Creating a Paradigm Shift in
Early Intervention:
Goals and Progress of the
Canadian Early Intervention
Project
Education Graduate Student’s Society
Conference
Panel Presentation
March 10, 2007
Creating a
Paradigm Shift
“awareness is prerequisite to all acceptable
changes…” (Kuhn, 1970)
“with regard to human life, paradigm shift is a
dynamic and interventional metamorphosis…”
(Lloyd, 2005)
“scientific advancement is not evolutionary….it is
a series of peaceful interludes… where one
conceptual world is replaced by another…a
metamorphosis or transformation driven by
agents of change” (Kuhn, 1962)
Purpose
To engage policy makers,
practitioners, and other key
stakeholders in specific discussion
forums in the area of early childhood
development, policies and practices
to ultimately create a paradigm shift
in Early Intervention (EI)
Need to know:
Current practices in Canada with respect to
families and children with developmental delays
Current service delivery frameworks in
Canada for families and children with
developmental delays
Current policies in Canada with respect to
families and children with developmental delays
Panel
Ingrid E. Sladeczek, PhD, Primary Investigator
Associate Professor, School/Applied Child Psychology
Nancy Miodrag, PhD Candidate
Special Population of Learners
Jennifer Saracino, MA Candidate
School/Applied Child Psychology
Anastasia Karagiannakis, PhD Candidate
Special Population of Learners
Yaffa Tegegne, Faculty of Law
Ashleigh Yule, MA Student
School/Applied Child Psychology
Definition of
Developmental Delay
Definition endorsed by the Disabilities Assistance
and Bill of Rights Act (2000)
Looking at individuals from birth through age 9,
who have a specific congenital condition,
acquired condition, delay, or are at risk for
meeting these criteria later in life, that affect the
following areas of functioning: self-care,
receptive and expressive language, learning,
mobility, self-direction, capacity for independent
living, or economic self-sufficiency.
(http://www.cdl.unc.edu/psychology)
Current Obstacles Impinging
Upon Policy, Practice
& Service Delivery
Practitioners and researchers all recognize the
need for interventions that have a strong
empirical basis for efficacy. However, millions
are spent on interventions that are not evidencebased (Eaves & Ho, 2003; Freeman, 1997;
Jacobsen et al., 2005; Kozloff, 2005).
We must ask ourselves how to make the best use
of limited resources and explore and identify
other, possibly more effective models.
Other Challenges
Thousands of children in Canada have pervasive
developmental disorders and the average
Canadian annual cost is in excess of $3 billion
(Simmermon, 2002).
Because of a lack of bridging between research
and policy, sometimes policy decisions are made
without a full understanding of the complexity of
intervention effects.
Some Headlines
“Families seek order requiring BC government to pay for the cost of
treatment for children with ASD” (Supreme Court of BC, April 2000).
“Landmark decision made by the Supreme Court of Canada which
essentially has absolved provinces from paying for intensive applied
behaviour analysis for children with autism – ‘ a novel, controversial,
experimental, and a not a medically necessary service’” (The
Montreal Gazette, November 2004--Auton Case, BC)
“MRI’s could unlock mysteries of Autism” (Associated Press, April 12,
2004)
“Parents of Children with Autism in Ontario Angry over Delays”
(Canadian Press, November 19, 2004)
Some Headlines
“Nova Scotia launches Program for Children with Autism”
(Associated Press, December 2, 2004)
“Ontario Parents sue Schools in New Autism Lawsuit” (CTV
News Staff, December 7, 2004)
“Ontario Removing Age Limit for Autism Therapy” (CTV
News Staff, September 3, 2006)
“Province should fund Lovaas treatment for Autism” (The
Vancouver Sun, November 23, 2004)
Headlines
Issues have underscored a glaring need
for research in this area, the lack of clarity
in public policy, and has stirred strong
emotional reactions by family advocacy
groups seeking specialized services for
their children and policy makers’ concerns
regarding types of services needed and
who should pay for them.
What is
Early Intervention?
We conceptualize Early Intervention (EI)
as a systematically planned method of
taking actions based on the child’s needs
during the early pivotal years of life.
What do we need
for effective EI?
Guralnick (2003), for example, found that EI must be
comprehensive, intensive, extended over time,
individualized and delivered directly to the child.
