Full Participation Institute
Administrator’s Track
December 15-16, 2015
1
Administrative Track Presenters
Michael Lovato, Director of Special Education, PED
Brenda Kofahl,
PreK Program Manager, PED Literacy and
Early Childhood Bureau
 Catherine Quick, Special Education/Literacy Coordinator, PED
Literacy and Early Childhood Bureau
Suzanne Harper, Consultant, University of New Mexico
Kathy T. Whaley, Technical Assistance Specialist,
Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center
(ECTA Center)
2
How are you feeling about inclusion?
1 =Not sure or comfortable about how to
implement inclusive practices and programs
2. Somewhat unsure and uncomfortable but
interested in learning more
3. Very interested and ready to move
forward with TA and guidance
4. Totally ready and implementing some or
all inclusive practices in our program
(Gupta, Henninger, & Vinh, 2014)
3
Session B
Leading Quality Inclusive Programs
What are the Facts? What are the
Laws, Requirements and Policies?
4
Objectives and Organization
Provide an overview of the Rules and Policies
Federal IDEA regulations and policies
 Federal IDEA reporting requirements
 NM PreK Statement of Assurances
 NM FOCUS

Share Results of a National Study
Begin to Assess, Summarize and Discuss NM
Challenges &Strategies
5
Self-assessment
Inclusion Checklist
Checklist Categories
 Interactions
Specialized Supports
Families
Inclusive Services
Sociological Outcomes
Professional Development
Program Evaluation
(Barton & Smith, 2015)
6
Regulations, Requirements & Policies
Federal
IDEA 2004 612(a)(5)
Part B Regulations (2006)
34 CFR Parts 300 and 301
OSEP Policy Letters (2012)
DE/HHS Joint Policy Statement on Inclusion
(2015)
DE/HHS Policy Statement on Expulsion &
Suspension Policies (2014)
7
Regulations, Requirements & Policies
State
New Mexico PED Special Education Rule
PED NM PreK Statement of Assurances
New Mexico QRIS - FOCUS
8
Regulations, Requirements & Policies
Other Federal and State
Head Start Performance Standards
Child Care &Development Block Grant
Act 2014 (CCDBG)
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
9
Department of Education and Health & Human Services
Joint Policy Statement on Inclusion
 Purpose
 Overview
 Foundations of Inclusion
 Scientific Base & Benefit
 Legal Foundations
 Challenges
 Building a Culture of Inclusion
 Recommendations for State
and Local Action
10
OSEP Policy - Dear Colleague Letter
The Musgrove Dear Colleague Letter on Preschool LRE
February 29, 2012
 IDEA Part B LRE provisions apply
 Right to be educated in Regular Class
defined as preschool program with typically
developing peers
 LEA may provide services in kindergarten
classes, public or privately funded
preschools, community-based child care
programs or home
 If LEA has no public pre-k programs then
other options are to be considered
11
Definition for Data Collection Purposes
Preschool Inclusion is when children
(age 3 – 5) with Individual Education
Programs (IEP) receive their special
education and related services in
settings with at least 50% of peers
without IEPs
12
LRE Requirements
Each public agency must ensure that-(i) To the maximum extent appropriate, children
with disabilities, including children in public or private
institutions or other care facilities, are educated with
children who are nondisabled; and
(ii) Special classes, separate schooling, or other
removal of children with disabilities from the regular
educational environment occurs only if the nature or
severity of the disability is such that education in regular
classes with the use of supplementary aids and services
cannot be achieved satisfactorily.
IDEA Part B 300.114
13
Supplementary Aids and Services
“Supplementary aids and services” means
 aids, services, and other supports that are provided
in regular education classes, other education
related settings, and in extracurricular and
nonacademic settings,
 to enable children with disabilities to be educated
with nondisabled children to the maximum extent
appropriate in accordance with Sec. Sec.
300.114through 300.116.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1401(33) - §300.42 )
14
Placements
The placement decision–
(1) Is made by a group of persons, including the
parents, and other persons knowledgeable about the
child, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the
placement options; and
(2) Is made in conformity with the LRE provisions Sec.
