USVI Public Records

Document text

i 2020 2019-2020 NEEDS ASSESSMENT OF THE USVI’S ECE MIXED-DELIVERY SYSTEM Appendices August 2020 USVI PDG B-5 NEEDS ASSESSMENT APPENDICES APPENDICES APPENDIX I: STATE ADVISORY COUNCIL Appendix IA: State Advisory Council Members Appendix IB: Workgroups, Charges, and Objectives APPENDIX II: THE CORE TEAM, PROCOM, AND PAOS APPENDIX III: DATA COLLECTION INFORMATION Appendix IIIA: IRB Approval Letter Appendix IIIB: Synopses of Quantitative Instruments Appendix IIIC: Qualitative Protocols APPENDIX IV: ADDITIONAL KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS APPENDIX V: SUMMARY FINDINGS – CAREGIVER/TEACHER SURVEY APPENDIX VI: SUMMARY FINDINGS – PARENT SURVEY APPENDIX VII: LAP-3 KINDERGARTEN ASSESSMENT RESULTS – SELECT DOMAINS AND SCHOOL YEARS APPENDIX VIII: HEAD START COR RESULTS – SELECT SCHOOL YEARS APPENDIX IX: AMENDED INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT (AIA) APPENDIX X: SUMMARY FINDINGS: TRANSITION SURVEY APPENDIX XI: LICENSED CHILDCARE FACILITIES APPENDIX XII: SUMMARY FINDINGS: STAKEHOLDER SURVEY APPENDIX XIII: SUMMARY FINDINGS: INCLUSION SURVEY APPENDIX I: STATE ADVISORY COUNCIL APPENDIX I.A APPENDIX I.B APPENDIX I.A: STATE ADVISORY COUNCIL [SAC] MEMBERS USVI PDG B-5 SAC MEMBERS CURRENT, FORMER & PROSPECTIVE ACTIVE AGENCY AFFILIATION POSITION DISTRICT Baecher-Brown, Dee/ Scarbriel, Anna Community Foundation of the Virgin Islands (CFVI) President/ Director of Grants & Programs St. Thomas-St. John Charleswell, Renee VIDE State Director, SPED Concepcion, Lorna VIDOH Director, WIC St. Croix Creque-Quain, Cherise VIDHS Grants Administrator St. Thomas-St. John D'Paula, Jessica Early Head Start Parent Council Parent member St. Croix Lewis, Masikia VIDHS Administrator, Head Start St. Thomas-St. John Moorehead, Maureen Head Start Governing Board & Retired Educator Children’s Advocate & Board Member St. Croix Perez, Jose VIDE Supervisor, ELL Program Phillips, April Retired ECE Coordinator- VIDE Children’s Advocate St. Thomas-St. John Serano-Griffith, Sheryl VIDE District Director, SPED St. Croix Smith, Jr., Moleto STEEMCC - FQHC Executive Director St. Thomas-St. John Stridiron, Priscilla Retired ECE-SPED Teacher Children’s Advocate Brown, Deborah E. UVI-CERC – State Entity Research Associate Callwood, Gloria B. Research Associate – In Kind Ragster, LaVerne E. Senior Research Associate Michael, Noreen Project Director/PI INACTIVE AGENCY AFFILIATION POSITION DISTRICT Barnes, Stephanie Virgin Islands Autism Network President St. Croix Callwood, Kay Kidz First Center – St. John Director/Owner St. Thomas-St. John Clendinen, Germaine Sunshine Bear Care , Inc Day Care Center Owner Cruse-Peter, Jeselle VIDE Supervisor, Elementary Ed. St. Croix Evans, Patricia Tenacious Toddlers Day Care Center Owner Henry, Jason Head Start Policy Council Parent Member Hewitt-Sewer, Laurel Retired teacher Children’s Advocate St. Thomas-St. John Joseph, Kathy Head Start Policy Council Parent Member Maduro, Kalamis VIDE Supervisor, Elementary Ed. Rallings, Eukries VI Partners for Healthy Communities President St. Croix Sprauve-Webster, Masserae FHC Inc. - FQHC Chief Executive Officer FORMER AGENCY AFFILIATION POSITION DISTRICT Encarnacion, Maria VIDE Assistant Commissioner St. Croix Humphreys, Brandy LSSVI Director, EHS McCray, Nona VIDOH Director, Birth-3 Program St. Thomas-St. John Petersen, Derval Director, MCH & CSHCN St. Croix Powell, Evril VIDHS Assistant Commissioner Price-Jones, Valerie Acting Admin., CCDF St. Thomas-St. John Valmond, Janis UVI-CERC Co-Investigator St. Croix PROSPECTIVE AGENCY AFFILIATION POSITION DISTRICT Hewitt, Vaughn LSSVI Director, EHS St. Croix Mayers, Charmaine VIDOH Director, MCH & CSHCN St. Thomas-St. John McMahon-Arnold, Yvette VIDE Director of Instructional Development St. Croix Sprauve , Patricia VIDOH Interim Director, Birth-3 Program St. Thomas-St. John Tonge-George, Sherryl UVI, Inclusive Early Childhood Ctr Director, IECC Tucker-Lans, Tishma VIDHS Administrator, CCDF Appendix I.A: USVI State Advisory Council USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX I.B: WORKGROUPS, CHARGES, AND OBJECTIVES USVI PRESCHOOL DEVELOPMENT GRANT BIRTH THROUGH FIVE – PDG B-5 WORKGROUPS: CHARGE, OBJECTIVES AND MEMBERSHIP B-5 DEFINITIONS WORKGROUP – CHAIR, C. CREQUE-QUAIN CHARGE OBJECTIVES MEMBERS The Definitions Workgroup is charged with describing how the territory defines key terms, including quality early childhood care and education, availability, vulnerable or underserved, and children in rural areas. 1. Identify key terms for the project. Cherise Creque-Quain Nikki Bannister Maria Encarnacion 2. Analyze secondary data sources for definitions. 3. Compile definitions (cultural sensitivity) 4. Develop consensus on and compile final definitions. B-5 SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS WORKGROUP – CHAIR, L. RAGSTER CHARGE OBJECTIVES MEMBERS The Socio-demographic Workgroup is charged with describing the populations of children who are vulnerable or underserved, and children in rural areas. 1. Describe USVI B-5 parents group by age, gender, ethnicity, income, health challenges, immigration status, educational attainment, insurance, housing ownership, language spoken at home, and social services received. LaVerne Ragster Renee Charleswell Jessica D’Paula Brandy Humphreys Kathy Joseph (P) Nona McCray 2. Describe the USVI B-5 population by gender, ethnicity, health status, social services received and types of immunization. B-5 SERVICES AND DATA WORKGROUP – CHAIR, D. BROWN; CO-CHAIR, L. CONCEPCION CHARGE OBJECTIVES MEMBERS The B-5 Services and Data Workgroup is charged with identifying, to the extent practicable, the unduplicated number of children being served in existing programs and the unduplicated number of children awaiting service in such programs. 1. Document the number of B-5 children being served by various programs in the Territory. Deborah Brown Lorna Concepcion Nona McCray 2. Identify programs with a waitlist for services to children. 3. Determine the level/extent of overlap in their clientele data/ target population / … what data will be used to determine the unduplicated PDG B-5 service count. 4. Identify the methodologies/systems used to collect and report program services data. Appendix I.B: Workgroups: Charge, Objectives, & Membership USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment B-5 SYSTEMS AND PARTNERS COLLABORATIONS AND SUPPORTS (SPARCS) WORKGROUP – CHAIR, N. MICHAEL; CO-CHAIR, L. RAGSTER CHARGE OBJECTIVES MEMBERS The B-5 SParCS Workgroup is charged with describing the gaps in data or research that are most important for the state/territory to fill in order to meet the goals of supporting collaboration between programs and services and maximizing parental choice. 1. Describe existing collaborations among ECE service providers. Noreen Michael Stephanie Barnes Kalamis Maduro Derval Petersen Tannesia Petersen LaVerne Ragster 2. Describe existing collaborations among ECE programs and services. 3. Document data available to assess the success of existing collaborations among ECE service providers. 4. Document data available to assess the success of existing collaborations among ECE programs and services. 5. Describe specific efforts of collaborations targeted to providing information to B-5 parents relative to programs and services available within the USVI B-5 mixed delivery system. 