cop ifsp 5.20.13 final - michelle gatmaitan -...

5/30/13

1

IFSP Quality: Pu3ng the “Family” Back in the Individualized Family Service Plan

Michelle Gatmaitan & Cindy Bregel Ohio Community of PracIce

May 20, 2013

Agenda

•  Checking in: how are your teams doing so far? Successes? Remaining challenges? Next steps?

•  Today’s topic: IFSP – Discussion quesIons –  Training materials (can disseminate to teams, new staff, etc)

•  Next steps – Module 5: IFSP ImplementaIon and Progress Monitoring

– Wrapping up: focus group in June

Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 2

5/30/13

2

IFSP Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 3

Process • RelaIonship/Partnership

• Empowerment

Product

• Contract with families

• ReflecIon of the process

IFSP


5/30/13

3

THE BIG IDEA

Family Engagement

QuesIons to consider

• What does the relaIonship between the family and service coordinator look like?

• What does the relaIonship between the family and the primary service provider look like?


5/30/13

4

Family Engagement defined

“Family engagement occurs when there is an on-‐going, reciprocal, strengths-‐based

partnership between families and their children’s early childhood educaIon

programs.”

(Halgunseth, Peterson, Stark, & Moodie, 2009, p. 3)


Why engage families?

“A growing body of research suggests that meaningful engagement of families in their children’s early learning supports school readiness and later academic success”

(Henrich & Gadaire, 2008; Weiss, Caspe, & Lopez, 2006)


VIDEO: Early Years and Parent Involvement

5/30/13

5

Comprehensive DefiniIon of Family Engagement: 6 Factors

1.  Early childhood educaIon programs encourage and validate family parIcipaIon in decision making related to their children’s educaIon. Families should act as advocates for their children and early childhood educaIon programs by acIvely taking part in decision making opportuniIes.

2.  Consistent, two-‐way communicaIon is facilitated through mulIple forms and is responsive to the linguisIc preference of the family. CommunicaIon should be both school and family iniIated and should be Imely and conInuous, inviIng conversaIons about both the child’s educaIonal experience as well as the larger program.

(Halgunseth, Peterson, Stark, & Moodie, 2009, p. 3) Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 9


3.Families and early childhood educaIon programs collaborate and exchange knowledge. Family members share their unique knowledge and skills through volunteering and acIvely engaging in events and acIviIes at schools. Teachers seek out informaIon about their students’ lives, families, and communiIes and integrate this informaIon into their curriculum and instrucIonal pracIces.

4.Early childhood educaIon programs and families place an emphasis on creaIng and sustaining learning acIviIes at home and in the community that extend the teachings of the program so as to enhance each child’s early learning.


5/30/13

6


5.Families create a home environment that values learning and supports programs. Programs and families collaborate in establishing goals for children both at home and at school.

6.Early childhood educaIon programs create an ongoing and comprehensive system for promoIng family engagement by ensuring that program leadership and teachers are dedicated, trained and receive the supports they need to fully engage families.


Focus on the

INTENT beyond the paperwork.

What IS the intent of the IFSP? Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 12

5/30/13

7

At the heart of the IFSP…

“The IFSP is a promise to children and families – a promise that their strengths will be recognized and built on, that their

needs will be met in a way that is respecrul of their beliefs and values,

and that their hopes and aspiraIons will be encouraged and

enabled.”

(McGonigel, Kaufman, & Johnson, 1991)

FINofOhio/Steps Toward Tomorrow/Your IFSP: PosiIve Planning

13

• “on-‐going, reciprocal, strengths-‐based partnership between families and professionals” (Halgunseth et al., 2009, p. 3)

ENGAGE

• “CreaIng opportuniIes for family members to become more competent and self-‐sustaining with respect to their abiliIes to mobilize their social networks to get needs met and asain desired goals” (Deal, Dunst, & Trivese, 1989, p. 33)

ENABLE

• “Carrying out intervenIons in a manner in which family members acquire a sense of control over their own development course as a result of their efforts to meet their needs” (Deal et al., 1989, p.33)

EMPOWER


5/30/13

8

It all begins with a VISION...