300.114 through 300.118;
(Part B Regulation 300.116(a))
15
Placements
The child's placement–
(1) Is determined at least annually;
(2) Is based on the child's IEP; and
(3) Is as close as possible to the child's home;
(Part B Regulation 300.116(b))
16
Placements
(c) Unless the IEP of a child with a disability requires some
other arrangement, the child is educated in the school that
he or she would attend if nondisabled;
(d) In selecting the LRE, consideration is given to any
potential harmful effect on the child or on the quality of
services that he or she needs; and
(e) A child with a disability is not removed from education in
age-appropriate regular classrooms solely because of needed
modifications
(Part B Regulation 300.116(c)-(d))
17
Decisions must be based on individual
needs as stated in the IEP, not on—
• the child’s disabling condition or label (such as placement in a
special class for students with intellectual disabilities just
because a child has a cognitive impairment);
• disability program categories (placement in an particular
program for students with learning disabilities (LD) just because
a child needs LD services);
• the location of staff;
• the funds that are available; or
• the convenience of the school district.
18
Continuum of Alternative Placements
• Include the alternative placements listed in the
definition of special education under Sec. 300.38
(instruction in regular classes, special classes,
special schools, home instruction, and instruction in
hospitals and institutions); and
• Make provision for supplementary services (such as
resource room or itinerant instruction) to be
provided in conjunction with regular class
placement.
(Part B Regulation 300.115(a) & (b))
19
Preschool Transportation
When is an LEA obligated to provide
transportation for a preschool child
with a disability between private day
care and the child’s preschool?
Answer: If the IEP Team determines that transportation is
required to assist the preschool child to benefit from special
education, and includes transportation as a related service on
the child’s IEP, the LEA would be responsible for providing the
transportation to and from the setting where the special
education and related services are provided.”
20
OSEP Q & A, Serving Children with Disabilities Eligible for Transportation,.
http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cdynamic%2CQaCorner%2C12%2C
Permissive Use of Funds
(a) Uses. Notwithstanding 300.322, 300.203(a), &
300.162 (b) funds provided to an LEA under
Part B may be used for
(1) Services and aids that also benefit nondisabled
children. For the cost of special education and
related services and supplementary aids and
services provided in a regular class or other
education-related setting……. Even if one or
more disabled children benefit from those
services
(Part B Regulation 300.208(a)(1))
21
Technical Assistance and Training Activities
Each SEA must carry out activities to ensure teachers
and administrators in all public agencies
(a) Are fully informed about these responsibilities for
implementing 300.114 and
(b) Are provided with technical assistance and training
necessary to assist them in this effort
22
(Part B Regulation 300.119)
Placement Options
Consideration Planning Form
Considering child strengths and needs
Considering program characteristics
Current settings; inclusive?
Family preferences
Likelihood of achieving child goals in setting
with special education and supports provided
there
Accommodations, modifications, supplementary
aids and services needed
What other settings/placements are available?
(Barton & Smith, 2015)
23
Special Education is not a place,
but a service or system of services
to meet the needs of the child.
24
IDEA Requirements and Accountability
• IDEA 2004 designated the use of a State
Performance Plan (SPP) requiring annual
reporting (APR) on performance and
compliance targets
• Indicator B6 - Part B LRE for Children 3-5
• Annual child count collects educational
environments for preschool (618 data)
25
SPP/APR Indicator B6 Measurement
A. Percent of children aged 3 - 5 with IEPs
attending a regular early childhood program
and receiving the majority of special education
and related services in the regular early
childhood program.
B. Percent of children aged 3 - 5 with IEPs
attending a separate special education class,
separate school or residential facility.
