Building Birth-Eight Information Systems:Strengthening the Focus on Early Childhood

BUILD Initiative Webinarwith

Charles Bruner & Ralph Smith

October 2010

Building 0-8 Information Systems:Strengthening the Focus on

Early Childhood

Charles Bruner Child and Family Policy Center &

BUILD InitiativeMay 2011

• Developing Information Systems– Comprehensive Efforts (SRII,

NNIP, DQC, ET, Early Childhood Data Collaborative)

– Best Practices– Integrated Approaches Spanning

0-8• Next Steps • Web Links• Checklist

Developing 0-8 Information Systems:Basic Resources

Questions You Sent In• How do you address the challenge of using “education”

data (3rd grade reading scores) without losing the “health/public health” focus/role?

Penny Hatcher, Supervisor of Child Health Programs, MN Department of Health

• What do we know about the skills needed in pre-k that prepare children for reading in kindergarten to third grade? What should be the focus of early childhood teachers to build the continuum?

Ana Berdecia, Senior Fellow/Director, Thomas Edison State College, NJ

1. Half of subsequent school difficulties/failure can be predicted by what children know and can do at the time of school entry.

2. Failure to be reading proficiently by the end of third grade is even more highly predictive of subsequent school failure; reading becomes fundamental to learning after that point.

3. The kids of greatest concern are mostly the same kids, and they need mostly the same things to succeed across the age span (0-8).

Why School Readiness and Third Grade Reading?

(and requires state and community information to address)

• A healthy start matters (birth to two years critically important)

• Parenting, health, early care environments, and early learning opportunities matter

• Addressing cognitive and non-cognitive development (five domains) matters

• Neighborhood/community matters• Participation and inclusion matter• Investments and quality matter

What Matters for School Readiness Matters for Third Grade Reading

Proficiency

• 20-40% of births to families with significant concerns• 13% of six month-2 year olds with developmental delays

eligible for Part C• 19% of 2-5 year olds with diagnosable mental disorders• Profound gaps in language and literacy development

exist at 36 months of age• 20% of children start school behind on more than one

dimension (cognitive, social/emotional, physical)• 30% of fourth graders are not at basic reading level• One-fifth to one-third of all kids are not getting all they

need to succeed at even a basic level.

What National Information Shows – The Prevalence of Risk/Adverse Outcomes

Early Learning/Education

Health, Mental

Health and Nutrition

Family Support

Special Needs/ Early Intervention

All children should have access to early care and education opportunities in nurturing environments where they can learn what they need to succeed in school and life. All children should be in high performing community schools for their elementary school years.

All families should have economic and parenting supports to ensure all children have nurturing and stable relationships with caring adults.

All children with special needs should be identified as early as possible, assessed, and receive appropriate services.

All children should have comprehensive health services that address vision, hearing, nutrition, behavioral, and oral health as well as medical health needs.

Source: Early Childhood Systems Working Group. 2006. ADAPTED in underline.

State Birth to Eight Development System

Early Learning

Health, Mental

Health and Nutrition

Family Support

Special Needs/ Early Intervention

20-30% high quality early childhood education

40-60% family strengthening and village building

5-10% timely interventions for MH, DD, & CW Services

15-25% comprehensive, prenatal -early children’s health care

Contributions to Closing the Gap: 0-5

Early Learning

Health, Mental

Health and Nutrition

Family Support

Special Needs/ Early Intervention

35-55% high performing community schools

30-40% family strengthening and village building

5-10% timely interventions for MH, DD, & CW Services

10-15% children’s health care

Contributions to Closing the Gap: 6-8

• Data at kindergarten entry provides both an “outcome for earlier actions” and a way to calculate earlier participation rates by subpopulations.

• Data in 1st-3rd grade can serve as lagging indicators of school readiness and suggest degree of sustainability of gains among different populations and for specific programs.