“I want Will to grow up with friends, parIcipate in hobbies and sports that interest him, and to learn to waterski.” (from an actual IFSP)


How do we facilitate the “visioning” process with families?


5/30/13

9

IFSP

V I S I O N


road map journal

IFSP the family’s

story What other metaphors can

you think of?

blueprint

learning process


5/30/13

10

Does our process reflect that metaphor?


Who “drives” the IFSP?


5/30/13

11

How do we explicitly

invite families to parIcipate?


Sub-‐ideas: 5 Quality Components

Big Ideas: FAMILY ENGAGEMENT,

ENABLEMENT, EMPOWERMENT


5/30/13

12

How do we define QUALITY in the context of the IFSP?

“…one that uses an individualized process to produce a wrisen plan that exceeds

minimal legal requirements and responds to family concerns, resources, and prioriIes

about their children”

(Campbell, Strickland, & LaForme, 1992, p. 113)


Breaking down QUALITY into individual components…

FuncIonal assessment

FuncIonal outcome wriIng

Linking funcIonal outcomes to

service decisions

Service integraIon

Progress monitoring

(Ridgley, Snyder, McWilliam, & Davis, 2011)


5/30/13

13

QuesIons to consider as we discuss QUALITY:

What do these components look like now?

What would you like to see differently?

What would make it beser?


Tips for Using the Training Slides To Follow

•  “Chunks” – maybe one component at a Ime or a few at a Ime

•  Individualize to program/team/provider needs

•  Disseminate to new staff as part of training or as a review/refresher for exisIng staff

•  5 quality components = enIre process (not just what happens at the IFSP meeIng)


5/30/13

14

#1

FuncIonal Assessment Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 27

Not just developmental domains, but PARTICIPATION:

Child engagement Independence

Social interacIons


5/30/13

15

Beyond developmental domains…

CHILD

• Role in rouInes

• Goodness of fit between skills and rouIne

FAMILY

• Strengths • Resources • Challenges • PrioriIes

LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES

• Within each environment

• Within each interac5on


Other Ips… •  Use specific examples to illustrate points •  Avoid narraIve repeat of evaluaIon findings •  Avoid use of jargon and acronyms (i.e., ROM, pre-‐linguisIc skills, bringing hands to midline)

•  Write in clear simple language that families, referral agents, and team members can easily understand (i.e., "has" vs. "presents with" or "uses" vs. "uIlizes")

•  hsp://www.ifspweb.org/flow/pre_ifsp_team_assess.html

•  Any other strategies that have worked for you and for families?


5/30/13

16

Jumping Off the Family Assessment Bandwagon

(Slentz & Bricker, 1992)

“The process of family assessment can carry the hidden message that because a child has special needs, the family must have problems” (Slentz & Bricker, 1992, p. 14)

How do we avoid this? Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 31

relaIonship-‐building

IFSP = “a service that takes place in the relaIonship and interacIons between families and professionals”

(Healy, Keesee, & Smith, 1989, p. 690) Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 32

5/30/13

17

Thinking about family assessment…

Authors’ recommendaIon:

“Family outcomes are included in the IFSP as they arise, rather than being idenDfied at

entry into the program” (Slentz & Bricker, 1992, p. 15)

What do you think?


How do we connect assessment to IFSP development?

IFSP

Family informaIon

Child informaIon


5/30/13

18

How do we share assessment informaIon among all team

members?


QuesIons to consider on FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT:

What does funcIonal assessment look like now?




5/30/13

19

#2

FuncIonal Outcome WriIng Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 37

Quality component 2: FuncIonal outcome wriIng

•  IntervenIon prioriIes should focus on child and family funcIoning

•  Be aligned with family prioriIes, beliefs, and values

•  Be understandable to families

•  Address funcIonal skills •  (Ridgley, Snyder, McWilliam, & Davis, 2011)


5/30/13

20

Child-‐related outcomes

•  Skills that are likely to be important for independence, engagement, and interacIon with others

•  (Ridgley, Snyder, McWilliam, & Davis, 2011)


Family outcomes

•  Develop family outcomes and strategies that encourage parental success in problem solving (Espe-‐Sherwindt, 1991)

•  Family outcomes should not be a means to increase family compliance with program policies and procedures (McGonigel & Garland, 1988)


5/30/13

21

Family outcomes

•  Related to the 5 general family outcomes specified by the Early Childhood Outcomes (ECO) Center: –  Families understand their child's strengths, abiliIes, and special needs.