26
Definitions
• Regular early childhood program (RECP)
• 50% or more typically developing children
• Head Start, public and private preschool,
kindergarten, child care
• Separate special education classroom, separate
school, residential facility
• Less than 50% typically developing
• Home
• Service provider location
27
Indicator 6A: Percent of children with IEPs
attending a RECP and receiving the
majority of services in the program
100%
44%
8%
Each bar represents a state or territory, 618 data, Dec 1 2013
28
Indicator 6B: Percent of children with IEPs
attending a special education program
62%
26%
0%
Each bar represents a state or territory, 618 data Dec 1, 2013
29
Educational Environments and Indicator B6
National & New Mexico Data
30
Educational Environments and Indicator B6
National & New Mexico Data
Educational Environments 3-5, 2013-14
RECP 10+
Majority
Service in
RECP
RECP 10+
Services
Other
Location
RECP <10
Majority
Service in
RECP
RECP <10
Services
Other
Location
Special
Education
Class
Separate
School
Residential
Facility
Home
Service
Provider
Location
National
38%
18%
5%
5%
23%
3%
0%
2%
6%
New Mexico
39%
5%
4%
2%
30%
10%
0%
0%
9%
31
B6 Data Reporting Tools
32
Source: EDFacts, File CO89
33
34
Using the B6 App for coding
Educational Environments - Faun
35
IDEA Data Center APP
B6 Data Reporting Tools: Educational
Environments, Ages 3-5
Interactive Application:
• https://ideadata.org/resourcelibrary/545d18f6140ba052308b456f/
Companion Toolkit:
• https://ideadata.org/files/resources/545d1
8f6140ba052308b456f/55ccb945140ba0f36
a8b4621/41893_b6_toolkit_508_revised/20
15/08/13/41893_b6_toolkit_508_revised.p
df
36
New Mexico
Special Education
Rule
NM PreK
FOCUS
37
NM PreK Statement of Assurances
4. All NM PreK classrooms will provide inclusive
settings for children with developmental delays and
disabilities:
 Amount and location of services is decided by the
child’s IEP team
 Special education services and equipment required
by the child’s IEP, including the costs of therapists
and special education staff can be funded by the
district or charter school’s special education budget
that includes both or either state operational funds
and IDEA B funds (basic or preschool)
 Ensure appropriate information and assessment
data for each child with an IEP in entered in both
the NM PreK and STARS databases.
38
NM PreK Statement of Assurances
5. Unless the IEP is modified to indicate a
different placement, children with special and/or
behavioral needs must not be dismissed from the
NM PreK Program solely because of their special
and/or behavioral needs.
39
NM PreK Statement of Assurances
13. Written transition policies and procedures that
assist families of children moving into the
program, exiting the program and/or transitioning
into kindergarten
 Transition procedures must reflect the diversity
and uniqueness of the children and community
in which they reside
 Procedures include a series of transition
activities throughout the year but do not replace
the child’s individual transition plan required by
IDEA for children with IEPs
40
NM PreK Statement of Assurances
17. NM PreK programs must adhere to the
maximum group size and ratios at all times:
• The maximum group size is 20 children. For
inclusive classrooms, the group size will be lower,
based on the needs of the children.
• The teacher-child ratio is 1:10 with one lead
teacher, and—if the group size is between 11
and 20—an assistant is assigned to the
classroom. Both the teacher and assistant must
be district or charter employees
41
42
• New Mexico’s systematic
approach acknowledges
and respects the
uniqueness of each
community, each family,
and each child and has
led to the establishment
of the Guiding Principles
for the Full Participation
of Young Children in New
Mexico’s Early Learning
System. The FOCUS:
Essential Elements of
Quality reflects these
Guiding Principles.
43
44
• The majority of
children with
developmental delays
and disabilities will
attend class for the
majority of the day
with same age peers
without disabilities
with supports and
services provided in
the classroom setting
(see LRE guidelines).
• Preschool program
integrates ancillary
services (e.g.,
occupational,
speech/language,
and/or physical
therapy) within regular
program activities and
routines to the
maximum extent
appropriate as
indicated in the child’s
IEP.
45
Preschool program
personnel must modify the
indoor and outdoor physical
and learning environments
(soliciting support from
facilities department) to
accommodate the needs of
children with disabilities and
developmental delays, with
supports from appropriate
service providers, as
indicated for the child with
an IEP.
46
Self- reflection on Barriers
Types of
Barriers &
Challenges
 Attitudes & Beliefs
 Policies
 Resources
47
Preschool Inclusion:
The FACTS
In 27 years, the practice of providing
special education and related services
in regular early childhood settings to
preschoolers with disabilities has
increased only 5.7% and many
young children with disabilities
continue to be educated in separate
settings.
