Overview of the Annual Performance Report Development:

Monitoring Priority:

Effective General Supervision Part C / Effective Transition

Indicator 8: Percent of all children exiting Part C who received timely transition planning to support the child's transition to preschool and other appropriate community services by their third birthday including:

  1. IFSPs with transition steps and services;
  2. Notification to LEA, if child potentially eligible for Part B; and
  3. Transition conference, if child potentially eligible for Part B.

(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(B) and 1442)

Measurement:

  1. Percent = [(# of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP with transition steps and services) divided by the (# of children exiting Part C)] times 100.
  2. Percent = [(# of children exiting Part C and potentially eligible for Part B where notification to the LEA occurred) divided by the (# of children exiting Part C who were potentially eligible for Part B)] times 100.
  3. Percent = [(# of children exiting Part C and potentially eligible for Part B where the transition conference occurred) divided by the (# of children exiting Part C who were potentially eligible for Part B)] times 100.

FFY: FFY08/SFY09

Measurable and Rigorous Target:

  1. 100 percent of children exiting Part C who have an IFSP will have transition steps and services.
  2. The LEAs will have been notified of 100 percent of the children exiting Part C that are potentially eligibility for Part B.
  3. A transition conference will be held for 100 percent of the children who leave the Part C program at age 3 and whose families have consented to participate in a meeting.

Actual Target Data for FFY08/SFY09):

Indicator 8A: Transition Steps and Services (Number of files with transition steps in IFSP/Total number of files reviewed) X 100
FFY08/SFY09 Result: (809/818)X 100 = 98.9%
FFY08/SFY09 Target = 100%

Indicator 8B: Referrals Made to LEA = 100% Compliance through data sharing agreement (Referrals/Potentially eligible) X 100
FFY08/SFY09 Result: (11,207/11,207) X 100 = 100%
FFY08/SFY09 Target = 100%

Indicator 8C: Transition Meetings Held = 98.6% Compliance (Transition meetings/ Potentially eligible excluding family delay) X 100
FFY08/SFY09 Result: (9,701/9,838) x 100 = 98.6%
FFY08/SFY09 Target = 100%

? Terminations Past
30 Mon.
Not SE
Eligible
Potentially
Eligible
Transition
Meetings
% With
Meetings
Pot. Elig. Ex.
Family Delay
Adj. Meetings
Documented
State
Totals
13,365 2,158 11,207 9,701 86.6% 9,838 98.6%

8A - IFSPs with transition steps and services:

File reviews completed as part of CFC offices indicate that 98.9% [(818 files review- 9 files with findings)/818] * 100 of the randomly selected files demonstrated IFSPs with transition steps and services. As part of a contractual agreement with the lead agency, the Illinois EI Monitoring Program conducts annual on-site monitoring visits to the 25 CFC offices. The number of files to be reviewed in a CFC office is based upon the number of active cases, varying from 20 files in a CFC office with a caseload of less than 200 to 56 files for a caseload between 1,800 and 2,000.

The number of files is divided by the number of service coordinators and then files are randomly selected to be representative of each service coordinator's caseload. There are several elements of the CFC monitoring file review tool that relate to documentation of the transition process. In FFY08/SFY09, the Illinois EI Monitoring Program reviewed a total of 818 files. Findings were identified in 9 of those files based on the following transition elements. A file with noncompliance was found in the review of CFC offices#3,#4,#7,#9,#10,#15,#16, and#20.

Transition elements from the CFC monitoring file review tool that reflect compliance with Indicator 8(a) include the following:

  • There is evidence that six months prior to the child's third birthday communication began with the family about transition.
  • With informed parental consent, service coordinator notified the child's local educational agency that the child will shortly reach the age of eligibility for preschool services under Part B.
  • Early Intervention to Early Childhood Tracking Form was completed (PA34).
  • Transition Efforts are documented in case notes (CMO4).

8B - Referrals made to Local Education Agency (LEA)

Illinois utilized the data sharing agreement with Part B/Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) to assure that every child who reached 30 months of age or who started EI services after that age were made known to the LEA..

8C - Transition meetings held

Data from the Cornerstone system for the time period July 1, 2008 - June 30, 2009 are used to document transition meetings. Cases with exceptional family circumstance not included in this calculation total 1,034. The last column of the following chart provides statewide and CFC-specific data on compliance with indicator 8C. All areas of the state performed well, with full compliance (100%) in six of the 25 CFC offices.