–  Families know their rights and advocate effecIvely for their child.

–  Families help their child develop and learn. –  Families have support systems. –  Families access desired services, programs, and acIviIes in their community.

(from hsp://projects.fpg.unc.edu/~eco/pages/tools.cfm ) Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce

41

IFSP Outcomes: Tips for WriIng •  Discipline-‐free •  Jargon-‐free •  Progress can be measured by family •  “Third-‐word rule”

– The 3rd word in the outcome statement should be a funcIonal concept

– E.g. “Sam will sit in the bathtub during his bath…”

(Shelden & Rush, 2009) Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 42

5/30/13

22

IFSP Outcomes: Tips for WriIng

•  Avoid passive words such as: – tolerate – receive – increase or decrease – Improve – maintain

(Shelden & Rush, 2009)


IFSP Outcomes: Tips for WriIng

•  Use a special occasion or life event such as a birthday or holiday or real-‐life point in Ime as the Imeline for the IFSP outcome statement. – This strategy can assist parents and other care providers in thinking in “real Ime” about the possibility of achieving outcomes within the context of the big picture of their family life

–  (Shelden & Rush, 2009)


5/30/13

23

IFSP Outcomes: SMART

•  Specific • Measurable

•  Achievable •  RouInes-‐Based •  Tied to a FuncIonal Priority

(Jung, 2007)


Videos: SMART Outcomes

Part 1 Part 2

& ROUTINE Strategies Part 3

AcIvity: Are these outcomes SMART?

•  We want to learn strategies to help Andrea during feeding so that she can eat safely.

•  Nina will walk on her own so that she can start exploring her environment more independently.

•  We want Kevin to be able to stack 3-‐5 blocks, zip his coat by pulling on the shank, and hold his drink cup.

•  We want Marie to be decrease hi3ng and be able to iniIate play with her peers in the classroom by verbalizing a greeIng such as “hi”.

•  Daniel will hold his trunk steady when placed in a boppy pillow.


5/30/13

24

IFSP Outcomes •  FuncIonal •  Family-‐centered

•  ParIcipaIon-‐based •  Relevant to the family

•  NOT discrete skills based on an assessment item

•  Example (video)


From RBI to funcIonal outcome (McWilliam, 2010, pp. 38-40)

STEP EXAMPLE

Read the family’s top priority from the RBI

Chewing food

Find out what rouInes this affects MealIme at home, grandparents’ house, restaurants

Write: “[Child] will parIcipate in [rouIne(s) in quesIon]

“Darcy will parDcipate in breakfast, lunch, dinner at home, grandparents’ house, and in restaurants…”

Write “…by ___ing” addressing the specific behaviors

“…by chewing food and swallowing it”


5/30/13

25

From RBI to funcIonal outcome (McWilliam, 2010, pp. 38-40)

STEP EXAMPLE

Add a criterion for demonstraIng that the child has acquired the skill

“We will know Darcy can do this when she eats 1 cup of food in this manner.”

Add another criterion for generalizaIon, maintenance, or fluency, as appropriate.

“…one Dme at breakfast, lunch, and dinner at home, at grandparents’ house, and at a restaurant”

Over what amount of Ime? “…in one week.”


From RBI to funcIonal outcome RBI priority: chewing solid food instead of

pureed food

Darcy will parIcipate in mealIme at home, at grandma’s house, and at restaurants by chewing and swallowing her food. We will know she can do this when she eats 1 cup of food in

this manner, one Ime at breakfast, one Ime at lunch, one Ime at dinner, at home and in grandma’s house, and one Ime at a

restaurant, in 1 week.

(McW

illiam, 2010, pp. 38-‐40)


5/30/13

26

QuesIons to consider on FUNCTIONAL OUTCOME WRITING:

What do IFSP outcomes look like now?