6. Use information gathered in addressing Objectives 1-5 to document existing gaps and propose how the gaps can be strategically addressed. B-5 QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY OF PROGRAMS AND SUPPORTS WORKGROUP – CHAIR, G. CALLWOOD CHARGE OBJECTIVES MEMBERS The B-5 Quality and Availability of Programs and Supports Workgroup is charged with identifying gaps in data or research about the quality and availability of programming and supports for children B-5, considering the needs of working families, as well as those who are seeking employment or in job training. 1. Identify source of data/research on B-5 programs and support. Gloria Callwood Laurel Hewitt-Sewer Brandy Humphreys 2. Determine available programs and supports for children B-5. 3. Identify support for working families, those seeking employing and those in Job training. 4. Identify gaps in programs and supports. 5. Evaluate the quality of identified programs and supports. Appendix I.B: Workgroups: Charge, Objectives, & Membership USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment B-5 INDICATORS OF PROGRESS WORKGROUP – CHAIR, J. VALMOND; CO-CHAIR, D. BROWN CHARGE OBJECTIVES MEMBERS The B-5 indicators of Progress Workgroup is charged with describing the territory's current measurable indicators of progress that align with the state/territory's vision and desired outcomes. [Key sources of data: Obj. 1: LAP-3 (VIDE); COR (HS); Obj. 2: CAP 360 (EHS) Obj. 3: VI DHS] 1. Identify key outcome indicators for child readiness for kindergarten Deborah Brown Maria Encarnacion Janis Valmond Noreen Michael 2. Identify key indicators for child readiness to start HS 3. Determine indicators of system performance to include numbers of children and families receiving coordinated services and numbers of families and children identified with needs who receive services B-5 FUNDING AND RESOURCE USE WORKGROUP – CHAIR, N. MICHAEL; CO-CHAIR, C. CREQUE-QUAIN CHARGE OBJECTIVES MEMBERS The B-5 Funding and Resource Use Workgroup is charged with completing an analysis of barriers to the funding and provision of high-quality early childhood care and education services and supports, and identify opportunities for more efficient use of resources. 1. Identify all sources of funding for current early childhood care and services and supports provided in the USVI. Noreen Michael Cherise Creque-Quain Tannesia Petersen Anna Scarbriel 2. Document instances of duplication of services and supports currently provided to the B-5 population in the USVI. 3. Identify and describe existing barriers to funding for the B-5 mixed delivery system in the USVI. 4. Document inputs to current early childhood care and education services within the B-5 mixed delivery system in the USVI, particularly as they relate to quality (curriculum, staffing, etc.). 5. Document barriers to key quality inputs. 6. Generate strategies to optimize efficiency of the use of resources in the USVI B-5 mixed delivery system. Appendix I.B: Workgroups: Charge, Objectives, & Membership USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment B-5 ECCE FACILITIES WORKGROUP – CHAIR, E. POWELL; CO-CHAIR, N. MICHAEL CHARGE OBJECTIVES MEMBERS The B-5 ECCE Facilities Workgroup is charged with describing key concerns or issues related to ECCE facilities.  Identify and review national and local regulations and standards on early childhood facilities Possible Resources: b. NAEYC Program Standard 9 - Physical Environment c. VI Office of Child Care and Regulatory Services: Rules and Regulations for Child Care Facilities, After School Programs, and Summer Camps, d. Accessibility Standards for Facilities e. Head Start Design Guide: A Guide for Building a Head Start Facility f. OSHA Regulations for a Preschool Facility Evril Powell Laurel Hewitt-Sewer Kathy Joseph Maureen Moorehead Noreen Michael  Confer with local and national experts to identify commonly encountered challenges and barriers that hinder an applicant’s ability to meet relevant EC facilities legislation and standards requirements.  Identify current and past innovative initiatives implemented both locally and nationally to support the availability of high quality early childhood facilities.  Identify any current plans/resources available to address/support early childhood facilities in the territory.  Identify opportunities for collaboration with all early childhood stakeholders to increase the availability of high quality child care facilities in the territory. Possible Reference: a. Review the ECAC Report b. Review the Kids Count Report Appendix I.B: Workgroups: Charge, Objectives, & Membership USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment B-5 TRANSITION SUPPORTS AND GAPS WORKGROUP – CHAIR, M. LEWIS CHARGE OBJECTIVES MEMBERS The B-5 Transition Supports and Gaps Workgroup is charged with describing transition supports and gaps that affect how children move between early childhood care and education programs and school entry. 1. How is information communicated to all families/parents of all stakeholders (language/culture)? Masikia Lewis Stephanie Barnes Felecia Blyden Renee Charleswell Jeselle Cruse Peter Jessica D’Paula Kalamis Maduro Nona McCray Jose Perez Sheryl Serano-Griffith 2. Identify SWOT (Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) for all stakeholders transitioning from early care and education system to school entry. 3. Identify SWOT (Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) specifically for students with special needs transitioning from early care and education system to school entry. 4. Identification of the number of children that are transitioning. 5. Identification of useful support systems from all stakeholders. Appendix I.B: Workgroups: Charge, Objectives, & Membership USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX II: THE CORE TEAM, PROCOM, PAOS, AND STUDENT RAs APPENDIX II.A APPENDIX II.B APPENDIX II.C APPENDIX II.D APPENDIX II.A THE CORE TEAM USVI PRESCHOOL DEVELOPMENT GRANT BIRTH THROUGH FIVE (PDG B-5) CORE TEAM NAME ROLE Noreen Michael, PhD Project Director/Principal Investigator Deborah Brown, PhD Research Associate Marlene Gokool, MPA Project Coordinator [May – July 2020] Administrative Specialist II [August – December 2020] LaVerne Ragster, PhD Senior Research Associate Gloria Callwood, PhD Research Associate [In-Kind] Tannesia E. Petersen, BA Project Coordinator [June – December 2019] Administrative Specialist II [January – May 2020] Nikki Bannister, MA Communications Specialist/Liaison [July – November 2019] Emily Danet Petty Administrative Specialist I [August – November 2019] Janis M. Valmond, DrPH, CHES Co-Investigator [January – April 2019] Appendix II.A: The Core Team USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX II.B PROJECT COMMITTEE [PROCOM] USVI PRESCHOOL DEVELOPMENT GRANT BIRTH THROUGH FIVE (PDG B-5) PROJECT COMMITTEE [PROCOM] Name Role Agency Nikki G. Bannister Communications Specialist [July – November 2019] State Entity Caribbean Exploratory Research Center, University of the Virgin Islands Deborah E. Brown Research Associate Gloria B. Callwood Research Associate [(In-Kind] Marlene Gokool Project Coordinator [May – July 2020] Noreen Michael Project Director/ PI Tannesia E. Petersen Project Coordinator [June - December 2019] Administrative Specialist II [January – May 2020] Emily D. Petty Administrative Specialist I [August – November 2019] LaVerne E. Ragster Senior Research Associate Janis M. Valmond Research Coordinator/Co- Investigator [January – April 2019] Cherise Creque-Quain