Indicator 3: Early Childhood Outcomes
Instructions and Measurement
Monitoring Priority: Early Intervention Services In Natural Environments
Results indicator: Percent of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who demonstrate improved:
- Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships);
- Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/ communication); and
- Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs.
(20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A) and 1442)
Data Source
State selected data source.
Measurement
N/A
Outcomes:
- Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships);
- Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/communication); and
- Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs.
Progress categories for A, B and C:
- Percent of infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning = [(# of infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning) divided by (# of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed)] times 100.
- Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers = [(# of infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers) divided by (# of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed)] times 100.
- Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it = [(# of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it) divided by (# of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed)] times 100.
- Percent of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers = [(# of infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers) divided by (# of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed)] times 100.
- Percent of infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers = [(# of infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers) divided by (# of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed)] times 100.
Summary Statements for Each of the Three Outcomes:
Summary Statement 1: Of those infants and toddlers who entered early intervention below age expectations in each Outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 3 years of age or exited the program.
Measurement for Summary Statement 1:
Percent = [(# of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (c) plus # of infants and toddlers reported in category (d)) divided by (# of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (a) plus # of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (b) plus # of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (c) plus # of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (d))] times 100.
Summary Statement 2: The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in each Outcome by the time they turned 3 years of age or exited the program.
Measurement for Summary Statement 2:
Percent = [(# of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (d) plus # of infants and toddlers reported in progress category (e)) divided by the (total # of infants and toddlers reported in progress categories (a) + (b) + (c) + (d) + (e))] times 100.
Instructions
Sampling of infants and toddlers with IFSPs is allowed. When sampling is used, submit a description of the sampling methodology outlining how the design will yield valid and reliable estimates. (See General Instructions page 2 for additional instructions on sampling.)
In the measurement, include in the numerator and denominator only infants and toddlers with IFSPs who received early intervention services for at least six months before exiting the Part C program.
Report: (1) the number of infants and toddlers who exited the Part C program during the reporting period, as reported in the State's Part C exiting data under Section 618 of the IDEA; and (2) the number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before exiting the Part C program.
Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the targets. States will use the progress categories for each of the three Outcomes to calculate and report the two Summary Statements.
Report progress data and calculate Summary Statements to compare against the six targets. Provide the actual numbers and percentages for the five reporting categories for each of the three outcomes.
In presenting results, provide the criteria for defining "comparable to same-aged peers." If a State is using the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Process (COS), then the criteria for defining "comparable to same-aged peers" has been defined as a child who has been assigned a score of 6 or 7 on the COS.
In addition, list the instruments and procedures used to gather data for this indicator, including if the State is using the ECO COS.
If the State's Part C eligibility criteria include infants and toddlers who are at risk of having substantial developmental delays (or "at-risk infants and toddlers") under IDEA section 632(5)(B)(i), the State must report data in two ways. First, it must report on all eligible children but exclude its at-risk infants and toddlers (i.e., include just those infants and toddlers experiencing developmental delay (or "developmentally delayed children") or having a diagnosed physical or mental condition that has a high probability of resulting in developmental delay (or "children with diagnosed conditions")). Second, the State must separately report outcome data on either: (1) just its at-risk infants and toddlers; or (2) aggregated performance data on all of the infants and toddlers it serves under Part C (including developmentally delayed children, children with diagnosed conditions, and at-risk infants and toddlers).
3 - Indicator Data
Does your State's Part C eligibility criteria include infants and toddlers who are at risk of having substantial developmental delays (or "at-risk infants and toddlers") under IDEA section 632(5)(B)(i)? (yes/no)
NO
Targets:
Description of Stakeholder Input
Illinois works to solicit broad stakeholder input via its various advisory bodies and workgroups. We continue to prioritize family membership on the Illinois Interagency Council on Early Intervention (IICEI), on the State Systemic Improvement Plan Leadership Teams, as well as all other workgroups. The IICEI, is a Governor-appointed advisory board that meets the federal requirements for a State Interagency Coordinating Council. The membership of the council includes parents, public and private service providers of the Early Intervention (EI) system, a member from the State legislature, a personnel preparation representative, and representatives from various designated State agencies and programs. Its membership also includes representatives from advocacy organizations, Child and Family Connections (CFC) managers, and a designee from the Illinois Early Learning Council. The IICEI discusses programmatic and Bureau-specific challenges and opportunities, reviews and approves the annual performance report (APR), helps determine the setting of State Performance Plan (SPP)/APR target values, and advises the Bureau in the overall performance of the program. The IICEI also, as needed, creates ad-hoc workgroups composed of both council and other subject-matter experts on a variety of subjects to help develop recommendations for consideration by the Bureau.
