition activities of local programs and
providers as depicted in Figure 2. These cr
itical state and local variables, or factors,
impact both the preparation, and subseq
uent adjustment, of young children and
These organizational factors influence
outcomes at three distinct levels:
Immediate – preparation of
children and families,
Short-term – adjustment of children an
d families to new environments, and
Long-term – engagement and involvemen
t of the family in the child’s
program and the child’s future success in school.
In order for these outcomes to be ac
hieved, the sending
program must reach
forward and the receiving program reach backward, as they each play significant
roles in both the preparation and adju
stment of children and families.
B
of
the
Evidence
in
Early
Childhood
Transition
A major theme in early literatu
of children with disabilities
anning to address the indivi
dual strengths, needs, and
characteristics of children, families, an
d programs (Conn-Powers, Ross-Allen, &
Holburn, 1990). This was based on the
early recognition that supports, including
social supports, play a key role in a succe
ssful transition planning process for both
families and the professionals that serve
them (Hanline, 1993). To support this
process, IDEA included spec
ific regulations related to
supports and services for
transition.
While IDEA supports early transition planni
ng for young children and their families
(34 CFR 303.148(b)), preliminary data from a study of the transition at age three
years conducted by the National Early Ch
ildhood Transition
Rous, Gooden & Cox, 2007) indicate that for th
e majority of families included in the
study, transition planning was initiated afte
r the child was 30 months of age (68.2%).
A review of IFSPs for these
children at around 33 months
of age revealed that while
73% of children had steps and se
rvices for transition explicit
ly stated in the IFSP, the
remaining 27% had IFSPs with unclear lang
uage related to transition or had no
transition steps at all, even though the ma
jority of children in the study (62%) were
identified as having develo
pmental concerns by 1 month of age and 73% went on
to receive preschool special education servic
es. These data indicate that for many
children, transition supports and services
required as part of IDEA are not being
provided in a timely fashion.
Building an adequate state and local infr
astructure to suppor
effective
transition for children and families is a complex undertaking. The importance of
effective transition planning on children
’s school success has become increasingly
clear. Research has demonstrated that a ch
ild’s initial transition to school directly
impacts later academic and social success
(Entwisle & Alexander, 1998). In turn,
children’s health and social/emotional de
velopment is predictive of academic
success at the end of 1
grade (Hair, Halle, Terry-Human
, Lavelle & Calkins, 2006).
For children who have disabilities and
need special services, poor transition
experiences often compound these difficulties both academically and socially.
Additionally, the use of transition polici
es and practices has been shown to have
positive effects on child outcomes, specif
ically academic achievement at the end
of kindergarten and parent
initiated involvement in schools (Schulting, Malone, &
Dodge, 2005).
Another critical component to consider in
transition planning
is recognition that
transition is not an event, bu
t a constant part of child de
velopment and family life.
Young children with disabilities and their fa
milies experience mult
iple transitions by
the time a child enters kindergart
en. It is also likely that they participate in multiple
programs and services at any given time.
C
Conn-Powers, M. C., Ross-Allen, J., & Holburn,
S. (1990). Transition of young children
into the elementary education mainstream.
Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education
, 91–105.
Danaher, J., Shackelford, J., Harbin, G. (2004
). Revisiting a Comparison of Eligibility
Policies for Infant/Toddler Progra
ms and Preschool Special Education
Programs.
Topics in Early Childhood Special Education
24(2),
59-67.
Entwisle, D. R. & Alexander, K.
L. (1998). Facilitating the tr
ansition to first grade: The
nature of transition and rese
arch on factors affecting it.
Elementary School
Journal, 98(4),
351-364.
Family Education Rights and Privacy Ac
http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/reg/ferpa/index.html
Hair, E., Halle, T., Terry-Hume
n, E., Lavelle, B., & Calkins,
J. (2006). Children's school
readiness in the ECLS-K: Prediction
s to academic, health, and social
outcomes in first grade.
Early Childhood Resear
ch Quarterly, 21(4),
431-454.
Hanline, M. F. (1993). Facilita
ting integrated preschool serv
ice delivery transitions for
children, families, and professionals. In
C. A. Peck & S. L. Odom (Eds.),
Integrating young children with disabilities into community programs:
Ecological perspectives on research and implementation
(pp.133–146).
Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.
Harbin, G, Danaher, J., & Derri
ck, T. (1994). Comparison
of eligibility policies for
infant toddler programs and preschool special education programs.
Early Childhood Special Education 14
(4) 455-471.
Harbin, G. & Rous, B. (2007, November).
Essential components and elements of an
effective infrastructure for early childhood transition
(Working Document).
Lexington, KY: National Early Childhood
Transition Initiative, National Early
Childhood Transition Center
, University of Kentucky.
Harbin, G., Rous, B., Peeler, N., Schuster
, J. & McCormick, K.
(2007, December).
Desired family outcomes of the early childhood transition process.