Key factors for success include:
– Age of the child at the beginning of the intervention (Blackman, 2002,
2003; Corsello, 2005; Ramey & Ramey, 2003);
– Intensity and amount of services provided (Guralnick, 2000; Smith,
Groen, & Wynn, 2000; Wolery & Garfinkle, 2002).
– Parent involvement (Blackman, 2002; Guralnick, 1998; Mahoney et al.,
1999; McCollum, 2002; Ramey & Ramey, 1998 Shonkoff & HauserCram, 1987; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000).
– Highly structured programs with frequent measurement of goal
attainment, regular use of child assessment data, and monitoring and
modification of instruction can increase effectiveness and positive
outcomes (Beatson & Prelock, 2002; Shonkoff & Hauser-Cram, 1987;
Wolraich, Gurwitch, Bruder, & Knight, 2005).
Child Outcomes
Researchers have demonstrated that
children with developmental delays can
achieve large, comprehensive, and
lasting gains with appropriate
interventions
(Birnbrauer & Leach, 1993; Charman, 2003; Couper,
2004; Fenske et al., 1985; Scheinkopf & Siegel, 1998;
Smith, Groen et al., 2000; Spiker, Hebbeler, & Mallik,
2005).
National Blueprint for
Canadian Families of
Children with
Developmental Delays
What goals have we set out to
accomplish in this EI project?
Goal 1
The development of an empirically
based protocol that will guide
screening, diagnosis, intervention,
and evaluation decisions for health
care professionals working with
children with developmental delays
from 0 to age 9 and their families.
Goal 1 (continued)
Domains of functioning that are being assessed
include:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Motor functioning
Speech-language and Communication
Cognitive functioning
Family
Behaviour/social-emotional
Medical/developmental
Neurology
Adaptive functioning
Goal 2
The evaluation of the impact of diverse
private, not for profit, public and government EI
centres in Quebec and Ontario wherein
children and families will be followed for a 2
year time period, which will enable us not only
to ascertain the overall impact of EI, but also
to determine which intervention components
are best matched to particular types of
developmental profiles and family
characteristics.
Goal 2 (continued)
Collect retrospective family and intervention data
and establish baseline measures for all children
using the new assessment protocol
Evaluate children every 6 months over 2 years
using assessment protocol
Presently, 5 EI sites (i.e., government funded,
not-for-profit, private, public) have been
identified and will be compared
Analyse data and assess significance of early
intervention factors and effect on outcomes
Disseminate results to EI centres
Goal 2 (continued)
Hold a teleconference with policy makers and
panel of EI experts to discuss results.
Disseminate results to pediatricians,
professional associations, parents, government
health planning bodies and others.
Hold a conference with government and health
ministry officials responsible for EI policy to
discuss results.
Goal 3
The development of an inventory and
analysis of EI models/centres across
Canada, and identification of the most
common characteristics, best practices,
and critical success factors in EI that
allows for the comparison of different
service delivery frameworks.
Goal 4
A Public Policy Action Group is being constituted that will
develop and implement specific strategies to:
• Identify and prioritize key stakeholders and
decision makers in EI policies and practices;
• Identify key policy change agents, solicit their
input on current perceived or actual deficiencies
in policy, service, planning and practices and
soliciting recommendations for lobbying and
implementing change;
• Disseminate information on an ongoing basis;
• Engage stakeholders in specific discussion
forums on creating a paradigm shift in EI;
• Develop a consensus of what changes are
needed and recommend and implement a
process for effecting these changes.
Closing Introductory Remarks
Our objective today is to inform and
engage you in a dialogue regarding EI
services and policies which will
eventually lead to the creation of the
National Blueprint for Canadian
Families of Children with
Developmental Delays.
Early Intervention Inventory
A survey of
early intervention services
across Canada
Purpose of the National
Inventory
• To analyze EI models/centres and their
grouping of services in various private, not
for profit, public and government sectors
• To identify the most common
characteristics, best practices and critical
success factors in Early Intervention (as
well as current gaps in service delivery)
Our Survey Instrument
• 29 item instrument
• 15-20 minutes to complete
• Open ended and fixed response items
• Types of Questions:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Demographic information
Services & service models
Wait lists
Professionals
Funding & costs
General Comments
Where are we now?