Grants Administrator Virgin Islands Department of Human Services Masikia Lewis Administrator, Head Start Valerie Price-Jones Acting Administrator, Office of Child Care and Regulatory Services [January – March 2019] Tishma Tucker-Lans Administrator, Office of Child Care and Regulatory Services [October 2019 – present] Appendix II.B: Project Committee [PROCOM] USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX II.C: PARTNER AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS [PAOS] USVI PRESCHOOL DEVELOPMENT GRANT BIRTH THROUGH FIVE [PDG B-5] PARTNER AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS [PAOS] MEMBERSHIP ROSTER Name Position Agency Felecia Blyden* Chief of Staff Virgin Islands Department of Education Karen Brown [August 2019 to present] Interim Dean School of Education Kimberley Causey Gomez [May 2019 to present] Commissioner Virgin Islands Department of Human Services Robert Graham [January 2020 to present] Executive Director Virgin Islands Housing Authority Junia John-Straker Chief Executive Officer Lutheran Social Services of the Virgin Islands Mary B. A. Lansiquot Dean School of Nursing Anna Scarbriel* Director of Grants Community Foundation of the Virgin Islands Moleto Smith Executive Director St. Thomas East End Medical Center Corporation [FQHC] Linda Thomas [through July 2019] Dean School of Education Janis M. Valmond* [June 2019 to present] Deputy Commissioner Virgin Islands Department of Health Masserae Webster Chief Executive Officer Frederiksted Health Care [FQHC] *Proxy for agency head Appendix II.C: Partner Agencies and Organizations USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX II.D: STUDENT RESEARCH ASSISTANTS [RAs] USVI PRESCHOOL DEVELOPMENT GRANT BIRTH THROUGH FIVE [PDG B-5] STUDENT RESEARCH ASSISTANTS Name Campus Lynesha Armstrong St. Croix Campus Ariana Athanase St. Thomas Campus Ramiz Hurtault St. Thomas Campus Jerome Philbert St. Croix Campus Shaunte Rawlins St. Thomas Campus Appendix II.D: Student Research Assistants USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX III: DATA COLLECTION MATERIALS APPENDIX III.A APPENDIX III.B APPENDIX III.C APPENDIX III.A: INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD [IRB] APPROVAL LETTER UVI INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD (IRB) ACTION ON APPLICATION IN SUPPORT OF COMPLETION OF A NEEDS ASSESSMENT OF THE TERRITORY’S EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION MIXED DELIVERY SYSTEM Funding Support: USVI Preschool Development Grant Birth through Five [PDG B-5] Grant From: Diahann Ryan To: Noreen Michael Subject: IRBNet Board Action Date: Thursday, June 27, 2019 11:20:32 AM Please note that University of the Virgin Islands IRB has taken the following action on IRBNet: Project Title: [1428205-2] A Needs Assessment of the Availability and Quality of Programs in the USVI Early Childhood Care and Education (ECE) Mixed Delivery System (MDS) for Children Birth through Five (B-5) from Vulnerable Families Principal Investigator: Noreen Michael, PhD Submission Type: Amendment/Modification Date Submitted: June 2, 2019 Action: APPROVED Effective Date: June 27, 2019 Review Type: Expedited Review Should you have any questions you may contact Diahann Ryan at dryan@live.uvi.edu. Thank you, The IRBNet Support Team www.irbnet.org Appendix III.A: UVI IRB Approval - Primary Data Collection USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX III.B: QUANTITATIVE INSTRUMENTS DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY PDG B-5 NEEDS ASSESMENT SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC SURVEY Directions: Please fill in the circles as such: 1. Island of residence O St. Croix O St. John O St. Thomas 2. Age O 18 – 24 O 25 - 29 O 30 – 39 O 40 – 49 O 50 – 64 O Over 65 3. Are you … O Male O Female 4. Ethnicity O Hispanic O Not Hispanic 5. Race O American Indian or Alaskan Native O Asian or Pacific Islander O Black O White O Other (please specify) _____________ 6. Marital Status O Single, Never Married O Married O In a domestic relationship O Separated O Divorced O Widowed 7. Education O Less than 9th Grade O 9 – 12, No diploma O High school graduate/GED O CDA O Some college or AA degree O BA/BS degree O Graduate/Professional degree 8. Employment Status O Employed, Full Time O Employed, Part-time O Unemployed, Seeking employment O Unemployed, Not seeking employment O Self Employed O Retired O Unable to Work O Other 9. Annual Household income: O Less than $10,000 O Less than $20,000 O Less than $35,000 O Less than $50,000 O Less than $75,000 O $75,000 or greater O Not sure 10. Insurance Status O Private Insurance through job O Insurance through Medicaid O Insurance through Medicare O Self-Insured O Uninsured O Other 11. Family Size (number of persons in household) O 2 O 3 O 4 O 5 O 6 or more 12. Number of children 5 years old and under O None O 1 O 2 O 3 O 4 O 5 or more Appendix III.B.1: Sociodemographic Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment ANNOTATED STAKEHOLDER SURVEY ANNOTATED STAKEHOLDER SURVEY SURVEY (QUESTION NO) QUESTION TYPE PURPOSE COLLABORATION AND SYSTEM BUILDING 1-2 Promote Collaboration To determine the mechanisms available for continuity of services and collaborations among ECE programs. 1-4 Recruit and Engage Stakeholders To determine diverse stakeholders are recruited and engaged, from both public and private sectors, in early childhood system- building efforts. 1-4 Define and Coordinate Leadership To determine the definition and coordination of leadership between state and local governance in ECE system. 1-5 Ensure accountability To determine that data-driven decision making, desired outcomes and accountability are ensured 1-2 Enhance and Align Standards To determine that quality standards for ECE programs are enhanced, aligned and supported by research. 1-5 Create and Support Improvement To determine the creation and support for quality improvement initiatives for the ECE workforce, infants, toddlers, and their families 1-3 Finance Strategically To determine that finances are utilized strategically to provide adequate and stable funding for services for infants, toddlers, and their families. POSITIVE EARLY LEARNING EXPERIENCES 1-4 Early intervention To determine early intervention services, transition from Part C IEP and IFSP services to support development are available where necessary. 1-10 Child Care To determine that families in need of care can access quality, culturally-appropriate, affordable child care and care providers are trained and earn a comparable salary. STRONG FAMILIES 1-4 Policy To determine the policies support vulnerable families who have knowledge about programs and services that support their needs to become strong families. 1-3 Basic Needs To determine that low income families have support for basic needs, skill training and work support to earn a livable wage. 1-5 Home Visiting/Parent Education To determine that home visiting programs, expectant parents and parents of young children seeking information on how to support healthy child development are informed. 1-5 Child Welfare To determine child welfare workers receive ongoing training; families investigated for maltreatment are connected to services and child welfare system receive screening and services to promote development. 1-3 Family Leave To determine working families can access different form of leave as needed to support of strong families HEALTH 1-9 Physical Health To determine the policy in terms of children’s wellness, food security and that children live in healthy environments, free from environmental hazards. 