FFY 08/SFY 09 Transition Meetings Held by Area Documented with Cornerstone Data System

Documented Meetings Not
Documented
Exc. Family
Delay
Terminations
Over 30 Mon.
Not Available
or Eligible
Possibly
Eligible
Meetings
Held
Family
Reasons
System
Reasons
% of Meetings
Documented
By CFC  
#1 - ROCKFORD 481 82 399 379 20 - 100.0%
#2 - LAKE CO. 643 78 565 508 55 2 99.6%
#3 - FREEPORT 238 44 194 153 33 8 95.0%
#4 - KANE-KENDALL 691 89 602 510 54 38 93.1%
#5- DUPAGE 915 112 803 742 60 1 99.9%
#6 - N SUBURBS 1,174 161 1,013 977 34 2 99.8%
#7 - W SUBURBS 764 110 654 589 60 5 99.2%
#8 - SW CHICAGO 530 172 358 276 81 1 99.6%
#9 - CENTRAL HICAGO 701 110 591 447 133 11 97.6%
#10 - SE CHICAGO 473 94 379 226 132 21 91.5%
#11 - N CHICAGO 1,402 277 1,125 822 300 3 99.6%
#12 - S SUBURBS 797 126 671 585 72 14 97.7%
#13 - MACOMB 276 46 230 227 3 - 100.0%
#14 - PEORIA 474 100 374 316 57 1 99.7%
#15 - JOLIET 1,063 115 948 867 81 - 100.0%
#16 - BLOOMINGTON 467 50 417 339 76 2 99.4%
#17 - QUINCY 145 39 106 103 3 - 100.0%
#18 - SPRINGFIELD 261 29 232 210 13 9 95.9%
#19 - DECATUR 245 30 215 213 2 - 100.0%
#20 - EFFINGHAM 259 74 185 175 9 1 99.4%
#21 - BELLEVILLE 484 90 394 346 38 10 97.2%
#22 - CENTRALIA 256 44 212 201 7 4 98.0%
#23 - NORRIS CITY 174 21 153 137 16 - 100.0%
#24 - CARBONDALE 111 9 102 94 7 1 98.9%
#25 - MCHENRY CO. 341 56 285 259 23 3 98.9%
By Area
Statewide 13,365 2,158 11,207 9,701 1,369 137 98.6%
CHICAGO 3,106 653 2,453 1,771 646 36 98.0%
SUBURBAN COOK 2,735 397 2,338 2,151 166 21 99.0%
COLLAR COUNTIES 3,653 450 3,203 2,886 273 44 98.5%
DOWNSTATE 3,871 658 3,213 2,893 284 36 98.8%

Discussion of Improvement Activities Completed and Explanation of Progress or Slippage that occurred for FFY08/SFY09:

Progress/Slippage for 8A: In FFY08/SFY09, 98.9% of the files demonstrated IFSPs with transition steps and services, down slightly from 99.1% in FFY07/SFY08. The outcomes of transition efforts indicate that transition steps and services were completed, but not appropriately documented.

For Indicator 8A findings seven finding were identified in FFY07/SFY08 through monitoring activities. Correction on noncompliance within one year was determined for all seven findings.

The following steps were taken to verify that the EIS program:

  1. is correctly implementing the specific regulatory requirements: If the on-site monitoring visit file review shows that a CFC office has one or more files that indicate noncompliance, a finding is identified. Following the monitoring visit, the CFC office submits a corrective action plan for approval and areas of noncompliance are reviewed at the CFC office's next monitoring visit.
  2. has corrected all instances of noncompliance consistent with OSEP Memorandum 09-02. In addition, electronic files were reviewed for each child identified in the seven findings for Indicator 8(A) in the FFY2007/SFY2008 APR to ensure that correction has taken place to ensure correction of each individual case of noncompliance. All the files indicated that transition steps and services had been accomplished (i.e., the child was either determined eligible (2), not eligible for Special Education (1), Special Education eligibility was not determined for family reasons (5), or the family declined referral to Special Education (1)).

Progress/Slippage for 8B: In both FFY07/SFY08 APR and FFY08/SFY09, Illinois demonstrated 100% compliance with 8B. FFY07/SFY08 APR should have noted correction of noncompliance for the remaining 13 findings identified in FFY2005. With the full implementation of the data sharing agreement between the EI Program and the ISBE and the subsequent data sharing reports, described below, no areas of noncompliance remain.

Progress/Slippage for 8C: In FFY08/SFY09 the number of transition meeting held increased to 98.6%, from 97.4% in the previous year. The number of CFC offices in full compliance (100%) increased from 3 to 6. The greatest gains were made in the Chicago CFC areas, which increased from 93.3% in FFY07/SFY08 to 98.0% in FFY08/SFY09.

Effective October 13, 2009, a new program for children residing in Chicago should result in further improvement to transitions for the Chicago CFC office areas. The Chicago Public Schools have established three evaluation schools. The case manager at the family's home school will gather registration information and send the family to the evaluation school to complete evaluations and the IEP process.

Although significant improvements have been realized in the documentation of transition meetings in the Cornerstone system, the program continues to emphasize the need for appropriate and timely data entry of this measure. For Indicator 8C, Illinois uses its data system and a formal system of notification, as described in Indicator 9, to identify findings and document correction of noncompliance.