Child and Family Outcomes Workgroup: The Child and Family Outcomes workgroup is a stakeholder group that is tasked with the goal of reviewing processes that improve outcomes for children and families, as well as the quality of child and family outcomes data. The workgroup includes representation from families, the EI Bureau, EI providers, CFC managers, EI Ombudsman and the EI Training Program (EITP). The Child and Family Outcomes Workgroup focuses its efforts to:
- Ensure that valid and reliable data are collected with consistency by field staff;
- Improve the validity of data reported on child and family outcomes;
- Improve response rates for Family Outcomes surveys, to increase representativeness and validity;
- Promote public awareness and training of child and family outcome measures;
- Explore options for linking child and family outcomes data;
- Support data review and analysis;
- Set baseline and target values; and
- Develop and implement improvement activities.
CFC Managers: Illinois has 25 CFC offices that serve as the regional points of entry, and each CFC office is responsible for the implementation of the Early Intervention Services System within its specific geographic region. A CFC Program Manager is hired by each CFC and they are the point of contact to disseminate information to CFC staff and their community, as appropriate. CFCs are responsible for ensuring all referrals to the Early Intervention Services System receive a timely response in a professional and family-centered manner. Other responsibilities of the CFCs include: child find activities; family-engaged intake; coordination of evaluation/assessment and eligibility determination activities for children; for eligible children- oversight of the development of timely individualized family service plans (IFSP); ongoing service coordination; and transitioning activities before a toddler exits the program or reaches three years of age when potentially eligible for Part B. CFC managers meet monthly with EI Bureau staff to review policies and procedures, provide statewide and local perspectives, offer feedback to the APR and SSIP, identify system challenges, and provide input on improvement strategies.
In addition, there are multiple stakeholder groups that participate in the development of the State's Systemic Improvement Plan. These include the large SSIP stakeholder group, the leadership team workgroup, the local leadership teams, and the performance support workgroup.
Illinois received stakeholder input via the Child & Family Outcomes workgroup and the Illinois Interagency Council on Early Intervention (IICEI). The Child & Family Outcomes workgroup helped set the targets that were approved by the IICEI. The workgroup routinely reviews the data and makes recommendations about improvement to the state's processes.
Historical Data
| Outcome |
Baseline |
FFY |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
| A1 |
2020 |
Target (greater than or =) |
68.10% |
68.50% |
68.90% |
68.00% |
66.50% |
| A1 |
67.01% |
Data |
65.97% |
66.70% |
67.71% |
67.99% |
67.01% |
| A2 |
2020 |
Target(greater than or =) |
64.10% |
64.30% |
64.50% |
63.50% |
63.30% |
| A2 |
51.20% |
Data |
54.48% |
57.29% |
54.39% |
52.51% |
51.20% |
| B1 |
2020 |
Target (greater than or =) |
79.60% |
80.00% |
80.40% |
77.10% |
77.00% |
| B1 |
75.28% |
Data |
74.95% |
75.78% |
76.27% |
76.22% |
75.28% |
| B2 |
2020 |
Target (greater than or =) |
50.60% |
50.80% |
51.00% |
49.70% |
49.60% |
| B2 |
42.09% |
Data |
42.81% |
47.06% |
44.90% |
43.48% |
42.09% |
| C1 |
2020 |
Target (greater than or =) |
77.30% |
77.70% |
78.10% |
75.60% |
75.50% |
| C1 |
73.40% |
Data |
72.68% |
73.88% |
73.67% |
73.48% |
73.40% |
| C2 |
2020 |
Target (greater than or =) |
57.00% |
57.20% |
57.40% |
56.10% |
56.00% |
| C2 |
47.08% |
Data |
49.87% |
53.44% |
50.26% |
48.50% |
47.08% |
Targets
| FFY |
2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
2025 |
| Target A1 (greater than or =) |
67.05% |
67.10% |
67.15% |
67.20% |
67.25% |
| Target A2 (greater than or =) |
51.25% |
51.30% |
51.35% |
51.40% |
51.45% |
| Target B1 (greater than or =) |
75.35% |
75.40% |
75.45% |
75.50% |
75.55% |
| Target B2 (greater than or =) |
42.15% |
42.20% |
42.25% |
42.30% |
42.35% |
| Target C1 (greater than or =) |
73.45% |
73.50% |
73.55% |
73.60% |
73.65% |
| Target C2 (greater than or =) |
47.15% |
47.20% |
47.25% |
47.30% |
47.35% |
FFY 2021 SPP/APR Data
Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs assessed: 9,638
Outcome A: Positive social-emotional skills (including social relationships)
| Outcome A Progress Category |
Number of children |
Percentage of Total |
| a. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning |
6 |
0.06% |
| b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers |
2,394 |
24.84% |
| c. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it |
2,363 |
24.52% |