48
Challenges and Barriers Exist
So We Must Look for
Strategies A National Study by Smith
and Barton (2014)
49
The Survey: Respondents
238 people responded to the survey.
This included representation from 32 states and 1 territory.
50
The Survey: Roles (2% “other”)
Roles
N
%
School District Special Education
Preschool Coordinator or Child Find
Coordinator
50
21.0%
School District Special Education
Director
49
20.6%
School District Early Childhood
Administrator
38
13.81%
State Section 619/IDEA Preschool
Coordinator
35
14.7%
Head Start Administrator
ECSE/Sped Teacher/Consultant
State Special Education Director
School Principal
School Psychologist
24
17
10
7
3
10.1%
7.1%
4.2%
2.9%
1.3%
51
What are the challenges to
preschool inclusion?
Challenges were grouped into 3
areas:
 Attitudes
Procedures/policy
Resources
52
Attitude & Belief
Challenges
• Lack of communication/collaboration
• Concerns someone will lose out
• Concerns related to preparedness
• Awareness of the benefits of inclusion
• Turf
• Lack of respect
• other
53
Policy Challenges
• 19 of 70 really policy
• Most identified as local, then state, then federal
• Categories of policy challenges:
1. Ensuring Effectiveness of Personnel and
Curricula
2. Fiscal Policies (contracting; $ streams)
3. Transportation Policies
4. Ensuring Quality and other policies
5. Ensuring inclusion as LRE option
54
Resource Challenges
 Community programs full; no slots
 Lack of resources for transportation for
typical kids
 Lack of resources for itinerate services
55
Solutions and Strategies
that Support Preschool
Inclusion
56
Attitude & Belief
Solutions/Strategies
Two categories
1.
Collaboration across regular EC and ECSE
personnel; between district and community
programs
2.
Building awareness/support
57
1. A/B Solutions: Collaboration
Establish interagency inclusion team
Provide awareness materials and
opportunities for local administrators
Provide joint PD for district EC, ECSE,
and community personnel
Ensure support to community programs
for ECSE and behavior support
Build culture of collaborative problem
solving
58
2. A/B Solutions: Build
Awareness & Support
Provide quick to read materials on benefits/laws
for preschool inclusion for all stakeholders:
administrators, families, providers
Provide models of high quality inclusion for
people to visit
Provide opportunities for practitioners,
administrators and families to explore concerns,
benefits and possible solutions
Arrange meetings with teachers, parents and
administrators involved in successful inclusion
59
Policy Solutions & Strategies
Make public school programs inclusive:
create tuition based access to district EC
programs for nondisabled children from
community
make district pre-k, Title I programs inclusive
Reimburse parents for transportation
Create a state-level inclusion team for “barrier
busting” that responds to local concerns
State dissemination to districts of creative ways to 60
provide inclusion; examples; incentives
Resource Solutions &
Strategies
Braiding funding streams (pre-k, IDEA, Title I,
etc.)
Collaboration
Redistribution (itinerate/consultative vs.
segregated)
Public awareness of the benefits=$$
Literature indicates inclusive services do not
cost more than segregated
61
Working Lunch Activity
• Use the worksheets and
identify or review the
barriers and concerns you
have noted.
• Share your concerns and
challenges with peers
• Put them on post it notes
(Print)and place on the flips
charts with topics
identified
• Print any questions that
arise for the state to
consider on a post it note.
• Review the worksheet
strategies and look for
potential strategies that
might be a good fit.
• Discuss and share
strategies to address your
concerns and barriers.
• Print the strategy on a post
it note and place on the
relevant flip chart paper.
• Print any questions that
arise for the state to
consider on a post it note.
62
Session E
Leading Quality Inclusive Programs
Service Delivery Approaches,
Staffing Patterns, and Financing
Strategies
63
Objectives and Organization
Provide an overview of the joint policy statement
recommendations for resource allocation to support
inclusion.
Provide an overview of federal and state funding
requirements and policies.
Share illustrations and examples for funding
inclusive service delivery models and staffing
patterns.