• Instrument Developed
• Constructed list of target centres
• Sent survey out December 2006
• Over 150 responses to date
Choosing Our Target Centres
• Services or supports for children with
developmental delays
• At least two types of services provided
• Targeting the executive director whenever
possible
Centres by Province
Province/Territory
Number of Centres to Date
British Columbia
142
Alberta
128
Saskatchewan
68
Manitoba
41
Ontario
220
Quebec
54
Nova Scotia
82
Newfoundland & Labrador
56
New Brunswick
54
Prince Edward Island
22
Northwest Territories
31
Yukon
16
Nunavut
9
TOTAL
932
Where are we going?
• Sponsorship
• Sending out hard copies/conducting telephone
interviews
• Deadline for survey completion – April 2007
• Data analysis – June 2007
• Report – August 2007
What do we want to know?
Province Comparisons
Do significant differences exist across Canada in terms of
the average number of services and professionals at the
centre?
Do significant differences exist across Canada in terms of
the average wait time to receive services?
Do significant differences exist across Canada in terms of
personnel satisfaction with child outcomes and perceived
parental satisfaction?
Do significant differences exist across Canada in terms of
perceptions of the provincial/territorial government’s
ability to meet the needs of children and families with
developmental delays?
What do we want to know?
General Findings: PREDICTIONS
There will be a positive relationship between the combined
wait time for assessment and service delivery and the
length of time for which the child requires services.
There will be a negative relationship between the combined
wait time for assessment and service delivery and the
perception of parent satisfaction.
There will be a positive relationship between the number of
services provided at the centre and satisfaction with child
outcomes.
Outcome of the Inventory
• Improved knowledge of EI service models
• Improved knowledge of current EI services and
identification of gaps and critical issues in EI
services
• Sensitize EI centres to best practices, success
factors and alternative models
• Motivate EI centres to reexamine practices in
light of inventory of other models
• Encourage EI centres to add new elements in
their interventions
Longitudinal Study of Children
with Developmental Delays and
Disabilities in EI
What have we accomplished thus far?
Project Goals
A. Development of Assessment Protocol
(AP)
B. Longitudinal Panel Design (Yaldei)
C. Comparison of Research Sites over time
A. Assessment Protocol (AP)
• Experts from around the world consulted:
– Medicine
– Psychology
– Psychiatry
– Social work
– Speech language-Communication
– Occupational and Physiotherapy
– Family and Human Development
– Kinesiology
– Play therapy
Development of AP
• Extensive review of assessment methods
in the current EI literature
• 8 domains:
– Motor functioning
– Speech-language and Communication
– Cognitive
– Family
– Behaviour/Social-emotional
– Medical/Developmental
– Neurology
– Adaptive functioning
8 Domains of Functioning
1. Motor functioning: Motoric Functioning (perceptual, gross, fine);
coordination; visual-motor integration
2. Speech-language and Communication: Focus on receptive and
expressive language; Phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics,
pragmatics
3. Cognitive: Development of perception, memory, language,
concepts, thinking, problem solving, metacognition, and social
cognition; academic performance
4. Family: Family ecology; focus on family functioning centered on
outcomes for wellbeing (parental stress, parental psychopathology,
coping and adaptation, cognitive appraisal, impact of child
behaviour on parenting, parent-child interaction, marital satisfaction,
family support systems)
8 Domains of Functioning (cont.)
5. Behaviour/Social-emotional: Social, behavioural
and emotional functioning (social-cognition, social
skills development, behaviour problems, peerrelated social competence, emotion regulation.
6. Medical/Developmental: Standard developmental
and medical tests conducted by pediatricians;
developmental milestones
7. Neurology: Diagnosis and treatment of nervous
system disorders, including diseases of the brain,
spinal cord, nerves, and muscles.
8. Adaptive: Limitations in communication, self-care,
home living, social/interpersonal skills, use of
community resources, self-direction, functional
academic skills, work, leisure, health and safety.