Key Role of Using K-3 Data with Early Childhood Program Data for

Birth to Five Purposes

• Comprehensive (all systems serving children)– Health coverage, utilization, and health outcomes– Participation in early childhood services/activities and developmental

progress– Attendance and progression in school and educational mastery– Identification and response to specialized needs (child protection, Part C

and B, child mental health) and correction/ameliorization of conditions– Family/community social connections, economic stability, and

participation in family support activities and parents as first teachers, nurses, and safety officers of their kids

• Interoperable (unique identifier, cross-system information sharing)• Longitudinal/real-time (cradle to career, accessible for case

planning)• Geographic (neighborhood/census tract level)

One Approach: Visioning and Developing an Ideal 0-8 Child Information System

• Comprehensive (all systems serving children)– Health coverage, utilization, and health outcomes– Participation in early childhood services/activities and developmental

progress– Attendance and progression in school and educational mastery– Identification and response to specialized needs (child protection, Part C

and B, child mental health) and correction/ameliorization of conditions– Family/community social connections, economic stability, and

participation in family support activities and parents as first teachers, nurses, and safety officers of their kids

• Interoperable (unique identifier, cross-system information sharing• Longitudinal/real-time (cradle to career, accessible for case

planning)• Geographic (neighborhood/census tract level)

One Approach: Visioning and Developing an Ideal 0-8 Child Information System

• Census, American Community Survey Data• Getting Ready data identified in School Readiness

Indicators Initiative• Public funding data• Other administrative data • National and state survey data• School data (from statewide longitudinal data base)

My Approach/Opportunity to Share:Selectively Analyzing Existing Available

(or Easily Collectible) Data

Questions You Sent In

• What are best/relatively simple indicators to use for identifying progress/problems before the 3rd grade?

Paul Shinn, Public Policy Analyst, Community Action Project of Tulsa County, Oklahoma

• How do we begin to build a platform for a “developmental status registry?”

Anne Stone, Executive Director, OR Pediatric Society

• ACS – diversity of child population• Public funding data – investments by child age• ACS – vulnerable child raising neighborhood data• School data – preschool participation at kindergarten

entry & preschool participation and early elementary development

• ACS – preschool data overall• School data – early elementary attendance data

…from data to information

Diversity in America:Young Children Leading the Way

6.5%

14.0%

18.6%

6.4%

22.3%

Teachers (1-8)

65+

18-64

5-17

0-4

Age

Source: United States Census Bureau, 2005 American Community Survey (age)Current Populations Services, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2006 (teachers)

44.9%

40.8%

32.4%

18.9% Hispanic population

17.9%

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

Infants and Toddlers (0-2) Pre-schoolers (3-5) School-age Children (6-18)

State and LocalFederal

$609

$2,409

$9,531

Source: Early Learning Left Out 3rd Edition

See also http://www.financeproject.org/publications/GLR_Guide.pdf

For every dollar invested in a school-aged child, only 6 cents is invested inan infant and toddler and 25 cents ina preschool child

Per Child Composite Investments in Education and Development by Child Age

50 States & District of Columbia Composite Assessment

Composition of Census Tracts by Child-Raising Vulnerability Status

All Tracts

NoRisk Factors

6-10 Risk Factors

Total Population 281,421,906 164,392,149 18,859,833

Percent of Population 58.41% 6.70%

RiskFactors/Vulnerability Indicators

Percent Single Parent 27.13 20.46 53.10

Percent Poor Families with Children 13.57 7.18 41.43

Percent 25+ no HS 19.60 13.53 48.00

Percent 25+ BA or Higher 24.00 28.67 7.14

Percent 16-19 no School/Work 6.00 3.05 15.00

Percent HoH on Public Assistance 7.81 4.87 25.48

Percent HoH with Wage Income 77.72 80.60 69.10

Percent HoH – Int/Div/Rent/Home 35.87 42.31 11.05

Percent 18+ Limited English 4.62 1.87 17.52

Percent Owner-Occupied Housing 60.24 71.00 29.62

SOURCE: Geolytics Census 2000 Data from Urban Institute, Washington, DC

Calhoun County, MichiganModerate Risk Tracts and EDI Scores

Calhoun County

Moderate Risk Tracts

EDI Vulnerability ScoresPhysical Health 20% 31%Social Competence 15% 22%Emotional Maturity 16% 19%Language/Cognitive Development 14% 21%Communications/General Knowledge 9% 16%Vulnerable at Least 1 Domain 36% 52%Vulnerable 2 or More Domains 19% 30%Note: The moderate risk census tracts are those with 3 or more risk factors. EDI = Early Development Index used in the TECCS Initiative.