Share resources for analyzing and understanding
funding streams and the relationship to and impact
on service delivery models and staffing patterns.
64
Federal Sources to Use
• Joint Policy Statement
• Federally funded research and TA
projects
• IDEA
• EDGAR – Education Department
General Administrative Regulations
• OMB –Office of Budget and
Management Circular
65
Joint Policy Statement
and
Federally funded Research
and TA Projects
66
What does Research and Experience Say?
Preliminary research shows that operating
inclusive early childhood programs is not
necessarily more expensive. (3, 43)
Promote a mixed delivery system of high quality
inclusive early learning opportunities by
establishing partnerships with private early
childhood programs and ensuring that all
programs can support the learning and
development of all children.
67
Examine Resource Allocation
At the State Level
Review how existing resources are allocated and how
they may be reallocated to better support increased
access.
Consider using funds across multiple early childhood
programs , particularly IDEA funds with other early
childhood funding streams
Determine how to most efficiently and effectively utilize
funds from different funding streams.
Provide technical assistance and guidance to LEAs and
early childhood programs on allocating resources and
braiding
68
Questions to Examine Resource Allocation
How might we support early intervention, early
childhood special education, related services
providers, and other specialized providers in
providing consultative services to early childhood
programs?
How can we optimize the distribution of specialized
providers, materials, and equipment across early
childhood programs?
How are PD/TA resources being used to expand
access to training/coaching, specific to supporting
children with disabilities to all staff?
69
Questions to Examine Resource Allocation
How are IDEA funds used to provide services in
inclusive programs typically developing peers?
How are we allocating funds and formalizing
partnerships with community-based early childhood
programs, including child care, to establish a mixed
delivery system, where children can receive inclusive
early learning opportunities in different settings?
How might resource allocation support some early
childhood special educators shifting from full time
teachers to providing consultative services?
70
Additional Recommendations
Establish an Appropriate Staffing
Structure and Strengthen Staff
Collaboration
Ensure Access to Specialized Supports
Develop Formal Collaborations with
Community Partners
71
Definitions
At the program level:
Blended funds are funds from two or more
separate funding sources wrapped together
within one full-workday, full-year program
budget to pay for a unified set of program
services to a group of children.
Costs are not necessarily allocated and tracked by
individual funding source.
72
(Wallen & Hubbard, 2013, Ounce of Prevention)
Definitions
At the program level:
Braided funds are two or more funding sources
coordinated to support the total cost of services
to individual children, but revenues are allocated
and expenditures tracked by categorical funding
source.
Cost allocation methods are required to assure
that there is no duplicate funding of service costs
and that each funding source is charged its fair
share of program and administrative costs.
(Wallen & Hubbard, 2013, Ounce of Prevention)
73
•What Does the IDEA Say?
•What Does OMB say?
•What Does Edgar Say?
74
Use of Funds to Support Braiding
EDGAR
• 76.760 more than one program may assist a
single activity
• 76.761 Federal funds may pay 100% of cost
IDEA - Maintenance of Effort
• 300.203 Maintenance of Effort
• 300.204 Exceptions to Maintenance of Effort
• 300.205Adjustments to local fiscal efforts in
certain fiscal years
75
Use of Funds to Support Braiding
IDEA – State Maintenance of Financial Support
• 300.203 State Maintenance of Financial Support
• 300.163 Maintenance of state financial support
IDEA – Excess Costs
• 300.202 Use of Amounts
• 300.16 Excess Costs
IDEA – Prohibition Against Commingling of Funds
• 300.162 Supplementation of State, local and
other Federal Funds
76
OMB CIRCULAR A-87
revised 05/10/04
Pertains to Support of Salary and Wages
77
NM PreK Funding
• NM PreK is state-funded through a special
legislative appropriation (HB 2).
• Districts and charters must apply for funding.
• Funding is on a “per child” basis for all
children who are four-years-old prior to
September 1 of the school year and are not
age-eligible for kindergarten.
78
NM PreK Funding
• FY16 funding: $3,206.20 per child for half-day
programs (450 instructional hours)
• FY16 Funding: $6,412.40 per child for
extended-day pilot programs (900 instructional
hours)
• Districts/charter schools may receive both NM
PreK and special education funding for the
same child if the child with an IEP is placed in
an NM PreK classroom.