Development of AP
• Potential tests were researched
• Policy makers, experts, and key informants
were consulted
• Teleconferences held for each domain with
world-renowned experts
• Experts helped:
– Identify ‘gold standard tools’
– Recommend other tools
– Identify critical issues in assessment (time
factor, validity, reliability)
To view the Assessment
Protocol go to:
http://www.earlyinterventioncanada.com/Assessment
_Protocol.html
B. Longitudinal Panel Design
• Comparison of YDC to other sites over time
– Collect retrospective and current family and
intervention data
– Cohort (n = 30) per site
– YDC children and families: followed over 2 yrs
– Establish baseline for all children in YDC cohort using
new AP
– Evaluate YDC children every 6 mos. over 2 year period
– Analysis of impact of YDC model compared to others
– Design: methodological advantages
• Gain insight on developmental processes over time
C. Comparison of Research Sites
What do we want to know?
1. What is the relative efficacy of different
EI service delivery models for children
with DD and their families across time?
2. Which of our outcome variables have
changed and to what degree?
3. Which variables are less affected by the
particular type of EI model of service
delivery?
Comparison of Research Sites
• Multi-site, non-experimental, longitudinal
• Repeated measures factor design
– Currently set out to conduct 3 repeated measures every 6 mos.
– Parents assessed on all measures
– Children assessed only on new measures; use prior scores if
available
• Anticipated sample size N = 150 Canadian children and
families
• Comparative analysis of YDC to 4 comparison sites
• Obtain same baseline data and end point data as YDC
• Analyze data and assess significance of EI factors and
effect on outcome for families
• Disseminate results to EI centres
Comparative Sites
To date:
• Identified 5 EI Sites across QC and ON
– 2 specialized day schools/treatment centre
– 1 rehabilitative community agency
– 2 early intervention centres
• Working closely with sites to coordinate data
collection with:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Clinical coordinators/principals
Speech-language therapies
Occupational and physiotherapists
Psychologists
Social Workers
Special educators
Currently we are…
• Training research assistants on the AP Child measures
– Intelligence, achievement, receptive and expressive language,
neuropsychological tests, observations of peer competence
• Training research site staff on measures of assessment
– Useful tools for future assessments at their respective site
• Compiling Parent measures
– Parental stress, parent psychopathology, behaviour problems,
social skills, and adaptive functioning of child, developmental
history questionnaire
• Compiling info on children and families
– Age, gender, developmental diagnosis, how long in EI, what
therapies they are have or are currently receiving, assessment
history, what assessments children have been measured on
• Gathering consent forms
– Child assent and Parent consent
• Field testing at YDC
– Parent interviews
Implications
• Children
– Developmental and significant advances in all areas
of functioning
– Thorough evaluation of the child
– Specific needs are being met
– Reduces need for specialized services
• Parents
– Better information base/knowledge; facilitate lobby
efforts for change
– Access better resources/services
– Reduced stress
– Increased wellbeing, coping mechanisms
– Help foster parent-child relationship, better attitudes,
parental competence
Specific research initiatives
• There are a multitude of questions that can be
addressed from this research endeavour
• Several graduate students in EI research lab are
pursing their own interests based on one of the
8 domains of functioning
• Questions represent specific interests, not
limited to only these research questions
• Example: Early intervention and adaptive
functioning: What works best for whom?
• Example: National assessment of service
delivery models
• Example: Parental stress and coping
Zach’s Story
• “We have been incredibly fortunate with
the early intervention program.”
• “[However], over the past two and a half
years we have found it very hard to
maintain consistency in our programs.”
• Challenges have included:
– Initial diagnosis
– Changing rules and procedures under their
provincial government’s funding program
– Finding keeping good qualified staff
Parental Stress and Coping
• 2 Research studies that emerged from
larger EI project
• Examining predictors of parental stress
and psychopathology
– Parental stress is a major health concern that
warrants attention in the lives of parents who
have a child with a DD
– Stress and coping vs. Pathology perspective
– Much variability in parental response to stress
– What predicts stress and how?
Two Studies
STUDY 1
• Identifying child, parent, and family predictors that affect
perceived parental stress and coping
– Child factors: age, disability, behaviour, IQ
– Parent factors: age, gender, educational level, marital status
– Family assets: cognitive appraisals of the child; coping mechanisms
• What factors predict outcome?
• How do mothers and fathers differ?
• What is the role of coping in perceived parental isolation?
STUDY 2
• Influence of children’s peer-related social competence and
behaviour problems and perceived maternal/paternal stress
– Does the type of disability mediate the relationship between child
behaviour problems and stress?
– How do children’s level of social-behavioural competence affect
mother’s and father’s perceptions of their child’s adaptability and
demandingness?