1-4 Developmental Screening To determine access to developmental screening and where necessary referrals to appropriate follow up care made and monitored to satisfy the child’s needs. 1-7 Social- emotional Health To determine that families have access to trained professionals to support social-emotional health of postpartum women, caregivers, infants and toddlers. Appendix III.B.2: Partner Agencies and Organizations USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment ANNOTATED EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSITION SURVEY ANNOTATED EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSITION SURVEY SURVEY (QUESTION QUESTION TYPE PURPOSE EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSITION SURVEY 3 Items (A-C) Content and Scope of Services To determine the content and scope of child Developmental, educational, health and support services available to families. 3 Items (A-C) Interagency Structure To determine interagency structure, policies and personnel involved in transitions 3 Items (A-C) Interagency Communication & Relationships To determine the network available for interagency communication and relationships. 5 Items (A-E) Interagency Agreement (IA/MOU/MOA) To determine the use and specifics of interagency agreements for compliance with federal and state regulations and rate of revision and update based on stakeholder input. 4 Items (A-D) Policy Alignment To determine policy alignment of transition requirements and timelines are aligned across agencies and minimize disruption in transition-related services. 6 Items (A-F) Personnel Development, Staff Training and Resources To determine personnel development, staff training and resources are occurring using a variety of personnel development strategies to promote development of knowledge and skills. 5 Items (A-E) Data System and Processes To determine the state data system have protocols and procedures for data sharing across agencies and utilize data transition data to improve performance. 3 Items (A-C) Monitoring & Evaluation To determine state monitoring transition requirements are aligned across agencies and evaluation is part of the transition system. Appendix III.B.3: Annotated Early Childhood Transition Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment ANNOTATED CAREGIVER/TEACHER SURVEY ANNOTATED CAREGIVER/TEACHER SURVEY SURVEY (QUESTION QUESTION TYPE PURPOSE PART I: LANGUAGE AND LITERACY KNOWLEDGE 1-50 Multiple Choice To determine caregiver’s knowledge of ways to support language and literacy in the classroom 1-20 True or False To determine caregiver’s knowledge of ways to support language and literacy in the classroom PART II: TEACHING BELIEFS & LEARNING STYLES 1-20 Strongly Disagree - Strongly Agree To determine the personal beliefs, preferences, and learning styles of teachers/ caregivers PART III: PERSONAL INFORMATION 1-5 Multiple Choice To determine the personal characteristics and experiences of teachers/ caregivers Appendix III.B.4: Annotated Caregiver/Teacher Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment ANNOTATED PARENT SURVEY ANNOTATED PARENT SURVEY SURVEY (QUESTION NO) QUESTION TYPE PURPOSE QUALITY OF CARE FROM A PARENT’S POINT OF VIEW: A QUESTIONNAIRE ABOUT CHILD CARE 7 Items (A- G) Child/Children Demographics To determine demographics (number of children under five, current childcare arrangements, financial support) of participant’s child/ren. Q 1-6 Caregiver’s Warmth and Interest in your child To determine the caregiver’s warmth, interest and level of attention paid to participant’s child. Q 7-11 Rich Environment and Activities for your child To determine whether child is set in a rich environment with activities that cater to learning and development. Q 12- 14 Caregiver’s Skill To determine the skills and responsiveness of the caregiver to the participant’s child needs. Q 15- 20 Your Relationship with the Caregiver To determine the parent’s relationship with the caregiver. Q 21-26 How Your Child Feels To determine the parent’s perception of how the child feels about the Caregiver. Q 27-36 Risks to health, safety, and well- being To assess risks to the child’s health, safety, and well- being in the child care environment. Q 37- 39 All things considered To determine the parent’s feeling and decision making about on the overall quality of care their child receives. C1- C4 Continuity of Care To determine the rate of staff turnover, stability and quality of continuous care at child’s care facility. F1- F20 The flexibility you have in your situation from work, family, and caregiver To determine the flexibility and support parents have in making changes and adjusting to varying situations regarding work and caregiving. N1- N9 About Your Child’s Special Needs To determine the extent of participant’s child special needs and caregiver’s responsiveness to the child’s O1- O14 The Choices You’ve Had To determine the parents’ choices, access and proximity to child care facilities. A1- A15 Affordability To determine the affordability – cost, availability of subsidies and financial security parents have to secure child care. Appendix III.B.5: Annotated Parent Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment ANNOTATED STATE EARLY CHILDHOOD INCLUSION SELF-ASSESSMENT SURVEY ANNOTATED STATE EARLY CHILDHOOD INCLUSION SELF-ASSESSMENT SURVEY SURVEY (QUESTION NO) QUESTION TYPE PURPOSE 1a- 1i Create a State- Level Interagency Task Force and Plan for Inclusion To determine the presence or absence of a state-level Interagency Task Force with plans for early childhood efforts/initiatives and to ensure early childhood inclusion and the necessary services and supports for children with disabilities. 2a- 2k Ensure State Policies Support High- Quality Inclusion To determine that state policies are aligned with federal requirements to promote and support a mixed delivery system of high-quality inclusive early learning opportunities by establishing partnerships by high- quality inclusion programs. 3a- 3h Set Goals and Track Data To determine whether state agencies have concrete goals aligned with the State Interagency Task Force; use data and have benchmarks to track the progress of children with disabilities and use data that provide information about program quality and inclusive program practices. 4a- 4d Review and Modify Resource Allocations To determine the existence of guidance or procedures that will allow for braiding and coordinating resources across programs to support inclusion. 5a- 5d Ensure Quality Rating Frameworks are Inclusive To determine whether the QRIS framework indicators address the learning and developmental needs of children with disabilities within each level of the framework and offer incentives and supports to effectively provide inclusive program. 6a- 6e Strengthen Accountability and Build Incentive Structures To determine whether local programs are accountable for providing access to inclusive learning environments for children with disabilities and whether State agencies address barriers to early childhood inclusion. 7a- 7i Build a Coordinated Early Childhood Professional Development (PD) System To determine the building of a coordinated early childhood professional development (PD) system and ensure that personnel standards, certifications, credentials, licensure requirements, and workforce preparation programs for early childhood program personnel. 