• A limited amount of funding is available for
transportation of students.
79
NM PreK Funding
• The NM PreK funding covers the “general
education” preschool program
• NM PreK ratios are 10 to 1, which may not
meet the needs of all children in the classroom.
Special education funding may be used to
lower ratios or provide additional supports to
meet the needs of the children in the
classroom
• All NM PreK classrooms must follow the NM
PreK Program Standards
80
A Cost Calculator to Examine Service Delivery Models
81
Using the Calculator
• This is for comparing costs for
different models
• This is only for the cost of the
specific # of children with IEPs
(green)
• This does not include all costs;
just main ones
82
Thoughts and Considerations
• Hire Ancillary vs. Contracting with Agencies
• Consider charging tuition for peers
• Pursue NM T.E.A.C.H. Scholarships to support staff in
attaining Early Childhood Education degrees.
• Work with outside agencies to support student
learning:
New Mexico School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
provide staff and training
New Mexico School for the Deaf provides consultation
UNM Center for Developmental Disabilities provides
training and coaching,
Head Start, Birth-Three agencies.
83
Considerations for Making Finance
Decisions to Promote Preschool
Inclusion (April 2012)
Developed by the National Early Childhood
Technical Assistance Center
http://ectacenter.org/~pdfs/topics/inclusion/finan
ceinclu.pdf
84
Key Considerations
Motivation and Partnerships
• Is there administrative support for inclusion?
• Have you identified partners for collaboration?
Settings, Staffing and Service Delivery
• In what settings will children receive services?
• How will the program be staffed to provide special
education supports and services?
• How will funds and in-kind contributions be used to
support the inclusive program?
Funding Streams and Accountability
• Which funding streams may be used to support inclusive
programs and special education services?
• What is the administrative and /or funding structure?
85
Time to Reflect and Talk
• Activity – Self reflection and small group
discussion
Use the handout from the tool kit that
has the questions from the previous slide.
• Place key issues, strategies and questions
for the state on the sticky walls before
leaving
86
Session G
Leading Quality Inclusive Programs
Continuing the Conversation on
Service Delivery Approaches and
Family Engagement
87
Objectives and Organization
Gain information on and share perspectives for
effective collaboration and teaming with families.
 Gain information on and share perspectives for
effective collaboration and teaming within
programs.
Receive information on designing and operating
inclusive service delivery models and staffing
patterns.
Gain and consider ideas for administrative support
for designing and implementing inclusive practices
and programs
88
Collaboration and
Supporting
Engagement with
FamiliesKey Members of the Team
89
Summary of the Research
In order to promote optimal
development for all children, early
childhood education programs and
policy decisions must be respectful of
the cultural and ethnic ideals of the
families they serve, not just those that
fit within the preconceived beliefs of
teachers, administrators, and
policymakers.
90
Provide a Welcoming
Environment
Make navigating the school easy by having
staff greet families near the entrance and
ensuring that signs are posted and clear.
Ensure there are clear continuous channels of
communication.
Encourage families to provide feedback
through a variety of venues.
91
Strive for Program-Family Partnerships
 Include families in decisions related to both
their own child’s education and the early
childhood education program as a whole.
 This includes on-going, collaborative goalsetting of children’s outcomes between
teachers and families.
 Facilitate complementary learning by
providing families with information and
resources to connect activities being
conducted during the program with the
home.
92
Make a Commitment to Outreach
 Conduct home visits, if families are
comfortable, where teachers can learn
from families about children’s home
environments and best learning styles.
 Model educational activities that families
can do at home to support children’s
learning.
 Ask families for their communication
preferences at the beginning of the school
year.
93
Perspectives on Inclusion
Special Quest Video –
Together We are Better
94
Collaboration
and Teaming
Within Programs
95
Collaboration Within Programs
The Administrator’s Role for Helping Staff Work
Together in Inclusive Preschool Programs
“Collaboration is the cornerstone of effective
preschool inclusion.”