Small Group Activity
1. Based on our presentation and your
personal experiences in the field, identify
the common underlying issues, challenges
and obstacles within Early Intervention,
2. What possible strategies and solutions
would you recommend and envisage to
respond to, or alleviate the issues identified
in question 1?
Policy Issues in EI
Key Policy Issues
• Jurisdictional Issues
• Discrepancy in service provision across Canada
• Each province allocates a different amount of
funding and disparate services.
• How do the courts and legislature conceive of
the rights of children with disabilities?
• What obligations are incumbent upon the federal
and provincial governments?
• How far does the obligation extend?
• Policy Action Groups
Jurisdictional Issues
• EI programs often fall under the Ministries of
Education or Health which are under provincial
jurisdiction
• The freedom of each province to include or
exclude a specific treatment in its insured
non core services defines the notable
differences among provincial programs for
the treatment of children with DD
• This means that there will discrepancy in service
provision and funding across the country
• This leads to unequal access to supports and
services for children and families. Ex: Alberta
Rights and Obligations
The premise of most legal actions in Canada:
• It is discriminatory not to provide scientifically
validated effective treatment to certain groups of
people.
• Families also take the government to court
arguing that the eligibility cut-off is discriminated
on the basis of age (section 15 of the Charter)(rf.
Wynberg V. Ontario).
• Claiming of a violation of Section 7 (security of
the Person) of the Charter because ‘children
were subjected to compulsory special education
that was ineffective or harmful.
Current State of Affairs in Canada
• Decision of the Supreme Court of Canada has absolved
provinces from paying for intensive applied behaviour
analysis therapy for children with autism – “novel,
controversial, experimental, and not a medically
necessary service.”
• Issue has underscored the glaring need for research in
this area, the lack of clarity in public policy, and has
stirred strong emotional reactions by family advocacy
groups seeking specialized services for their children
and policy makers’ concerns regarding types of services
needed and who should pay for them.
Major Cases
British Columbia:
• The Auton case was the first case where a provincial appeal court
upheld a lower court's decision that Charter rights require a provincial
government to pay for a specific health treatment. (Auton Guardian ad
Litem of.)
• On appeal, the Supreme Court overturned the two lower court rulings.
They ruled that the British Columbia government's conduct had not
infringed the petitioners' rights under sections 15 and 7 of the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• Controversy surrounding different models of instruction and treatment
for children with autism
• Jurisdictional question of which provincial department(s) is responsible
for service delivery for children with special needs: Education, Health…
• Issue of limited government resources to fund programs for children
with special needs
• Elected governments, rather than the courts, will be left to determine
how public funds are allocated for health care services
Other Examples
Ontario:
•Since 2000, the Ontario government
has paid for Applied Behaviour Analysis
(ABA) for children under the age of six
with autism.
•30 families with children with autism
took the government to court, arguing
that the cut-off was discriminatory on the
basis of age (Section 15)
Ontario Jurisprudence
Wynberg V. Ontario 2005 CanLII 8749 (ON S.C.):
Each of these children is "exceptional" within the
meaning of s. 8(3) of the Education Act .... Once
that exceptionality has been identified, special
education programs and services become
available through publicly funded district
school boards pursuant to s. 170.
HOWEVER…
Ontario Jurisprudence
•The province has not allocated the funding
required to deliver programs. This leaves schools
and school boards in the untenable position of
addressing parental demands for services that
are not adequately funded.
