Indicator 1: Timely Provision of Services
Instructions and Measurement
Monitoring Priority: Early Intervention Services In Natural Environments
Compliance indicator: Percent of infants and toddlers with Individual Family Service Plans (IFSPs) who receive the early intervention services on their IFSPs in a timely manner. (20 U.S.C. 1416(a)(3)(A) and 1442)
Data Source
Data to be taken from monitoring or State data system and must be based on actual, not an average, number of days. Include the State's criteria for "timely" receipt of early intervention services (i.e., the time period from parent consent to when IFSP services are actually initiated).
Measurement
Percent = [(# of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on their IFSPs in a timely manner) divided by the (total # of infants and toddlers with IFSPs)] times 100.
Account for untimely receipt of services, including the reasons for delays.
Instructions
If data are from State monitoring, describe the method used to select early intervention service (EIS) programs for monitoring. If data are from a State database, describe the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarter, selection from the full reporting period) and how the data accurately reflect data for infants and toddlers with IFSPs for the full reporting period.
Targets must be 100%.
Describe the results of the calculations and compare the results to the target. Describe the method used to collect these data and if data are from the State's monitoring, describe the procedures used to collect these data. States report in both the numerator and denominator under Indicator 1 on the number of children for whom the State ensured the timely initiation of new services identified on the IFSP. Include the timely initiation of new early intervention services from both initial IFSPs and subsequent IFSPs. Provide actual numbers used in the calculation.
The State's timeliness measure for this indicator must be either: (1) a time period that runs from when the parent consents to IFSP services; or (2) the IFSP initiation date (established by the IFSP Team, including the parent).
States are not required to report in their calculation the number of children for whom the State has identified the cause for the delay as exceptional family circumstances, as defined in 34 CFR §303.310(b), documented in the child's record. If a State chooses to report in its calculation children for whom the State has identified the cause for the delay as exceptional family circumstances documented in the child's record, the numbers of these children are to be included in the numerator and denominator. Include in the discussion of the data, the numbers the State used to determine its calculation under this indicator and report separately the number of documented delays attributable to exceptional family circumstances.
Provide detailed information about the timely correction of noncompliance as noted in the Office of Special Education Programs' (OSEP's) response table for the previous SPP/APR. If the State did not ensure timely correction of the previous noncompliance, provide information on the extent to which noncompliance was subsequently corrected (more than one year after identification). In addition, provide information regarding the nature of any continuing noncompliance, methods to ensure correction, and any enforcement actions that were taken.
If the State reported less than 100% compliance for the previous reporting period (e.g., for the FFY 2021 SPP/APR, the data for FFY 2020), and the State did not identify any findings of noncompliance, provide an explanation of why the State did not identify any findings of noncompliance.
1 - Indicator Data: Historical Data
Baseline Year: 2005
Baseline Data: 98.53%
| FFY |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
| Target |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
| Data |
98.23% |
97.89% |
99.52% |
94.23% |
99.79% |
Targets
Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive the early intervention services on their IFSPs in a timely manner: 1,665
Total number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs: 1,755
FFY 2020 Data: 99.79%
FFY 2021 Target: 100%
FFY 2021 Data: 97.95%
Status: Did not meet target
Slippage: There was slippage.
Provide reasons for slippage, if applicable
Reasons for slippage primarily appear to be due to personnel shortages. We are experiencing personnel challenges both at the CFC level and within the provider pool. In some instances, service coordinators are able to identify a provider willing to use live video visits for support but the family wants in person support. We are continuing to work with the CFCs to address both recruitment and retention strategies for CFC personnel and providers.
Number of documented delays attributable to exceptional family circumstances
This number will be added to the "Number of infants and toddlers with IFSPs who receive their early intervention services on their IFSPs in a timely manner" field above to calculate the numerator for this indicator.
54
Provide reasons for delay, if applicable.
Reasons for delays included: unable to find a provider, unable to provide as many services as recommended by the IFSP team, service provided in a setting other than the natural environment due to not enough providers to deliver service in natural environment, and family circumstances.
Include your State's criteria for "timely" receipt of early intervention services (i.e., the time period from parent consent to when IFSP services are actually initiated).
Illinois Early Intervention considers a service to be timely if the service begins within 30 days of receiving IFSP consent.
What is the source of the data provided for this indicator?
State database
Provide the time period in which the data were collected (e.g., September through December, fourth quarter, selection from the full reporting period).
Illinois continues to utilize the reporting period of October 1 - October 31 for the corresponding Federal Fiscal Year (FFY). In the case of this APR, the reporting period is October 2021.
Describe how the data accurately reflect data for infants and toddlers with IFSPs for the full reporting period.
Illinois has historically utilized the single month of October to represent our collection period. October represents the average number of children entering the program throughout the year without the fluctuations that occur before and after holidays and specific child find events.
Provide additional information about this indicator (optional)
Each of the 25 CFCs report monthly on IFSP consented services that have not yet started timely due to various factors including insufficient number of qualified early intervention direct service providers as well as family exceptional circumstances and delays. The data is collected and utilized to create monthly statistical reports on the status of each of the 25 CFCs service delays as well as other components of performance for each CFC. A Statewide statistical report is also prepared and shared so each CFC can compare their performance with the Statewide average for service delays and other components.
Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified in FFY 2020
Findings of Noncompliance Identified: 1
Findings of Noncompliance Verified as Corrected Within One Year: 0
Findings of Noncompliance Subsequently Corrected: 1
Findings Not Yet Verified as Corrected: 0
FFY 2020 Findings of Noncompliance Not Yet Verified as Corrected
Actions taken if noncompliance not corrected
The program that continues to demonstrate noncompliance will have an improvement plan developed to address performance. Based on our initial work with the TA centers, we believe that we will have this program work through a process of identifying barriers and receiving technical assistance from Bureau staff, Early Intervention Training Program staff, and other partners/program managers (as needed) on potential strategies for meeting the regulatory requirements and program expectations for Indicator 1 (timely services). We anticipate that Bureau and Training Program staff will work closely with this program to identify additional resources and technical assistance opportunities to support timely services. The program will receive performance data and feedback to determine the program's correction of noncompliance, guide improvement strategies, and ensure the program is correctly implementing timely services according to regulatory requirements. Since we know that this indicator has been significantly impacted by personnel shortages, the Bureau hopes to address this issue more systemically and is currently exploring options to improve recruitment and retention of qualified staff.
Correction of Findings of Noncompliance Identified Prior to FFY 2020
No Amounts were listed.
1 - Prior FFY Required Actions
Because the State reported less than 100% compliance for FFY 2020, the State must report on the status of correction of noncompliance identified in FFY 2020 for this indicator. When reporting on the correction of noncompliance, the State must report, in the FFY 2021 SPP/APR, that it has verified that each EIS program or provider with noncompliance identified in FFY 2020 for this indicator: (1) is correctly implementing the specific regulatory requirements (i.e., achieved 100% compliance) based on a review of updated data such as data subsequently collected through on-site monitoring or a State data system; and (2) has corrected each individual case of noncompliance, unless the child is no longer within the jurisdiction of the EIS program or provider, consistent with OSEP Memo 09-02. In the FFY 2021 SPP/APR, the State must describe the specific actions that were taken to verify the correction.
If the State did not identify any findings of noncompliance in FFY 2020, although its FFY 2020 data reflect less than 100% compliance, provide an explanation of why the State did not identify any findings of noncompliance in FFY 2020.
Response to actions required in FFY 2020 SPP/APR
In the previous federal fiscal year (FFY), there were three children identified with noncompliance (not related to family exceptional circumstances) across two programs. The state verified correction of noncompliance for one of the two programs prior to issuing findings (pre-finding correction). For this program, the state reviewed the record for the single child who did not receive timely services and verified that they did receive services, albeit late. In addition, the state reviewed a sample from one month (December) of subsequent data on children with initial IFSPs and confirmed that this program was performing at 100% compliance and correctly implementing the timely services requirements. However, one finding was issued for FFY2020 as the subsequent review of a sample from December's data did not indicate that the second program was now in compliance. The Bureau will be working with this program to develop an improvement plan as well as exploring options for provider recruitment and retention on a systemic level.
1 - OSEP Response
The State reported that it used data from a State database to report on this indicator. The State further reported that it did not use data for the full reporting period (July 1, 2021- June 30, 2022). The State described how the time period in which the data were collected accurately reflects data for infants and toddlers with IFSPs for the full reporting period.
1 - Required Actions
IFSPs INITIATED WITHIN 45 DAYS
| CFC # |
ACTIVE IFSP (OCT. 2021) |
FAMILY EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES (FEC) |
NET IFSPs (LESS FEC) |
NO DELAYS (OSEP Reportable) |
% of NO DELAYS (NO DELAYS + FEC/ACTIVE IFSP) |
| 1 |
55 |
5 |
50 |
49 |
98.2% |
| **2 |
72 |
0 |
72 |
61 |
84.7% |
| 3 |
34 |
0 |
34 |
34 |
100.0% |
| **4 |
94 |
22 |
72 |
72 |
100.0% |
| **5 |
119 |
2 |
117 |
117 |
100.0% |
| *6 |
153 |
3 |
150 |
150 |
100.0% |
| *7 |
82 |
0 |
82 |
82 |
100.0% |
| *8 |
83 |
6 |
77 |
74 |
96.4% |
| *9 |
88 |
0 |
88 |
87 |
98.9% |
| *10 |
76 |
3 |
73 |
73 |
100.0% |
| *11 |
171 |
6 |
165 |
161 |
97.7% |
| *12 |
127 |
2 |
125 |
120 |
96.1% |
| 13 |
18 |
0 |
18 |
17 |
94.4% |
| 14 |
67 |
1 |
66 |
49 |
74.6% |
| **15 |
157 |
0 |
157 |
129 |
82.2% |
| 16 |
77 |
1 |
76 |
62 |
81.8% |
| 17 |
30 |
0 |
30 |
30 |
100.0% |
| 18 |
35 |
0 |
35 |
35 |
100.0% |
| 19 |
46 |
2 |
44 |
44 |
100.0% |
| 20 |
42 |
0 |
42 |
42 |
100.0% |
| 21 |
51 |
0 |
51 |
51 |
100.0% |
| 22 |
30 |
0 |
30 |
30 |
100.0% |
| 23 |
11 |
0 |
11 |
7 |
63.6% |
| 24 |
14 |
0 |
14 |
14 |
100.0% |
| **25 |
23 |
1 |
22 |
21 |
95.7% |
| Statewide |
1,755 |
54 |
1,701 |
1,611 |
94.9% |
| *Chicago - Cook County |
418 |
15 |
403 |
395 |
98.1% |
| *Suburban - Cook County |
362 |
5 |
357 |
352 |
98.6% |
| ** Collar Counties (2, 4, 5, 15, * 25) |
465 |
25 |
440 |
400 |
91.4% |
| Downstate (All Others) |
510 |
9 |
501 |
464 |
92.7% |
*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