(Wolery and Odom, Early Childhood Research Institute on Inclusion)
Collaboration is the relationship or partnership
between two or more individuals, programs, or
agencies.
96
Factors for Successful Collaboration
Seven Factors for Successful Collaboration
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Shared philosophy
Adequate time for staff communication
Joint participation in program development
Shared “ownership” of children
Role clarity
Stability in relationships
Administrative support
97
Service Delivery Models
Itinerant Consultation Model of Collaboration
Team Model of Collaboration
Co-Teaching Model of
Collaboration
98
Itinerant-Consultation Model
Special Education Consultant
 Serves a caseload of students with disabilities.
 The special education teacher/therapist delivers services
directly to the child, indirectly through the child’s teachers,
or through some variation of service delivery.
 Services occur on a continuum from isolated direct
services to complete consultation with the child’s teacher.
Administrator’s Role
Financial Support
Planning For Collaborative Consultation
Implementing Collaborative Consultation
Evaluating Collaborative Consultation
99
Team Model of Collaboration
Typically, team members include educators, ancillary staff and
when necessary, health care and social service representatives.
Three Team Models
1. Multidisciplinary Team Model
2. Interdisciplinary Team Model
3. Transdisciplinary Team Model
100
Co-Teaching Model of Collaboration
• Two teachers plan together and deliver instruction.
• Co-teaching allows the preschool teacher and the
special education teacher to combine their expertise
for the benefit of all children.
• The goal of the co-teaching arrangement is to have
both teachers share equally in the implementation of a
child’s IEP. Requires training and support.
Administrator’s Role
• Staffing
• Assist in development of Action Plan (space, roles and
responsibilities, schedules, management plan)
• Provide planning time
• Evaluate; Share successes and provide encouragement.
101
Blended Service Delivery
These models are not mutually exclusive, and often
occur together as services for young children are
planned and implemented.
102
Additional Thoughts &Considerations
• Consider increasing adult to child ratio when
child has more need for special
instruction/supervision.
• Consider staff expertise and experience
when developing class lists- vision, autism,
physical and developmental delays.
• Provide mentorship for staff in writing and
participating in IEP Process, example- Shining
Stars Practices.
103
Additional Thoughts &Considerations
• Preschool program integrates ancillary
services (e.g. occupational therapy,
speech/language, and/or physical therapy
within regular program activities and
routines to the maximum extent appropriate
as indicated in the child’s IEP.
104
Session J
Leading Quality Inclusive Programs
Collaboration, Teaming and
Partnerships
105
NEXT STEPS:
Effective Collaboration & Administrative Support
How will you support program change as
administrators and consultants?
What is going well that you want to support,
maintain and sustain?
What would you like to examine more closely to
see how it is working?
What do you need to change or redesign? What
resources will you need?
Who are your partners? In your school? in your
district? In your community?
106
Do you have a team?
Does your community have a
interagency group?
107
Recommendations for Action
• Step 1
• Step 2
meet
• Step 3
• Step 4
• Step 5
Build a team
Commit, communicate and
Develop an action plan
Assess & measure progress
Seek external support
(Hayden, Frederick & Smith, 2003 –A Road Map for Facilitating
Collaborative Teams)
108
Develop a Shared Vision
• Where do you want to see our (inclusive)
program in 3-5 years?
• What are the realistic services and
procedures that will support inclusion in
our program?
• How will inclusion benefit our children and
families?
• Conduct a SWOT Analysis
(Hayden, Frederick & Smith, 2003 –A Road Map
for Facilitating Collaborative Teams)
109
Revisiting:
How are you feeling about inclusion?
1 =Not sure or comfortable about how to
implement inclusive practices and
programs
2. Somewhat unsure and uncomfortable
but interested in learning more
3. Very interested and ready to move
forward with TA and guidance
4. Totally ready and implementing some
or all inclusive practices in our program
110
Final Thoughts…….
• After yesterday and today, what did you see or hear that
stands out in your mind regarding inclusion?
• What was exciting? What concerned or worried you?
• What is something that you want to do as an individual
to support and implement more inclusive practices back
home?
• What do you want your program to do next? What
seems like an important next step?
111