•The Wynberg decision would make it more
difficult for provincial governments to restrict
funding to school boards and shift the financial
burden on the boards for the provision of services
to children with special needs
Other Examples
Québec:
• R.Q., CHAPITRE S-4.2
• "Toute personne a le droit de recevoir des services de
santé et des services sociaux adéquats sur les plans à la
fois scientifique, humain et social, avec continuité et de
façon personnalisée «(article 5) toutefois
• " Les droits aux services de santé et aux services sociaux
et le droit de choisir le professionnel et l’établissement
prévus aux articles 5 et 6, s’exercent en tenant compte
des dispositions législatives et réglementaires relatives à
l’organisation et au fonctionnement de l’établissement
ainsi que des ressources humaines, matérielles et
financières dont il dispose.” (Article 13)
Other Examples
Québec Charter:
•
" Toute personne dont la vie ou l’intégrité est en danger a le droit de recevoir
les soins que requiert son état. Il incombe à tout établissement, lorsque
demande lui en est faite, de voir à ce que soient fournis ces soins. " (article 7)
•
Informations: " Tout usager des services de santé et des services sociaux a le
droit d’être informé sur son état de santé et de bien-être, de manière à
connaître, dans la mesure du possible, les différentes options qui s’offrent à
lui ainsi que les risques et conséquences généralement associés à chacune
de ces options avant de consentir à des soins le concernant." (article 8)
•
Consentement requis: " Nul ne peut être soumis sans son consentement à
des soins, qu’elle qu’en soit la nature, qu’il s’agisse d’examens, de
prélèvements, de traitement ou de tout autre intervention. " (article 9)
•
Consentement aux soins: “Le consentement aux soins ou l’autorisation de les
prodiguer est donné ou refusé par l’usager ou, le cas échéant, son
représentant ou le tribunal, dans les circonstances et de la manière prévues
aux articles 19 du Code civil du Bas Canada. " (article 9)
•
Représentant: "Les droits reconnus à toute personne dans la présente loi
peuvent être exercé "
Québec Charter
Policy on Special Education (unveiled in January, 2000)
• 6 lines of action defined to guide intervention: measures for students with
LDs:
– importance of prevention, all those working with special populations must make
the adaptation of educational services a priority, adapt educational services
based on evaluation of students needs and abilities, with a view of integration
into the regular classroom, school should create a true educational community –
starting with students and parents, but also including the community, devote
particular attention to at-risk populations, particularly those with learning
difficulties, evaluation in terms of knowledge, social development, service quality;
must report the results
Services & Resources for Elementary Children with Learning Difficulties
• In elementary school, generally integrated into typical classroom
• One of the main services is remedial education (seem to work mainly
outside of the classroom but this is beginning to change)
• Grade repetition still frequently used as a means of getting the child to meet
competency requirements (although research shows it is ineffective)
• Schools use a broad array of measures to meet the needs of students with
LDs
• Workshops, support measures, individual teaching units, tutoring, remedial
units
• Innovative projects being piloted in several communities as well
Québec: Reforms
• 2003 Reform to the Health and Social Services
Act
• Conglomeration of regional services
• Mandate to fund private sector programs and
services not provided by the public sector.
• Not yet implemented
Nova Scotia
• Dassonville-Trudel vs. Halifax Regional School Board raises
several issues
• The case highlighted several key aspect of the funding and
jurisdictional disputes associated with programming for children
with autism
• What is a reasonable balance between parental funding
requests and limited funding resources, especially when the
gap between the two is extreme?
• This case exemplifies the serious procedural and jurisdictional
questions which often arise in the provision of services for
children with autism
• Questions of discretion in adherence to guidelines and policies
extend beyond funding disputes to other aspects of service
delivery for children with DD including transition planning in the
move from preschool to public school programs
Issues to Consider
•
Is EI a financial burden?
•
Which special services and programs fall
within the domain of public education?
•
If public education is free, why are parents
paying for these programs?
•
Dilemma of limited public funds to meet
unlimited public demands for services
Issues to Solve
•
Transitions between pre-school and public school
programs may present challenges for children with
developmental delays and for their families
•
Type of programs
•
Age Limits
•
A proper definition of “Reasonable Accommodation”
•
Jurisdictional Responsibility
•
Coordination between the federal and the provincial
level regarding actions for Children with DD
Implications and Future
Directions
• Role of the Federal Government?
• Must legal framework of education in
Canada be revisited?
• Are national definitions and standards
required to create a Canadian model of
adequate education for children with
special needs?
Policy Action Group
• What are we doing to address some of the above
issues?
• Contacts throughout various sectors, provinces and
ministries
• Goal of presenting to the National Blueprint for
Service Provision for Families and Children with
Developmental Delays
• Alert key sectors about our research, evolution and
website
• Conference to facilitate dialogue
• Current government priorities: Bill C303
• UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
Policy Advisory Group
Comprised of experts whose mandate will be to
develop and implement specific strategies that
include:
– identifying and prioritizing key stakeholders and
decision makers in early intervention (EI) policies and
practices;
– providing input on current perceived or actual
deficiencies in policy, service, planning and practices
and soliciting recommendations for lobbying and
implementing change;
– developing a consensus on what changes are needed
and recommending and implementing a process for
effecting these changes in EI policies.