| d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers |
2,764 |
28.68% |
| e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers |
2,111 |
21.90% |
| Outcome A |
Numerator |
Denominator |
FFY 2020 Data |
FFY 2021 Target |
FFY 2021 Data |
Status |
Slippage |
| A1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome A, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 3 years of age or exited the program |
5,127 |
7,527 |
67.01% |
67.05% |
68.11% |
Met target |
No Slippage |
| A2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome A by the time they turned 3 years of age or exited the program |
4,875 |
9,638 |
51.20% |
51.25% |
50.58% |
Did not meet target |
No Slippage |
Outcome B: Acquisition and use of knowledge and skills (including early language/communication)
| Outcome B Progress Category |
Number of Children |
Percentage of Total |
| a. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning |
6 |
0.06% |
| b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers |
2,243 |
23.27% |
| c. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it |
3,244 |
33.66% |
| d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers |
3,490 |
36.21% |
| e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers |
655 |
6.80% |
| Outcome B |
Numerator |
Denominator |
FFY 2020 Data |
FFY 2021 Target |
FFY 2021 Data |
Status |
Slippage |
| B1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome B, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 3 years of age or exited the program |
6,734 |
8,983 |
75.28% |
75.35% |
74.96% |
Did not meet target |
No Slippage |
| B2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome B by the time they turned 3 years of age or exited the program |
4,145 |
9,638 |
42.09% |
42.15% |
43.01% |
Met target |
No Slippage |
Outcome C: Use of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs
| Outcome C Progress Category |
Number of Children |
Percentage of Total |
| a. Infants and toddlers who did not improve functioning |
8 |
0.08% |
| b. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning but not sufficient to move nearer to functioning comparable to same-aged peers |
2,282 |
23.68% |
| c. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to a level nearer to same-aged peers but did not reach it |
2,767 |
28.71% |
| d. Infants and toddlers who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same-aged peers |
3,369 |
34.96% |
| e. Infants and toddlers who maintained functioning at a level comparable to same-aged peers |
1,212 |
12.58% |
| Outcome C |
Numerator |
Denominator |
FFY 2020 Data |
FFY 2021 Target |
FFY 2021 Data |
Status |
Slippage |
| C1. Of those children who entered or exited the program below age expectations in Outcome C, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 3 years of age or exited the program |
6,136 |
8,426 |
73.40% |
73.45% |
72.82% |
Did not meet target |
No Slippage |
| C2. The percent of infants and toddlers who were functioning within age expectations in Outcome C by the time they turned 3 years of age or exited the program |
4,581 |
9,638 |
47.08% |
47.15% |
47.53% |
Met target |
No Slippage |
The number of infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before exiting the Part C program.
The number of infants and toddlers who exited the Part C program during the reporting period, as reported in the State's Part C exiting 618 data: 16,881
The number of those infants and toddlers who did not receive early intervention services for at least six months before exiting the Part C program: 4,424
Sampling Question
Was sampling used? NO
Did you use the Early Childhood Outcomes Center (ECO) Child Outcomes Summary Form (COS) process? YES
List the instruments and procedures used to gather data for this indicator.
As stated above, Illinois uses the ECO Center's COS process. This involves using information collected from a variety of sources including parent report, observation, evaluation/assessment, and, for exits, intervention information. For evaluation/assessment, providers in Illinois are allowed to use any of the tools.
Provide additional information about this indicator (optional).
The state reviewed the reasons for the remainder of its missing child outcomes data and found that, although the largest number of children were excluded due to being in the program for less than six months, other reasons for exclusion included the child was deceased, the entry or exit rating was completed outside the specified date range, or entry or exit data was missing from the data system. The state also compared the data from FFY20 and FFY21 to examine the reasons behind the smaller number of matched pairs in FFY21. The decrease is primarily due to a decrease in the number of children in the system (3 months of COVID for FFY20 and 12 months of COVID for FFY21). Data completeness actually improved by roughly 3% during FFY21.