8a- 8e Implement Statewide Supports for Children’s Social- Emotional and Behavioral Health To determine the implementation of statewide supports for social-emotional and behavioral health through funding and hiring specialists to work with public and private early childhood programs for children and care givers. 9a- 9d Raise Public Awareness To determine whether there are established partnerships with state and community leaders to communicate the benefits of early childhood inclusion by raising public awareness and communicating laws and research that provide the foundation for inclusion to key partners. Appendix III.B.6: Annotated Inclusion Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX III.C: QUALITATIVE PROTOCOLS PROTOCOLS FOR KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW PROTOCOL NEEDS ASSESSMENT: USVI Preschool Development Grant - Birth to Five FOR DATA SUPPORT STAFF OF AGENCIES AND PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDE EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATIONAL SERVICES TO THE B-5 POPULATION IN THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS Interview Introduction Thank you for agreeing to participate in this Key Informant Interview. As we mentioned in the consenting process, we are researchers from the Caribbean Exploratory Research Center (CERC) at the University of the Virgin Islands (UVI) interested in gathering information on the programs and services you and/or your organization/ or agency provide to children, ages B-5, with respect to child care and education. To ensure accuracy in our representation of the information shared, we are asking to audiotape the session for easy transcription. Do we have your consent to record the interview? [If “Yes”: “Thank you for agreeing to have us audiotape the interview”; If “No”: Thank you for agreeing to speak with us. We will honor your request not to audiotape and will ensure that our notes accurately reflect what you share with us.”] Core Questions [Opening]: 1. Please provide us with an example of two/three kinds of data you collect pertaining to early childhood care and/or education. 2. How do you/does your agency use these data? 3. How do you ensure that the data you collect is reliable? Data Coordinator/Data Support Staff - VIDE 1. What programs are in place to serve or support preschool children transitioning to Kindergarten in the St. Croix [St. Thomas-St. John] School District? 2. What data are collected on these programs? a. Are there federal mandates linked to the data collected? b. How are the data utilized and by whom? c. What data gaps or challenges, if any, have you experienced in capturing data in this/these area(s)? 3. Does VIDE link child-level data between early childhood education databases and any of the Territory’s health program databases for children B-5? 4. Are you aware of whether health screening information for children transitioning to kindergarten is shared with VIDE [state or district level]? a. If Yes, how is health screening information shared between departments and agencies? b. What are the biggest data gaps in this area pertaining to collaboration across programs and services? 5. Does the VIDE [state level or district level] have an up to date literacy plan that is informed by a comprehensive needs assessment and aligned with the Territory’s comprehensive literacy plan, for B-5 children, as required by Federal Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy (SRCL) programs? If Yes, please share this document with us. Step 1: Obtain informed consent [Informed Consent Form] prior to commencing Key Informant Interview Appendix III.C.1: Protocols for Key Informant Interviews USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 6. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the data you have on quality care available to B-5 parents and children? Data Coordinator/ Support Staff - VIDHS/MEDICAID 1. Does your office/agency link child-level data between early childhood education databases and any of the Territory’s health program databases for children B-5? 2. What are the biggest data gaps in the area regarding collaboration across programs and services? 3. Does the USVI calculate the percentage of children who participate in subsidized child care and the Medicaid/CHIP program? What challenges do these data present? 4. From your Annual Enrollment Reports, can you provide us with the unduplicated number of Children Enrolled in CHIP and Medicaid? 5. What data do you have describing the unduplicated number of children being served by Medicaid/CHIP? 6. What data do you have describing the unduplicated number of children being served by Social Services Block Grant? 7. What, if any, performance measures are used to collect data for compliance with the regulations of the Maternal, Infant Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Program and the State Early Childhood Comprehensive Services? 8. Does your office collect data on parents’ knowledge/information seeking behavior regarding early childhood care and education? 9. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the data you have on quality care available to B-5 parents and children? Data Coordinator/Support Staff VIDOH 1. Is there a link between the Territory’s health data about individual children, B-5 birth records, with the Early Childhood Care and Education (ECE) programs? 2. Is there a link between the Territory’s health data about individual children, B-5 immunization records, with the Early Childhood Care and Education (ECE) programs? 3. What data do you have describing the unduplicated number of B-5 children being served by MCH and Infant and Toddlers programs in the Territory? 4. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the data you have on quality care available to B-5 parents and children? CORE QUESTIONS [CLOSING]: 1. We have shared with you the purpose for this interview and the PDG B-5 needs assessment. Is there anything else you would like to share that you think will help us develop the most relevant program/responses and research for the Territory’ data systems that would support successful preschool experiences for children and families? 2. In closing, can you identify for us key personnel/individuals within the community you think would be able to provide information on early childcare education issues and programs that are important to data use and support for USVI birth-to five-year old children? Appendix III.C.1: Protocols for Key Informant Interviews USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW PROTOCOL NEEDS ASSESSMENT: USVI Preschool Development Grant - Birth to Five FOR HEADS OF AGENCIES AND PROGRAMS THAT PROVIDE EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATIONAL SERVICES TO THE B-5 POPULATION IN THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS Interview Introduction Complete consenting process, using the KI Informed Consent Form. Thank you for agreeing to participate in this Key Informant Interview. As we mentioned in the consenting process, we are researchers from the Caribbean Exploratory Research Center (CERC) at the University of the Virgin Islands (UVI) interested in gathering information on the type of services you and/or your organization/agency provide to children, ages B-5, with respect to child care and education programs and services. To ensure accuracy in our representation of the information shared, we are asking to audiotape the session for easy transcription. Do we have your consent to record the interview? [If “Yes”: “Thank you for agreeing to have us audiotape the interview”; If “No”: Thank you for agreeing to speak with us. We will honor your request not to audiotape and will ensure that our notes accurately reflect what you share with us.” ] As we begin the interview, which we anticipate will last 45-60 minutes, we want to remind you that your participation is voluntary and you may choose to stop participating at any time or to not answer particular questions posed. Your decision will not negatively impact your affiliation with your employer/the Government of the Virgin Islands or the University of the Virgin Islands (UVI). Step 1: Obtain informed consent [Informed Consent Form] prior to commencing Key Informant Interview Appendix III.C.1: Protocols for Key Informant Interviews USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW PROTOCOL CORE OPENING QUESTIONS: 1. Can you describe the services that you provide to preschool children (ages birth through 5) and their families? 