Preparing for the State Systemic
Improvement Plan
Virginia - March 2014
(Content adapted from 2014 MSRRC Forum)
First thoughts …
Overview
 Part of the SPP/APR
 Comprehensive, ambitious yet achievable
 Plan for improving results for infants and toddlers
with disabilities and their families
 Multi-year plan developed in two phases
 Must engage stakeholders in the process
4
Phase I Components
Theory of Action
What will we do about
it?
Data Analysis
Infrastructure Analysis
• In-depth Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data Related to Primary
Concern Area to Confirm
Focus Area for Improvement
Why is it
happening?
• In-depth Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data Related to Primary
Concern Area to Confirm
Focus Area for Improvement
Focus for Improvement
Infrastructure Analysis
Data Analysis
• Broad Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data to Identify Areas of Low
and High Performance
What is the
problem?
• Broad Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data to Identify Systemic
Issues Impacting
Performance
Data Analysis
 Identify and analyze key data to determine areas
for improvement
 Disaggregate data as needed
 Look at data quality
 Determine any compliance issues that are barriers
 Start BROAD
 Identify areas of high and low performance
 Identify potential focus area for improvement
Variety of Data Sources
 Quantitative Data
 SPP/APR data, Section 618 data (child count, etc.)
 Other data related to infants and toddlers (Health,
DOE, Infant Mental Health, etc.)
 Qualitative Data
 Feedback from VICC
 Focus groups
 Surveys
Infrastructure Analysis
 Analyze capacity of system to support
improvement and build capacity in EI programs
and providers to implement EBP to improve
results for infants, toddlers, families
 Analyze initiatives in state that can have impact
on infants, toddlers, families
 Describe how decisions are made within state
system and representatives that must be involved
in planning for systemic improvements
 Start BROAD – “big picture” view
System Components
Governance
Monitoring and
Accountability
Fiscal
Broad
Infrastructure
Analysis
Technical
Assistance
Quality
Standards
Data
Professional
Development
Primary Area of Concern
 Area(s) in which there is lower performance and, if
addressed, could have most impact on outcomes for
children and families
 Factors to consider in prioritizing:
 Magnitude of concern
 Equity issue
 Agency priorities
 Leveraging of resources
 Feasibility/doability
 Becomes the potential focus area of improvement for
the SSIP
Phase I Components
Theory of Action
What will we do about
it?
Data Analysis
Infrastructure Analysis
• In-depth Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data Related to Primary
Concern Area to Confirm
Focus Area for Improvement
Why is it
happening?
• In-depth Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data Related to Primary
Concern Area to Confirm
Focus Area for Improvement
Focus for Improvement
Infrastructure Analysis
Data Analysis
• Broad Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data to Identify Areas of Low
and High Performance
What is the
problem?
• Broad Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data to Identify Systemic
Issues Impacting
Performance
In-Depth Data and Infrastructure
Analysis
 Focus on the primary area of concern
 Purpose: Identify focus for improvement and
determine the systemic issues that need
improvement (contributing factors, root causes)
 Ask more specific questions based on findings
from broad analysis
 May need to collect more data but don’t overdo it
 Consider qualitative data
Focus for Improvement
 The area of improvement on which the State
will focus, that will lead to a measurable child
or family result
 How addressing this area of focus for
improvement will build local systems’ capacity
to improve the identified result for children and
families
“Good” Focus for Improvement
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Is supported by the data
Will make a significant impact on results
Aligns with current priorities and initiatives
Will (has potential to) leverage resources
Addresses issues of disparate outcomes
Is supported by leadership
Has the necessary commitment to change
Is feasible/doable (2-4 years)
Examples of Focus Area
 Improving social emotional outcomes for
children with autism
 Improving families’ ability to help their child
develop and learn
 Improving social emotional outcomes for
children with disabilities
Phase I Components
Theory of Action
What will we do about
it?
Data Analysis
Infrastructure Analysis
• In-depth Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data Related to Primary
Concern Area to Confirm
Focus Area for Improvement
Why is it
happening?
• In-depth Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data Related to Primary
Concern Area to Confirm
Focus Area for Improvement
Focus for Improvement
Infrastructure Analysis
Data Analysis
• Broad Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data to Identify Areas of Low
and High Performance
What is the
problem?
• Broad Analysis of
Quantitative and Qualitative
Data to Identify Systemic
Issues Impacting
Performance
Theory of Action
 Describe the general improvement strategies that
will need to be carried out and the outcomes that
will need to be met
 A series of if-then statements
 Make connection between what you are doing
(Improvement Strategy) and what you expect to
happen (Results)
 Focus on how and why you will produce the
change, using “if-then” statements to generate a
logical explanation (Rationale) and reveal
strategies and assumptions about how resources
and activities are used
Example
 If I eat just before going to the grocery store, then
I will be full and not craving a sugary treat while
shopping.
 If I’m full and not craving a sugary treat while
shopping, then I’ll be able to resist buying candy
at the checkout
 If I can resist buying candy at the grocery store,
then I won’t have candy around the house
 If I don’t have candy around the house, I will eat
less candy
What do we know
about how
practices need to
look in order to
achieve the
outcomes?
Governance
Quality
Standards
result
Funding/
Finance
Implementation
of effective
practices
Personnel/
Workforce
(PD&TA)
Monitoring and
Accountability
Data System
Improved
outcomes for
children and
families
What do we know
about how the
system needs to
look in order to
support the
practices?
Governance
Quality
Standards
result
Funding/
Finance
Implementation
of effective
practices
Personnel/
Workforce
(PD&TA)
Monitoring and
Accountability
Data System
Improved
outcomes for
children and
families
Relationships between Levels of the System to Achieve Results
State System:
Implementati
on of
effective state
systems that
support
effective
practices
What specific
state system
supports are
needed to
encourage/
require
practices?
Local
System:
Implementati
on of
effective local
systems that
support
effective
practices
What specific
local system
supports are
needed to
encourage/
require
practices?
Direct
Support:
Implementati
on of direct
support for
effective
practices
(e.g., training,
TA, coaching
and other
supports)
What specific
direct support
is needed to
give
practitioners
the skills to
implement
effective
practices?
Practices:
Implementati
on of
effective
practices by
teachers and
providers
What specific
practices
need to occur
to accomplish
the specific
outcomes?
Result:
Improved
outcomes for
children and
families
What specific
outcomes or
population is
the focus?
Phase I:
• Initiate data analysis
• Identify problem area
(Focus for Improvement,
e.g. child outcomes for
low income children)
Phase III:
• Evaluate progress
annually
• Adjust plan as needed
What is
the
problem?
SSIP
Phase I and II:
• Search/evaluate evidencebased solutions (Exploration
Phase)
• Develop Theory of Action
• Develop and implement plan
for improvement
(Implementation Framework)
Phase I:
• Conduct infrastructure
analysis to identify system
strengths and barriers
• Conduct root cause
analysis to identify
contributing factors
Source: Western Regional Resource Center.
Virginia SSIP Development
By 4/30/14
• Project & Communication Plan
• Stakeholders
By 3/31/14
• Broad data & infrastructure analysis
• VICC and LSM Meetings
By 6/11/14
• In-depth data & infrastructure analysis
• Focus for improvement
Virginia SSIP Development
By 9/30/14
By
12/10/14
By 2/1/15
• Theory of Action
• VICC and LSM Meetings
• Draft of complete written document
• VICC and other stakeholder final review
• Final revisions
• Submit to OSEP
The C in Part C is for …