#3

Linking funcIonal outcomes to service decisions


5/30/13

27

Quality component 3: Linking funcIonal outcomes to service decisions

•  Emphasize family strengths and natural support networks (Bennes, Zhang, & Hojnar, 1998)

•  Family concerns and prioriIes must drive the IFSP

•  AcIon steps that reflect families’ resources, materials, and environments

•  Strategies that are likely to be effecIve and least intrusive to families (Ridgley, Snyder, McWilliam, & Davis, 2011)


QuesIons to ask when developing strategies:

•  Is this a preferred acIvity for the child? •  Does the acIvity provide opportuniIes for the targeted outcomes without becoming contrived?

•  Is this acIvity a part of ongoing daily acIviIes or is it a special event?

•  Does the acIvity provide opportuniIes for child iniIaIon?

•  Are there opportuniIes for peer interacIon? (Winton, McCollum, & Catles, 1997, pp. 358-‐359)


5/30/13

28

IFSP Strategies: ROUTINE

•  RouInes-‐Based •  Outcome-‐Related

•  Understandable

•  Transdisciplinary •  Implemented by family or caregiver

•  Nonjudgmental

•  Evidence-‐Based (Jung, 2007)


A systemaIc decision-‐making approach when making service decisions

•  Framework to support service coordinators when making service decisions with families

•  Incrementally adding services only as needed to help families and other service providers know how to address specific outcomes within families’ daily rouInes –  (Ridgley, Snyder, McWilliam, & Davis, 2011)


5/30/13

29

“IFSPs should show evidence that EI professionals support the family’s ability to help their child parIcipate

in and learn from everyday acIviIes.”

(Jung & Baird, 2003, p. 207)


FuncIonal assessment

FuncIonal outcomes

FuncIonal intervenIon


5/30/13

30

Other Ips…

•  RouInes = learning opportuniIes •  Professional role: from “expert” to “ally” (Zhang & Bennes, 2003)

•  Family empowerment, not dependence on professionals

•  Strategies must be feasible in their day-‐to-‐day acIviIes.

•  “Early intervenIon is what happens between sessions/visits.” (McWilliam, 2007)


What do families say about their IFSP?

FINofOhio/Steps Toward Tomorrow/Your Child’s IFSP: Why You Should Care

“I have saved all my copies… It journals the progress of your development and your child’s development in the first three years. It was very helpful.”

-‐ Judy D.

60

5/30/13

31

QuesIons to consider on LINKING OUTCOMES TO SERVICE DECISIONS:

What do IFSP services/strategies look like now?




#4

Service integraIon Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 62

5/30/13

32

in·∙te·∙grate verb \ˈin-‐tə-‐ˌgrāt\

Defini5on of INTEGRATE transiIve verb

1: to form, coordinate, or blend into a funcIoning or unified whole : unite

(Merriam-‐Webster)

Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce

Quality component 4: Integrated service delivery

•  SupporIng the delivery of services to families within their natural environments

•  FacilitaIng shared responsibility between families and professionals

(Ridgley, Snyder, McWilliam, & Davis, 2011)


TEAMING

5/30/13

33

IntegraIng services across…

TEAM MEMBERS

ROUTINES/SETTINGS

CAREGIVERS

• PSP, SC, • other members

• home • community

• family • other significant adults and peers


QuesIons to consider on SERVICE INTEGRATION:

What do services look like now?




5/30/13

34

#5

Progress Monitoring Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 67

Quality component 5: Progress monitoring

•  Progress that can be measured by the family •  Barriers to outcome asainment idenIfied and addressed when necessary

•  Gathering data during visits •  Using data gathered to make changes in the IFSP

•  (Ridgley, Snyder, McWilliam, & Davis, 2011)


5/30/13

35

Progress Monitoring: an ongoing process that involves…

•  DocumenIng a child’s growth and development and family-‐idenIfied outcomes

•  Planning for changes in outcomes by: – CollecIng and analyzing objecIve informaIon – Making decisions based on the review and analysis of the objecIve informaIon

(hsp://jeffline.jefferson.edu/cfsrp/tlc/pdfs/Unit2_Philadelphia_Policies-‐Procedures_9_14_10.pdf )


