Quality rating and improvement system (qris) provisional Standards study

Diane Schilder, EdD and Jessica Young, PhDEducation Development Center, Inc.Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) Provisional Standards Study

QRIS Pilot FindingsPrimary reason for participation was to enhance qualityProviders reported relative ease in completing most componentsLevel of provider effort variedMost providers understand QRIS standardsProviders reported some challenges meeting standardsQRIS Pilot Findings (continued)Providers believe observation tools are valuable and appropriateDocumentation from providers varied substantiallyProviders value QRIS PilotProviders have some misconceptions about QRIS PilotProviders reported impact of QRIS Pilot on program qualityEDC Recommendations for revising QRIS Standards & DocumentationStreamline the number of standards within each levelInclude a dictionary of terms used in the QRISClarify the requirements for each standard by listing the types of criteria that are expected to meet that standardProvide additional guidance about the number and types of documentation required and/or acceptable to EECProvide additional guidance regarding the QRIS Standards exemption rule for providers.Align the QRIS with NAEYC Accreditation standards, NAFCC, NOA, Head Start Program Standards, etc. as well as the various Environmental Rating Scales, including providing guidance around acceptable scores (e.g., ECERS-R)

EEC Response to RecommendationsEEC launched QRIS Provisional Standards Study

Primary goal of study is to update QRIS System based on evidence and stakeholder feedback

QRIS Provisional Study Logic Model Timeline of Activities & Outputs Overview of ActivitiesReview FY2010 documentationConduct literature reviewGather stakeholder feedbackCrosswalk of QRIS with other standardsAnalysis

Activity: Review FY2010 DocumentationReview all pilot documentationProvide recommendations to EEC regarding acceptable documentation for each standardVerify each programs self assessment ratingActivity: Literature ReviewGather documentation on the evidence-base related to each standardDevelop a scale to define the strength of the evidence associated with each standard (e.g., strong, moderate, minimal)Present recommendations in the context of other states QRIS programsLiterature ReviewExample Standard with Strong Research Evidence

Program has a written policy that addresses the importance of positive educator-child relationships and interactions that is shared with parents.

Evidence: 4 experiment research studies found in peer reviewed journalsLiterature ReviewExample of Standard with Strong Evidence:Program director or administrator qualifications and education level

Evidence: 3 experimental research studies published in peer review journals

Literature ReviewExample Standard with Minimal Research Evidence

Room arrangement provides sufficient space for the age of thestudents served to accommodate a variety of activities from which they can choose.

Evidence: To date no peer review journal articles have been found supporting this standard. Literature ReviewExample standard with mixed research evidence

Educator completes a written progress report on children at the beginning, mid year and end of the programs year, or at least three times in a twelve month period, and shares them with parentsEvidence: One study states In early childhood, progress monitoring measures have only recently been applied to the process of intervention decision-making. The study by Walker et al published in a peer review journal describes progress monitoring in early childhood settings and illustrates how they can be used within a larger problem-solving model to guide intervention decisions for infants and toddlers.

To date, no experimental studies have been found on this standard. Activity: CrosswalkSide-by-side comparison of QRIS Standards with:NAEYCNAFCCHead StartPASArnettAPTBASCLASSDEC/OSEPCross Walk ExampleExample Family Involvement StandardExample school based standard: 4.A2.1 - Family input is solicited on an annual basis through a family survey in the primary, or preferred, language of the family

Example SACERS item that aligns: [34.7.2] Parents involved in decision making roles (Ex: parent representatives on board, yearly evaluation of program, input from parents sought regarding program content).Example Cross WalkExample Family Involvement StandardExample family child care standard: 4.A2.1 - Family input is solicited on an annual basis through a family survey in the primary, or preferred, language of the familyExample ITERS items that align: [33.3.3] Some possibilities for parents or other family members to be involved in childrens program.; [33.7.1] Parents asked for an evaluation of the program annually; [33.7.3] Parents involved in decision-making roles in program along with staff (Ex. Parent representatives on board)Example NAEYC item that aligns: [7.B.03] Program staff inform families about the program's systems for formally and informally assessing children's progress. This information includes the purposes of the assessment, the procedures used for assessment, procedures for gathering family input and information, the timing of assessments, the way assessment results or information will be shared with families, and ways the program will use the informationExample FCCERS item that aligns: [35.3.3] Some possibilities for parents or other family members to be involved in childrens programExample PAS that aligns: [16.3.2] The staff ask families about their values, beliefs, and cultural and child-rearing practices during the intake process

Activity: Gather Stakeholder FeedbackSurveys, Interviews & Regional ForumsCollect and summarize feedback and provide recommendationsEngage public schools and provide recommendations on the barriers to participationPresentations to EEC Board, Committees, and Advisory CouncilActivity: AnalysisCompletion ratesRelevant gaps in standards/measures/documentationResources that EEC could provideLicensing historyInterim OutputsLiterature Review documentCrosswalk documentSummary of stakeholder input and dataDraft report (October 15th)Draft refined standardsUltimate OutputsFinal report (November 15th)Final revised standardsFinal list of acceptable documentationEEC to launch updated QRIS SystemGoalQRIS System is updated based on evidence base and stakeholder feedbackRevised QRIS System is launched in January 2011