(NECTC
Research Brief Number 5), Lexington,
KY: National Early Childhood Transition
Center, University
of Kentucky.
Health Insurance Portability and Accountabi
http://aspe.hhs.gov/admnsimp/pl104191.htm
Individuals with Disabiliti
es Education Act Final Regu
lations, 71 Fed. Reg. 46540
http://idea.ed.gov/download/finalregulations.pdf
McCormick, K., Rous, B., Gooden
, C., & Cox, M. (2007, July).
Empirical data on early
childhood transitions: Emerging find
ings for the transition at age 3.
Presentation at the OSEP Director’s M
eeting, Washington, DC. National Early
Childhood Transition Center
, University of Kentucky.
McCullough, K. & Whaley, K. (2007).
Essential elements of an effective state
infrastructure for early childhood transition.
Chapel Hill: The University of North
Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute, National Early Childhood
Technical Assistance Center.
McNulty, B. A. (1989). Leadership and po
licy strategies for interagency planning:
National Early Childhood Te
chnical Assistance System
. Monitoring transition from
Part C.
http://www.nectac.org/topics/transition/monitrans.asp
Office of Special Education Programs.
Part B SPP/APR Related Requirements
. OMB
Office of Special Education Programs.
Part C SPP/APR Related Requirements
. OMB
Rous, B. (2007, October). Standard practices and supporting strategies to support
the transition of young children. Pre-conference session at the National
Division for Early Childhood Conferenc
e, Niagara, Canada. Lexington, KY:
National Early Childhood Transition
Center, University of Kentucky.
Rous, B., Hallam, R., Harbin,
G., McCormick, K.,
for young children with disabilities: A conceptual framework.
Infants and
Young Children, 20
Rous, B., Hallam, R., Harbin, G., McCormick,
K, & Jung, L. (2005). The transition
process for young children with disabili
ties: A conceptual framework. Human
Development Institute: University of
http://www.ihdi.uky.edu/nectc/DOCUMENTS/PROJECTINFO/Conceptual_Fra
mework_Web_Version.pdf
Rous, B., Harbin, G. & McCormick, K. (2007, June).
A child outcome framework for
the early childhood transition process.
(NECTC Research Brief Number 3),
Lexington, KY: National Early Childhood
Transition Center
, University of
Schulting, A. B., Malo
ne, P. S., & Dodge, K. A. (2005)
. The effects of school-based
kindergarten transition policies
on child academic outcomes.
Developmental Psychology, 41
(6), 860-871.
D
RGANIZATIONS
lution in Special Education (CADRE) --
http://www.directionservice.org/cadre/
CADRE is funded by the Office of Sp
ecial Education Programs at the US
Department of Education to serve as the National Center on Dispute Resolution
in Special Education. CADRE works with state and local education and early
intervention systems, parent centers, families and educators to improve
capacity for resolving special education disputes and provides a
database for
y intervention mediation systems
Child Care Bureau --
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ccb/
The Child Care Bureau, ho
used within the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS), Administration
for Children and Families (ACF),
Administration on Children, Youth, an
d Families (ACYF), Children’s Bureau,
support low-income working families by
providing programs for child care
financial assistance and quality initia
after school programs.
Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) --
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/l
ist/oii/nonpublic/childcare.html
The Child Care and Development Block grant (CCDBG) program is
administered through the U.S. Depart
ment of Health and Human Services
(HHS), Administration for Children and
Families (ACF), Ad
ministration on
Children, Youth and Famili
es (ACYF), Children’s Bureau, Child Care Division
and provides grants to states to help increase the availability, affordability,
and quality of child care.
Council of Chief State School Officers --
http://www.ccsso.org/
The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) is a nonpartisan,
nationwide, nonprofit organization of
public officials who head departments
of elementary and secondary education in the states, the District of
Columbia, the Department of Defense Ed
ucation Activity, and five U.S. extra-
state jurisdictions. The Council
seeks member consensus on major
r views to civic and professional
organizations, federal agencies, Congress, and the public.
Council of Chief State School Officers, Early Childhood Education Assessment
Consortium --
http://www.ccsso.org/projects/SCASS/Projects/Early_Childhood_Education_
Assessment_Consortium/
The Early Childhood Education Assessm
ent (ECEA) Consortium was initiated
in 2000 to provide guidance to decision
makers on appropriate assessment
gh-quality learning opportunities for
young children. The consortium’s focus
is on early childhood learning and
developmental outcomes, appropriat
e assessment, program evaluation,
and using data for system accountability.
Council for Exceptional Children.
Division for Early Childhood Web Page on
Recommended Practices.
http://www.dec-sped.org/recommendedpractices.html
Publications listed provide information on
practices relevant to the transition
process such as child assessment and
evaluation, inclusion and professional
development.