A system for progress monitoring includes…


WHAT to monitor HOW to monitor

HOW to share informaIon with

families

WHO needs to be involved in progress

monitoring


5/30/13

36

Benefits of Progress Monitoring

•  Everyone involved with the child and family are partners and know what is expected

•  Families and staff have a documented and organized record of performance

•  Families and staff know what is and what is not working based on data

•  It provides an “easy to understand” way to communicate with families and other team members about progress

•  IFSP teams have comprehensive performance informaIon to use for decision-‐making and can make objecIve decisions

(hsp://jeffline.jefferson.edu/cfsrp/tlc/pdfs/Unit2_Philadelphia_Policies-‐Procedures_9_14_10.pdf ) Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 71

Progress Monitoring: A 9-‐Step Approach

1.  Develop outcomes 2.  Write meaningful and measurable objecIves 3.  Decide possible intervenIon methods 4.  Determine what informaIon should be collected and

how this will be done 5.  Decide ways of collecIng this informaIon and when 6.  Represent the informaIon (text, visuals, video, etc) 7.  Evaluate the informaIon 8.  Adjust intervenIon 9.  Communicate progress



5/30/13

37

Progress Monitoring Example (Home)


Progress Monitoring Example (Child Care)

hsp://community.fpg.unc.edu/connect-‐modules/learners/module-‐1


5/30/13

38

Progress Monitoring Example (Child Care)

hsp://community.fpg.unc.edu/connect-‐modules/learners/module-‐1 75

What do families say about their IFSP?

FINofOhio/Steps Toward Tomorrow/Your Child’s IFSP: Why You Should Care

“It’s something to refer back to and say ‘this is sIll something I want to do’, and kind of go

from there with it.” -‐Yahara G.

76

5/30/13

39

QuesIons to consider on PROGRESS MONITORING:

How does progress monitoring look like now?




Other general Ips…

•  involve the input of family members AND other care providers

•  write in first person (I, we) •  use people-‐first language ("child has cerebral palsy", NOT "cerebral palsied child")

•  refer to parents by name (NOT "mother", "grandpa")

•  be posiIve and soluIon-‐focused hsp://www.ifspweb.org/flow/pre_ifsp_team_assess.html


5/30/13

40

IFSP/IEP ConsideraIons: Culturally and LinguisIcally Diverse

(CLD) Families

•  CommunicaIon style –  Low-‐context –  High-‐context

•  Family’s view of disability •  Family structure •  Time orientaIon

•  Family’s understanding of family-‐centered philosophy

(Zhang & Bennes, 2003) Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce 79

IFSP/IEP ConsideraIons: Culturally and LinguisIcally Diverse

(CLD) Families

•  Working with interpreters – Bilingual AND bicultural – BEFORE: plan collaboraIvely – DURING: address the parent or family member, not the interpreter

– AFTER: debrief


5/30/13

41

IFSP Resources for Families •  Family InformaIon Network (FIN) of Ohio: FREE webinars for families on IFSP, transiIon, etc.

•  Help Me Grow of Ohio

•  WriIng The IFSP For Your Child

•  Child Outcomes


How would you describe the "what, why, where, how" with families that lead to

acIve engagement in the IFSP process (assessment, strategies, outcomes,

implementaIon, progress monitoring)?


5/30/13

42

What does family engagement in the IFSP look like now?

What would you like to see differently,

and what would make it beser?


How do we keep the IFSP process alive, fluid, and ongoing?


5/30/13

43

(McWilliam, Ferguson, Harbin, Porter, Munn, & Vandiviere, 1998)

“The IFSP is a tangible reflecIon of the service provider’s philosophy.”


YOU are the curriculum.

“The most important ‘curriculum’ is the

emerging relaIonship between the family and the professional.”

(Espe-‐Sherwindt, 1991, p. 117)

Gatmaitan, M., & Bregel, C. (2013) Ohio/KSU EI Community of PracIce

5/30/13

44

References

•  Bennes, T., Zhang, C., & Hojnar, L. (1998). FacilitaIng the full parIcipaIon of culturally diverse families in the IFSP/IEP process. Infant-‐Toddler IntervenDon: The Transdisciplinary Journal, 8(3), 227-‐249.