3 - Prior FFY Required Actions
None
3 - OSEP Response
N/A
3 - Required Actions
| CFC # |
Matched Pairs |
Outcome 1-Summary Statement 1 |
Outcome 1-Summary Statement 2 |
Outcome 2-Summary Statement 1 |
Outcome 2-Summary Statement 2 |
Outcome 3-Summary Statement 1 |
Outcome 3-Summary Statement 2 |
| 1- Rockford |
316 |
65.2% |
56.3% |
75.4% |
52.2% |
73.2% |
59.5% |
| ***2 - Waukegan |
477 |
62.8% |
43.4% |
73.2% |
37.9% |
69.0% |
41.1% |
| 3- Freeport |
178 |
74.7% |
49.4% |
79.4% |
45.5% |
81.6% |
52.8% |
| ***4- Geneva |
560 |
57.3% |
38.8% |
63.3% |
37.5% |
58.3% |
38.6% |
| ***5- Lisle |
683 |
53.1% |
52.4% |
60.5% |
45.7% |
57.2% |
53.6% |
| **6- Arlington Hts. |
969 |
70.3% |
57.1% |
79.9% |
47.3% |
73.7% |
51.3% |
| **7- Westchester |
501 |
78.0% |
50.3% |
83.0% |
40.9% |
79.3% |
45.7% |
| *8- Chicago SE |
421 |
76.3% |
43.7% |
81.8% |
36.8% |
80.4% |
39.0% |
| *9- Chicago Central |
248 |
75.0% |
49.6% |
81.8% |
39.5% |
77.7% |
42.3% |
| *10- Chicago SE |
235 |
75.4% |
16.6% |
75.2% |
15.7% |
77.0% |
18.3% |
| *11- Chicago North |
781 |
73.7% |
52.5% |
81.3% |
40.3% |
81.3% |
43.0% |
| **12- Tinley Park |
600 |
77.4% |
35.0% |
80.4% |
26.7% |
83.1% |
29.0% |
| 13- Macomb |
135 |
46.9% |
64.4% |
49.0% |
50.4% |
48.8% |
60.0% |
| 14- Peoria |
423 |
52.1% |
75.4% |
63.5% |
67.6% |
58.9% |
69.5% |
| ***15- Joliet |
756 |
61.6% |
50.8% |
67.2% |
45.6% |
65.2% |
53.3% |
| 16- Champaign |
447 |
84.0% |
51.0% |
84.6% |
46.5% |
86.7% |
45.6% |
| 17- Quincy |
145 |
65.5% |
50.3% |
74.8% |
41.4% |
73.0% |
38.6% |
| 18- Springfield |
173 |
60.5% |
32.9% |
73.0% |
24.9% |
67.5% |
28.3% |
| 19- Decatur |
290 |
71.2% |
75.5% |
82.5% |
64.1% |
78.9% |
76.9% |
| 20- Effingham |
259 |
57.5% |
56.8% |
68.5% |
47.9% |
67.8% |
52.9% |
| 21- O'Fallon |
378 |
67.0% |
48.7% |
78.9% |
40.2% |
75.6% |
42.3% |
| 22- Centralia |
259 |
68.6% |
61.4% |
76.0% |
51.0% |
71.9% |
60.2% |
| 23- Norris City |
89 |
79.1% |
44.9% |
83.0% |
47.2% |
79.5% |
46.1% |
| 24- Carbondale |
99 |
60.6% |
64.6% |
81.3% |
47.5% |
69.2% |
67.7% |
| ***25- Crystal lake |
216 |
56.0% |
44.0% |
64.3% |
34.7% |
61.9% |
47.2% |
| Statewide |
9638 |
68.1% |
50.6% |
75.0% |
43.0% |
72.8% |
47.5% |
| *Chicago |
1685 |
75.1% |
40.6% |
80.0% |
33.1% |
79.1% |
35.7% |
| **Suburban - Cook County |
2070 |
75.2% |
47.5% |
81.1% |
38.3% |
78.7% |
42.0% |
| *** Collar Counties |
2690 |
58.2% |
45.9% |
65.7% |
50.4% |
62.3% |
46.8% |
| Downstate |
3191 |
65.6% |
56.3% |
75.6% |
48.2% |
71.7% |
53.9% |
*Cook County Offices:
- CFC 6 - North Suburban
- CFC 7 - West Suburban
- CFC 8 - Southwest Chicago
- CFC 9 - Central Chicago
- CFC 10 - Southeast Chicago
- CFC 11 - North Chicago
- CFC 12 - South Suburban