Good Start, Grow Smart: The Bush Admini
stration’s Early Childhood Initiative --
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/earlychildhood/toc.html
The
Good
Start, Grow Smart
initiative addresses three major areas:
Strengthening Head Start; Partnering wi
th States to Improve Early Childhood
Education; and Providing Information to
Teachers, Caregivers and Parents.
IDEAdata.org --
https://www.ideadata.org/index.html
The Ideadata.org web site
provides public access to
about children with disabilities served
under the Individuals
with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA). These data ar
e collected annually by the U.S.
Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs in
accordance with Section 618 of IDEA. They
are provided in the form of tables
ngress. The web si
te is organized
according to the part of the law that
governs services for children in an age
group.
National Association of Child Care Reso
urce and Referral Agencies (NACCRRA) --
referral centers (CCR&Rs) located in
every state and
most communities
across the US. CCR&R centers help fami
lies, child care providers, and
communities find, provide,
and plan for affordable, quality child care.
NACCRRA provides training, resources and practice standards to local and
state CCR&Rs to support high
quality, accountable services.
National Child Care Inform
ation Center (NCCIC) --
http://www.nccic.org/index.html
NCCIC is funded through the Child Care
Bureau and serves as a national
clearinghouse and technical
assistance center that links parents, providers,
policy-makers, researchers, and the
public to early care and education
information.
National Early Childhood Technical
Assistance Center (NECTAC) --
http://www.nectac.org/
The National Early Childhood Techni
cal Assistance Center supports the
ildhood provisions of the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA
NECTAC is funded by a cooperative
agreement with the U.S. Department
of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs to provide technical assistance by transferring
knowledge about early childhood research
, practices that work, and policies
to assist states and th
eir stakeholders to accomplish goals and plans for
National Early Childhood Tra
nsition Center (NECTC) --
http://www.ihdi.uky.edu/nectc/
The National Early Childhood Transiti
on Center is funded by the U.S.
Department of Education, Office of
Special Education Programs to examine
National Professional Development Center
http://www.fpg.unc.edu/~npdci/
The National Professional Developmen
t Center on Inclusion (NPDCI) is
working with states to create a syst
em of high quality, cross-agency,
accessible professional development fo
r early childhood personnel relating
to inclusion.
Office of Head Start --
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb/
Head Start is a national program th
at promotes school readiness by
enhancing the social and cognitive development of children through the
provision of educational, health, nutrit
ional, social and other services to
enrolled children and families. Resources are available through their Early
Learning and Knowledge Center and their Head Start Information and
Publication Center.
Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) --
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/index.html?src=mr
The Office of Special Education Progra
ms (OSEP) is dedicated to improving
results for infants, toddlers, children an
d youth with disabilities ages birth
through 21 by providing leadership and financial support to assist states and
local districts. OSEP administers the Indi
viduals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA). IDEA authorizes formula grants
to states, and discretionary grants to
institutions of higher education and ot
her nonprofit organi
zations to support
research, demonstrations, technical assistance and dissemination,
technology and personnel develo
pment and parent-training and
information centers.
Regional Resource Centers/Federa
l Resource Center (RRC/FRC) --
This website will link the user to the Fed
eral Resource Center and link to each
of the six specific OSEP funded Re
country. Information is available both
regionally and nati
onally on a broad
arena of topical areas, resources, guid
ance, training, conf
erences, activities,
and regulations related to Part B an
d Part C special education including
transition and general supervision.
http://www.serve.org/
SERVE's operational core is the Region
al Educational Laboratory. Funded by
the U.S. Department of Education's
Institute of Education Sciences, the
Regional Educational Laboratory for the
Southeast is one of ten Laboratories
providing research-based information
and services to all 50 states and
territories. These Laboratories form
a nationwide ed
ucation knowledge
State Collaborative on Assessment and
http://www.ccsso.org/projects/SCASS/
SCASS provides leadership, advocacy
and services in creating and
supporting effective collaborative
partnerships through the collective
experience and knowledge of state
education personnel to develop and
implement high standards and valid assessment systems to maximize
educational achievement for all children.
SCASS also has an Early Childhood unit described at
http://www.ccsso.org/projects/SCASS/Projects/Early%5FChildhood%5FEducat
Tracking, Referral and Assessment
Center for Excellence (TRACE) --
http://www.tracecenter.info/index.php
TRACE is funded by the US Department
of Education, Office of Special
Education Programs. The major goal of
TRACE is to identify and promote the
use of evidence-based practices and
models for improving child find,
referral, early identification and eligibil
What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) --
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/
The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) colle
cts, screens, and id
entifies studies of
effectiveness of educationa
l interventions (programs,
products, practices, and
policies). The WWC regularly updates the WWC Technical Standards and their
application to take account of new cons
iderations brought forth by experts and
users. Such changes may result in re-appr
aisals of studies and/or interventions
previously reviewed and rated. The cu
rrent WWC Standards offer guidance for
those planning or carrying out studies, not
only in the design co
nsiderations but the
analysis and reporting stages as well.
Designing And Implementing Effective Early Childhood Transition