2. How would you describe the population you serve? {Probe: demographics -- age distribution; SES; income levels; catchment area; employment?} 3. Have there been any changes in the demand for the service you provide to the B-5 population over the last 3-5 years? {Probe: Please describe/elaborate. Number served? Presenting problems/issues? Others?} 4. Has your agency/program been altered or changed in the last five years? {Probe: physical structure/ organizational structure/funding sources} If “yes”, how has this affected your ability to provide services to the B-5 population and their families? 5. Over the last three to five years has your agency entered into any interagency agreements specifically to support services for B-5 clients? If “yes”, could you name the partner agencies and describe the current status of those agreements? How have services to B-5 clients been affected since the agreements have been in place? {Probe: Could you provide us with a copy/copies of your MOAs/MOUs} Questions for Hospital CEOs/FQHC EDs/Commissioner of Health: H-1. What initiatives or programs for birth to five children and their families have been most effective in supporting good health and development? H-2. Has your agency/organization added any programs for B-5 children in the last 3-5 years? Has your agency/organization discontinued or significantly changed the focus of any programs or services that used to be available to preschool children and their families in the last five years? {If “Yes”, please explain.} H-3. What new arrangements and partnerships do you think are needed to address the most immediate a) health and b) developmental needs of B-5 children and families in the Territory? {Please explain/provide example what would work in our community.} H-4. How does the DOH provide services to preschool children and families that speak languages other than English? Questions for Commissioner, Department of Education: E-1. Over the past 5 years, what do you consider as the major issues facing students transitioning from preschool to the Department of Education? E-2. What interventions, strategies or initiatives have been put in place to support the reduction of challenges for kindergarten students? E-3. How does the Department support and serve B-5 children with special needs in kindergarten? Are there currently kindergarten students who have P5 or IEP programs in place? E-4. How does the DOE provide services to preschool/kindergarten children and families that speak languages other than English? E-5. How does the Department of Education identify the needs and issues being faced by kindergarten students, their families and teachers? {For example academic, social, nutritional, or emotional needs}. In responding to identified needs, have you needed to seek support or partnerships? Do you currently have an example of such a partnership? Appendix III.C.1: Protocols for Key Informant Interviews USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Questions for Commissioner, Department of Human Services/CEO LSS: DHS-1. What has gone right for programs serving B-5 children in your Department? What do you consider as the major issues regarding services to B-5 from the Department of Human Services/LSS over the past 5 years? DHS-2. Over the past 5 years what services provided by the DHS/LSS have been most used by the birth to five population and their families served by the Department? DHS-3. How does the DHS/LSS provide services to preschool children and families that speak languages other than English? How does the Department/LSS support and serve families with preschool children with special needs? DHS-4. What new arrangements and partnerships do you think are needed to address the most immediate needs of B-5 children and their families for functional families and continued learning? Please explain/provide example what would work in our community. DHS-5. Can you describe the current transition process from preschool to Kindergarten?/EHS to HS? Are there any aspects of the process that have worked especially well? DHS-6. Does your organization utilize the Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) to assess quality of care for B-5 children and families in the Territory? Could you help us understand how this works? CORE CLOSING QUESTIONS: 1. What types of data does your agency/unit/area routinely collect for children B-5? {Probe: Do you have recent compliance reports you can share with us?} What are your challenges with collecting, storing and using the data? 2. Would you like to share anything else with us regarding your work with preschool children and families in the Territory? Appendix III.C.1: Protocols for Key Informant Interviews USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment PROTOCOLS FOR FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS PROTOCOL FOR FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION [Childcare Facility Owners, Childcare and Education Staff] NEEDS ASSESSMENT for UVI Preschool Birth to Five Project Introduction Thank you for agreeing to participate in this study assessing the availability and quality of early childhood care and education (ECE) programs in the Territory. As a care provider serving children ages birth through five, this study pays particular attention to the availability and quality of ECE programs for the most vulnerable children and families. As noted in the Consenting process, your participation is voluntary and you may choose not to answer any of the questions posed. Your decision will in no way negatively impact your affiliation with the Government of the Virgin Islands or the University of the Virgin Islands (UVI). We anticipate that the Focus Group discussion will take approximately 60-75 minutes, depending on how much you have to share. We are asking to audiotape the session for easy transcription and to ensure accuracy in our representation of the information shared. Do we have your consent to record the discussion? [If “Yes”: “Thank you for agreeing to have us audiotape the interview”; If “No”: Thank you for agreeing to speak with us. We will honor your request not to audiotape and will ensure that our notes accurately reflect what you share with us.”] Step 1: Obtain informed consent [Informed Consent Form] prior to commencing Focus Group Discussions Appendix III.C.2: Protocol for Focus Group Discussions USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION QUESTIONS [For Child Care and Education Facility Owners and Managers (Day Care Centers, Preschools, HS & EHS), Infant and Toddlers Program Manager; Key pediatric health care providers] CORE QUESTIONS [OPENING] 1. How long have you been serving the community as an owner of a childcare facility/member of the staff of the childcare system? [Probing questions, as needed] 2. How would you describe the children served in your child care facility? {Probes: demographic characteristics; payment, etc} 3. What do you feel are some of this community’s strengths with respect to responding to the childcare education needs of preschool children and families in the Territory? [Probing questions, as needed] 4. What are some ways in which improvements could be made to positively impact early childcare in the USVI? 5. How familiar are you with the national guidelines for ensuring effective early childcare and education? a. Please share how useful you believe the national guidelines are for ensuring effective early childcare and education in the Territory. b. Have you identified any modifications that make the guidelines more effective in the USVI? Owners of childcare centers and staff that work in childcare centers: 1. How does your program serve birth to five-year old children and their families that do not speak English? Do you make any accommodations for children with disabilities? 2. What health screening requirements, if any, are required for a child enrolling in your program? 3. Describe how you handle the situation if a child becomes ill while at your program/facility. 4. What strategies have you used to engage parents/guardians in the learning and development of their children? 5. Are you aware of any unmet needs of the children and families that interact with your program? Are there any services that parents require that you are unable to provide? If yes explain. Pediatric Health Care Providers: 1. What are to top 3-5 illnesses or health challenges that children B-5 have been treated for at your facility in the past 3-5 years? 2. Are there any health condition(s) that your B-5 clients have presented with that you have not been able to address through your programs/services? If “Yes”, have you been able to refer the B-5 clients (through their parents) to other health care providers? Appendix III.C.2: Protocol for Focus Group Discussions USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 3. What agreements are in place at your facility to address health care needs that require referrals to specialists? 4. What agreements are needed to better address health care needs that cannot be readily addressed by staff on hand at your facility? CORE QUESTIONS [CLOSING]: 3. We have shared with you the purpose for this interview and the PDG B-5 needs assessment. Is there anything else you would like to share that you think will help us develop the most relevant program/responses and research for the Territory that would support successful preschool experiences for children and families? 4. In closing, can you identify for us key personnel/individuals within the community you think would be able to provide information on early childcare education issues and programs that are important to the educational careers and success of USVI birth-to five-year old children? Appendix III.C.2: Protocol for Focus Group Discussions USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment PROTOCOL FOR TOWN HALL MEETINGS PROTOCOL FOR PRESCHOOL DEVELOPMENT GRANT BIRTH TO FIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT TOWN HALL MEETINGS/ COMMUNITY FORUMS Introductory statement by Research Team as to the purpose of the PDG B-5 Needs Assessment. Thank members of the audience for attending. There are 10 questions that we will be asking you on this evening’s Town Hall meeting. For all of the questions, we are asking that you answer thinking about your child or children in their first five years (birth through five). Begin meeting/forum … 1. We would like to begin by asking you to share some of your experiences with the health care system and the care you received for your child/children during their early years (B – 5). 2. Where do you or did you take your child for health care services? How easy is it or was it to schedule appointments when your child/children need(ed) to get services from a health care provider? 3. Have you experienced any challenges (recently or in the past) accessing health care for your young child/children (B-5)? 4. On a scale of 1 – 10, with one being the best and 10 being the worst, how would you rate the health care available to your child/children (B-5)? 5. What else would you like to share with us about your experiences with health care services for your young children? 6. What kind of child care service(s) do you have for your child/ren B-5? {Self/ Day Care/ Friends and Family member} 7. Have you experienced any challenges enrolling your child in preschool, day care, Early Head Start (STX only), or Head Start? 8. What have been the best experiences for your children during their time preschool/Day Care, EHS, HS? What have been some of the most difficult challenges that your child(ren) have had in preschool/Day Care, EHS, or HS? 9. How important is early childcare to your child’s future in school? 10. What are the best ways for early child care facilities to keep parents engaged with their child’s/children’s learning and education? 11. What changes would make USVI early childcare facilities more effective? 12. What else would you like to share with us about your experiences with educational services for your young children? 13. Are there any programs and/or services you need or your children (B-5) need now that you are not receiving? 14. How do usually/ did you get information/learn about the programs and services available for families with children B-5? Stenographers will be present to record the proceedings to assist with analysis of data (themes). Appendix III.C.3: Protocol for Town Hall Meetings USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX IV: ADDITIONAL KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS ADDITIONAL KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Early Intervention - The term used to describe the services and supports available to infants and toddlers, birth through five with developmental delays and/or disabilities and their families. Based on identified needs of the child and family, these services may include speech, physical, occupational or developmental therapy, audiology, behavioral counseling and other types of services required to enhance a child's ability to learn new skills, overcome challenges and maximize successful outcomes in school and life. Maternal Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Program - Initiated in 2010 under the federal Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) with allocations of $1.5 billion over five-year periods to states/territories which provide evidence-based home visiting programs to at-risk pregnant women and parents of young children (birth to five). Through collaborative agreements with government agencies (Departments of Health, Education and Human Services), the programs provide social workers, parent educators, registered nurses, mental health clinicians, paraprofessionals and therapists to ensure positive and improved outcomes in health, educational readiness and reduced child abuse in families. The home visitors