Individualized Family Service Plan Quality and Alignment of Child-Focused Outcomes to Federal Outcomes and State Early Learning Guidelines

Abstract

We used two judgment-based scales to evaluate quality features of 623 individualized family service plans (IFSP) contributed by 73 service coordinators in one state. We also explored the alignment between the skills specified in child-focused IFSP outcomes, the three Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) early childhood outcome categories, and the knowledge and skill statements included in state early learning guidelines. Findings showed IFSP content generally was family-centered and of good quality. Outcomes were more frequently aligned with the IDEA outcome categories addressing the use of appropriate behaviors to meet needs and the acquisition and use of knowledge and skills. Outcomes were aligned more frequently with early learning guidelines in the areas of physical development, speech/language development, and approaches to learning. We discuss how instruments and procedures could be used to evaluate IFSP quality and determine connections to expected knowledge and skills for all children identified by state and federal programs.

Family‐centred care in early intervention: A systematic review of the processes and outcomes of family‐centred care and impacting factors

“…The subtheme of family support needs included post‐diagnostic support to increase ‘parent acceptance of disability’ (Mahoney & O'Sullivan, 1990) and information needs such as helping the family ‘understand child's disability’ (Mahoney & O'Sullivan, 1990). The subtheme of care plan documentation accounted for the role of the participation care plan (Bosak et al, 2019) or IFSPs (Ridgley et al, 2020) as a concrete outcome, and its role in supporting and measuring the achievement of identified goals. The topic of quality of life had wider implications beyond the child, representing the quality of family life with consequences for siblings, the wider family system, planning for the future, respite care, financial support, coping skills, social prospects and ethical concerns as outlined by Pickering and Busse (2010).…”

“…Service operations and resources was the most frequent theme, accounting for factors such as the endorsement and ‘formation of quality teams’ at the service level (Ely & Ostrosky, 2018), the ‘frequency of professional contact with family’ (Wilkins et al, 2010), ‘administrative’ difficulties (Mahoney & O'Sullivan, 1990), service coordination (Fordham et al, 2012) and time constraints (Douglas et al, 2020), amongst other variables. This was related to the theme of service location and logistics , which included the ‘distance between child and therapy’ (Dall'Alba et al, 2014), the distance between team members (Brotherson et al, 1993), and service delivery settings such as home‐ versus clinic‐based service delivery (Ridgley et al, 2020) and EI provided in education settings (Ueda & Yonemoto, 2020). This therefore accounted for the significance of context in the effective delivery of FCC.…”

“…Care planning and goal setting revealed the importance of formal administrative processes such as Individualized Family Service Plans (IFSPs) (Bosak et al, 2019) and clear guidelines/protocols (Carter & Thomas, 2011) in the provision of FCC, especially in newer publications. Similarly, Routines‐Based Interviewing was employed as a means of setting functional and meaningful child and family goals (Ridgley et al, 2020). The subthemes of professionals around the child and family and clinic‐ and home‐based work emphasized the importance of multidisciplinary work (Dyke et al, 2006) and keyworking (Pickering & Busse, 2010) in the operationalization of FCC, in addition to working across clinic (Stefánsdóttir & Thóra Egilson, 2016) and home (Ideishi et al, 2010) contexts.…”

Using the EI/ECSE Personnel Preparation Standards to Inform In-Service Professional Development in Early Intervention

“…Families share information about themselves and their dreams for their child; service coordinators conduct routines-based interviews (RBIs) to better understand the routines, natural environments, resources, priorities, and concerns of families; and service providers collect information to understand children’s present levels of development. Synthesized RBI and developmental assessment reports articulate this collected information and are used to develop the IFSP which then guides the services and supports families will access in EI (DeSpain & Hedin, 2020; Ridgley et al, 2020; Shelden & Rush, 2013). EI/ECSE Standard 4 may be used to guide the content of training targeting assessment practices.…”

State Early Learning and Development Standards: A Unified Curriculum Framework for All Young Children

“…These feature the foundation for a unified curriculum for all young children, including those with developmental delays who receive EI or ECSE in inclusive classrooms. ELDS have been recommended to support various aspects of EI or ECSE such as the assessment process (Bagnato et al, 2011), IFSP and IEP goal setting (Ridgley et al, 2020), and the measurement and collection of child outcome data (Scott-Little et al, 2009). It has also been recommended that state ELDS guide the design and implementation of inclusive classroom routines and activities with young children with and without developmental delays (Grisham-Brown et al, 2009).…”