61.1% 57.8%46.7%

57.0%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

White Non-Hispanic

AfricanAmerican

Hispanic Total

Source: US Census Bureau, 2009 American Community Survey, Public Use Microdata Sample

U.S. 4-Year-Old Preschool Participation by Ethnicity

48.2%54.6%

43.3% 47.8%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

White Non-Hispanic

AfricanAmerican

Hispanic Total

Source: US Census Bureau, 2009 American Community Survey, Public Use Microdata Sample

75.9% 73.6%

64.5%74.1%

U.S. 4-Year-Old Preschool Participation, Less than 200% and Greater than 400%

Poverty

LIGHT BLUE Under 200% of Poverty DARK BLUE Over 400% of Poverty

Preschool Involvement and Subsequent Student Achievement: Council Bluffs,

Iowa

181919202021212222

Beginning Year End-Year Gain

District Preschool Not Low SES No Preschool Not Low SESALL STUDENTS District Preschool Low SESNo Preschool Low SES

+1.15+ .48

+ .73+ .98

+ .25

First Grade Math Scores by SES and District Preschool Involvement

Council Bluffs School District 2005-06

• Data was consistent with Council Bluffs on kindergarten entry assessments by FRM/preschool participation.

• Participation (particularly of FRM students) in statewide universal preschool varied widely by school district.

• English language learners were least likely to participate, relative to their presence in the kindergarten population.

• Most of the participation of low-income children was the result of enhancing preschool for children already in Head Start and not expanded outreach and enrollment; most increased preschool participation rates in 200-400% of poverty child population.

Preschool Participation Rates in Iowa Statewide Longitudinal Data Base:

Who’s Being Reached

Attendance Counts Data

Rate of Chronic Absenteeism and Average Daily Attendance

Select Metropolitan School District, 2008-2009y = -4.0283x + 3.9508

R2 = 0.8258

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

91% 92% 93% 94% 95% 96% 97% 98% 99% 100%

Average Daily Attendance (ADA)

Rat

e of

chr

onic

ab

sent

eeis

m

93% ADA = 21% Chronic Absence

97% ADA = 4% Chronic Absence

• BUILD Data Related Reports (www.buildinitiative.org)– Building Public Early Childhood Data Systems for a Multi-Ethnic

Society– Opportunities to Incorporate Young Child Data into Statewide

Longitudinal Data Systems– The Early Learning Network in Pennsylvania– Federal Funding and Young Children Part One: Directions,

Opportunities, and Challenges to States in Building Early Childhood Systems

– Federal Funding and Young Children Part Two: Securing Funding Flexibility to Improve Children’s Healthy Development

Sharing Experiences in Analyzing Data as well as Developing New and More

Comprehensive Data Systems

Questions You Sent In

• Can you address the importance of real engagement of families to promote emergent literacy in very young children by providing strategies to intentionally guide families on how to promote literacy in the home? It is my belief that the culture of education and literacy in the home sets the tone for children.

Sherry Linton, Project Director, CT Early Childhood Education Cabinet

Charles BrunerDirector of Research and Evaluation, Build Initiative Director of Child and Family Policy Centercbruner@cfpciowa.org

www.buildinitiative.orgwww.finebynine.orgwww.cfpciowa.org

LEARNING TO READ: Developing 0-8 Information Systems to Improve Third Grade Reading Proficiency http://www.cfpciowa.org/uploaded/AEC%20Resource%20Guide%20Learning%20to%20Read1_1.pdf

Contact Information

Ralph Smith• Executive Vice-President, Annie E. Casey Foundation