In SFY07/FFY08, 38 findings of noncompliance were identified for Indicator 8C, with all findings of noncompliance corrected within one year. For 8C findings were identified using the data system for the time periods described in Indicator 9. The following steps were taken to verify that the EIS program:

  1. is correctly implementing the specific regulatory requirements: For CFC offices with findings, reports that demonstrate implementation of corrective action plans and outcomes to those strategies were submitted. All the reports were received and reviewed and it was determined that all findings of noncompliance were corrected.
  2. has corrected all instances of noncompliance consistent with OSEP Memorandum 09-02. CFC offices conducted case file reviews for all children identified in the months of April 2007 and April 2008 that did not have a transition meeting entered in the Cornerstone system. CFC offices either confirmed through case notes that a transition meeting had been held/transition appropriate completed or that the child was no longer in the jurisdiction of the Early Intervention program. Transition information from the IL State Board of Education was also reviewed to determine the child's transition outcome. All but two findings of noncompliance (representing 7 children from 2 CFC offices) remained unresolved in the sample.

offices either confirmed through case notes that a transition meeting had been held/transition appropriate completed or that the child was no longer in the jurisdiction of the Early Intervention program. In a few cases, transition information from the IL State Board of Education was used to determine the child's transition outcome.

Improvement Activities

  • The IICEI continues to receive regular reports on transition performance.
  • In FFY08/SFY09, nine sessions of "Transitioning Children from Early Intervention to Early Childhood Special Education" were held statewide. These training are part of an ongoing cooperative effort to train CFC office and LEA staff on policies and practice regarding the transition process.
  • As part of a contractual agreement with the lead agency, the Illinois EI Monitoring Program conducts annual on-site monitoring visits to the 25 CFC offices, utilizing a CFC file review tool with several elements relate to documentation of the transition process.
  • The proportion of transition meetings held for children exiting the program at age 3, including meetings not held due to family reasons, and the portion of children who have special education eligibility determined when they leave the program at age 3 are reported to CFC offices monthly and are measures that incentive funding is granted to the top 12 performing CFC offices each quarter.
  • Findings are reported to each CFC office for children exiting Part C who did not receive timely transition planning, based upon 12-month data. Corrective action plans to address noncompliance policies, procedures, and practices are required to be written and implemented, with full compliance documented within one year.
  • As part of designation of determinations, the score of a CFC office is negatively impacted if it the CFC office is in the bottom five CFC offices in transition performance measures (i.e., proportion of transition meetings held for children exiting the program at age 3 and eligibility determined when child leaves the program at age 3).
  • Under a data sharing agreement with the ISBE, the EI Program utilizes system data and a transition tracking form to accomplish appropriate notification of Part B and to help facilitate the transition process and document its outcome.
  • Geocoding software is used to match every child's home address to the appropriate local school district. A monthly match is completed for every child with an IFSP, regardless of his/her age or time in the system. Every month the EI Program compiles a list of all children with an IFSP who have turned 27 months of age or who entered in the last month and who are over 27 months old. Based on the guidance letter from OSEP (Letter to Elder) basic information is forwarded on all children, even if a family has denied a referral and forwards this list to ISBE. ISBE divides the list and forwards the detail to the receiving LEA. Minor data problems, usually associated with LEA district lines, are identified and corrected so that notification occurs before a child's third birthday.
  • An additional step is taken to reinforce the notification process. Each month, the EI Program also forwards a list of all children who closed from EI and the reason for termination.
  • Both Part C and Part B programs are required to use a Transition Tracking Form. The CFC office forwards the form to the LEA. If the family refuses a referral to special education, the CFC is to forward the form with limited identifying details provided by the EI Program through the data sharing agreement and notes that the family had refused the referral. Once the LEA completes the eligibility process they forward the form back to the CFC office and sends a copy to ISBE. ISBE matches the tracking forms to the lists received from the EI Program and pays particular attention to cases where the EI termination reason indicates that eligibility was not determined. ISBE follows-up with LEAs on missing reports and failed transitions.
  • The issue of competing Cornerstone data tables intended to track aspects of transition has been resolved with the use of one table eliminated. Elements of the remaining table are being revised to better reflect the transition tracking form.
  • Although the Part C/Part B data sharing process covers all children, CFC offices comply with referral rules and document their actions in Cornerstone.
  • The Transition Workgroup of the IICEI was formed to review current strategies for improving transition data and determine if there are strategies that will assist Illinois in meeting its targets. Information was gathered from CFCs regarding children who fail to transition prior to the third birthday for family reasons to identify reasons that could be addressed. This Workgroup concluded its work in FFY08/SFY09.

Revisions, with Justification, to Proposed Targets / Improvement Activities / Timelines / Resources for FFY09/SFY10:

Illinois has made significant improvements to transition measures based upon a multi-layered approach, including data sharing and tracking, training, monitoring, and performance data reporting, including incentive funding. The EI Program will continue to work closely with ISBE to identify and address data issues and needs and promote improved communication and practice between CFC offices and LEAs. The improvement activities described above are ongoing efforts. No changes in targets, improvement activities, or timelines are proposed.