•  Cowden, J.E. (1991). CriIcal components of the Individualized Family Service Plan. Journal of Physical EducaDon, RecreaDon, and Dance, 62(6), 38-‐40.

•  Deal, A.G., Dunst, C.J., & Trivese, C.M. (1989). A flexible and funcIonal approach to developing individualized family support plans. Infants and Young Children, 1(4), 32-‐43.

•  Espe-‐Sherwindt, M. (1991). The IFSP and parents with special needs/mental retardaIon. Topics in Early Childhood Special EducaDon, 11(3), 107-‐

•  Halgunseth, L.C., Peterson, A., Stark, D.R., & Moodie, S. (2009). Family Engagement, Diverse Families, and Early Childhood EducaDon Programs: An Integrated Review of the Literature. Retrieved from hsp://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/ecprofessional/EDF_Literature%20Review.pdf


References •  Healy, A., Keesee, P., & Smith, B. (1989). Early services for children with special

needs: TransiDons for family support. Iowa City: The University of Iowa. •  Johnson, H., Brady, S.J., Shenkle, A., & Amidon, E. (1997). A computer-‐based

system to prepare personnel for family-‐centered interacIons in the Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) process. Journal of Special EducaDon Technology, 13, 14-‐26.

•  Jung, L. A. (2007). WriIng SMART ObjecIves That Fit the ROUTINE. Teaching ExcepDonal Children, 39(4), 54–58

•  Jung, L.A., & Baird, S.M. (2003). Effects of service coordinator variables on Individualized Family Service Plans. Journal of Early IntervenDon, 25(3), 206-‐218.

•  McGonigel, M.J., & Garland, C.W. (1988). The individualized family service plan and the early intervenIon team: Team and family issues and recommended pracIces. Infants and Young Children, 1(1), 10-‐21.

•  McGonigel, M.J., Kaurmann, R.K. and Johnson, B.H. (1991). Guidelines and recommended pracIces for the IFSP.

•  McWilliam, R.A. (2010). Assessing families’ needs with the rouInes-‐based interview. In R.A. McWilliam (Ed.), Working with families of young children with special needs (pp. 27-‐(43). New York: Guilford Press.


5/30/13

45

References •  McWilliam, R.A., Ferguson, A., Harbin, G.L., Porter, P., Munn, D., &

Vandiviere, P. (1998). The family-‐centeredness of Individualized Family Service Plans. Topics in Early Childhood Special EducaDon, 18(2), 69-‐82.

•  Ridgley, R., Snyder, P.A., McWilliam, R.A., & Davis, J.E. (2011). Development and iniIal validaIon of a professional development intervenIon to enhance the quality of Individualized Family Service Plans. Infants and Young Children, 24(4), 309-‐328.

•  Shelden, M.L., & Rush, D.D. (2009). Tips and Techniques for Developing ParIcipaIon-‐Based IFSP Outcome Statements. BriefCASE, 2(1), 1-‐6.

•  Winton, P.J., McCollum, J.A., & Catles, C. (1997). Reforming personnel preparaDon in early intervenDon: Issues, models, and pracDcal strategies. BalImore: Brookes.

•  Zhang, C., & Bennes, T. (2003). FacilitaIng the meaningful parIcipaIon of culturally and linguisIcally diverse families in the IFSP and IEP process. Focus on AuDsm and Other Developmental DisabiliDes, 18(1), 51-‐59.


Next Steps

•  Module 5: ImplementaIon and Progress Monitoring

•  Wrapping up: focus group in June – How to sustain changes a�er the project period ends


5/30/13

46

Contact

•  Michelle Gatmaitan, Consultant Kent State University [email protected]

•  Cindy Bregel, Parent Coach Consultant, Family InformaIon Network [email protected]


These slides and other materials are available at the Ohio EI Community

of PracIce Website: hsp://ohioeicommunityofpracIce.weebly.com/


cop ifsp 5.20.13 final - michelle gatmaitan -...

Documents