Policy Advisory Group
Experts Consulted to Date
Professor Angela Campbell, Associate-Professor, Faculty of Law McGill University,
Montreal, QC
Ms. Trinela Cane, ADM, on behalf of Mary Anne Chambers, Minister of Children and
Youth Services, Toronto, ON
Ms. Hollee Card, L’Arche Canada, Montreal, QC
Dr. Antonia Maioni, Director, McGill Institute for the Study of Canada, Montreal, QC
Honourable Margaret McCain, First woman Lieutenant-Governor of New Brunswick,
Sudbury, ON
Representative on behalf of Principal Heather Munroe-Blum, McGill University,
Montreal, QC
Honourable Landon Pearson, Director of the Landon Pearson Resource Centre for
the Study of Childhood and Children’s Rights at Carleton University, Ottawa, ON
Dr. Ralph Strother, Senior Program Officer, Max Bell Foundation, Calgary, AB
Dr. Wendy Thompson, Director of School of Social Work, McGill University, Montreal,
QC
Research Advisory Group
Comprised of both scholars and
practitioners who are providing invaluable
feedback regarding our assessment
protocol to be used in the longitudinal part
of our study. They will continue to advise
us on an ongoing basis concerning a
myriad of clinical and methodological
issues. They will be kept apprised of all
findings and developments throughout the
study.
Research Advisory Group
Experts Consulted to Date
Mr. Ben Baer, Director of Yaldei Developmental Centre, Montreal, QC
Dr. Deborah Dewey, Professor and research Neuropsychologist, Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB
Ms. Katrine Doucet, Speech and Language Pathologist, Montreal, QC
Ms. Caroline Erdos, Speech and Language Pathologist, Montreal, QC
Dr. Emmett Francoeur, Pediatrician, Montreal Children’s Hospital, Montreal, QC
Dr. Eric Fombonne, Director of Psychiatry Department, Montreal Children’s Hospital, Montreal, QC
Dr. Shuvo Ghosh, Child Developmental Pediatrician, Montreal Children’s Hospital Montreal, QC
Dr. Erika Gisel, Professor, School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, Montreal, QC
Dr. Coral Kemp, Senior Lecturer in Special Education, Australian Centre for Educational Studies, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
Dr. Lucy Lachs, Assistant Professor, School of Social Work, McGill University, Montreal, QC
Ms.Josee Laurendeau, Speech and Language Pathologist, Montreal, QC
Dr. Gabriel Leonard, Neuropsychologist, Montreal Neurological Institute, Montreal, QC
Dr. Michael Lewis, Developmental Psychologist, Distinguished Professor of Pediatrics and Psychiatry, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School,
New Brunswick, NJ
Dr. Annette Majnemer, Professor and Occupational Therapist, School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, Montreal, QC
Dr. Laraine Masters-Glidden, Developmental Psychologist, St-Mary’s College of Maryland, St. Mary’s City, MD
Ms. Barbara Nadler, Occupational Therapist, Yaldei Developmental Centre, Montreal, QC
Dr. Rhea Paul, Speech and Language Pathologist, New Haven, CT
Ms. Kimberley Reynolds, Developmental Progress Clinic Co-ordinator, Montreal Children’s Hospital, Montreal, QC
Ms. Nancy Ship, Speech and Language Pathologist, Montreal, QC
Dr. Wendy Thompson, Director of School of Social Work, McGill University, Montreal, QC
Dr. David Tupper, Neuropsychologist, University of Minnesota and Hennepin County Medical centre in Minneapolis, Minneappolis, MN
Dr. Caroline Zanni, School Psychologist, Summit School, Montreal, QC
Small Group Activity
1. In your opinion what would be the basic
services that should be guaranteed to
children diagnosed with developmental
delays?
2. Given the federal and the provincial budget
constraints, what recommendations would
you make for fiscal policies directed at
families of children with developmental
delays?
Closing Remarks
Thank you!
Canadian Early Intervention Research Team
Dr. Ingrid Sladeczek, PhD (primary investigator)
Phone: (514) 398-3450
Email: ingrid.sladeczek@mcgill.ca
Web: www.earlyinterventioncanada.com