provide health check-ups and referrals, parenting advice, developmental programming instruction and guidance with navigating other government or community resources. The MIECHV Program, most recently reauthorized under the US Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (BBA2018, P.L. 115-123) provided $400 million annually through FY 2022. Executive Function Skills - The set of mental processes that enable us to plan, focus attention, filter distractions, resist temptation, delay gratification remember and use instructions, complete multiple tasks successfully, and persevere to achieve long-term goals. It is an umbrella term for the neurologically-based skills involving mental control and self-regulation. The eight key Executive Functions are (1) Impulse Control or Inhibition, (2) Emotional Control or Emotional Self-Regulation, (3) Flexible Thinking, (4) Working Memory, (5) Self- Monitoring/ Self-Awareness, (6) Planning, Prioritizing and Problem Solving (7) Task Initiation and (8) Organization. [Research on Brain Development at the Harvard University Center on the Developing Child has produced new evidence that these skills are "essential for school achievement, for preparation and adaptability of the Nation's future workforce, and for avoiding a wide range of health problems. According to Leong (2019), the development of these EF skills are deemed to be a greater predictor for school achievement than "a child's IQ score or social class". Developing research (Lipkowitz and Poppe, 2014) indicates that the more developed EF skills are, the more likely a child is able to process what he or she reads, writes or computes, and thus succeed in school.] Appendix IV: Additional Key Terms and Definitions USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment ADDITIONAL KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Granny Preschool - St. Croix District Granny Preschool Program The Virgin Islands Department of Education (VIDE) implemented a federally funded, voluntary, full day prekindergarten program targeting 3 and 4 year olds at 2 elementary school sites within the St. Croix District. According to ACT 7343, the purpose of the preschool program is to provide greater opportunity for young children in the Virgin Islands to enter school ready to learn by expanding access to quality preschool curricula for all students who are 4 years old. Goal 1 of the Virgin Islands Department of Education also aligns to ACT 7343 as it states: Each student, by the end of Kindergarten, will be socially, emotionally, and academically prepared for learning success. Data indicated that more than half of incoming kindergartners tested below grade level on the Kindergarten diagnostic assessment. This prompted the need for support that would prepare incoming Kindergarteners with the kindergarten readiness skills needed. As a result, the Granny Preschool Program was implemented to equip pre-schoolers with the prerequisite skills required to be successful as they transition to Kindergarten. Similar programs are proposed for the St. Thomas/St. John district for the SY 2020-2021 that will be called “SUGAR APPLE Preschool.” Virgin Islands Virtual Information System (VIVIS) - Virgin Islands Virtual Information System (VIVIS) through collaboration across agencies and programs, is expected to generate usable, timely, accurate data that are accessible on-line by all relevant stakeholders. VIVIS will adhere to data governance policies and actions that comply with privacy laws and data system best practices. It will provide information on Early Childhood, local industries, wages, post-secondary preparation as well as critical access to K12 Data: Student Demographics, Enrollment, Discipline, Grades, Multiple Assessments, Attendance, Courses, SPED, Faculty and Schedules. Early Childhood Integrated Data System (ECIDS) - The early childhood data represented a critical component of VIVIS in order to have a true B-20W integrated data system. Funding for an Early Childhood Integrated Data System became available from the United States Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (US ED IES) early childhood grant and the Virgin Islands Department of Education (VIDE) applied for grant. The USVI (through VIDE) was the only State or Territory awarded the early childhood grant in 2012, but because of human capacity began work on ECIDS in 2013. The overarching questions to be addressed by ECIDS in regards to availability and quality and how the quality level of a child’s early childhood program impact their outcomes entering kindergarten to the third grade and other related issues with school readiness, health care, programs and support for early childhood development. Similar programs proposed for the St. Thomas-St. John district, in SY 2020-2021, will be called “Sugar Apple” Preschool. Appendix IV: Additional Key Terms and Definitions USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX V: SUMMARY FINDINGS CAREGIVER/TEACHER SURVEY TEACHING BELIEFS & LEARNING STYLES SURVEY 1 of 2 STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE 1. I am confident in my ability to support the early reading and writing skills of all of the children in my care. 7 (3.3) 3 (1.4) 20 (9.6) 83 (39.7) 96 (45.9) 2. I am confident that I can help all of the children in my care develop early writing skills. 3 (1.4) 5 (2.4) 36 (17.2) 102 (48.8) 63 (30.1) 3. I enjoy learning about new ways to teach early reading and writing skills. 5 (2.4) 1 (.5) 7 (3.3) 78 (37.3) 118 (56.5) 4. Changing my practice to better support early language development would take a lot of time and energy. 29 (14.4) 52 (25.9) 67 (33.3) 34 (16.9) 19 (9.5) 5. I am confident that I can help children whose first language is not English make significant progress in their language skills. 4 (2.0) 11 (5.4) 62 (30.7) 90 (44.6) 35 (17.3) 6. I am confident that I can teach all of my children in my care to recognize rhymes. 1 (.5) 11 (5.3) 45 (21.8) 85 (41.3) 64 (31.1) 7. I am interested in learning more about how to support children’s language development. 2 (1.0) 3 (1.4) 14 (6.8) 68 (32.9) 120 (58.0) 8. I am not very effective in keeping track of children’s early reading and writing skill development 41 (19.8) 84 (40.6) 41 (19.8) 33 (15.9) 8 (3.9) 9. Being able to support children’s language development is more important to me than other teaching skills. 7 (3.5) 55 (27.5) 64 (32.0) 42 (21.0) 32 (16.0) 10. I have the knowledge and skills to work effectively with a child who has language difficulties. 5 (2.4) 19 (9.2) 72 (35.0) 79 (38.3) 31 (15.0) 11. I am confident that I can motivate all of my children in my care to read or look at books regularly. 5 (2.4) 23 (11.1) 94 (45.2) 86 (41.3) 12. Being a caregiver who can foster children’s early reading and writing skills is important to me. 2 (1.0) 1 (.5) 17 (8.2) 87 (41.8) 101 (48.6) 13. Learning new ways to support children’s early reading and writing skills would be useful to me. 2 (1.0) 1 (.5) 11 (5.3) 76 (36.5) 118 (56.7) Appendix V: Summary Findings - Caregiver/Teacher Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment TEACHING BELIEFS & LEARNING STYLES SURVEY 2 of 2 STRONGLY DISAGREE DISAGREE NEUTRAL AGREE STRONGLY AGREE 14. I don’t teach early reading and writing skills as well as I teach other skills. 44 (21.1) 80 (38.3) 54 (25.8) 22 (10.5) 9 (4.3) 15. I understand language concepts well enough to be effective in supporting children’s development of early reading and writing skills. 1 (.5) 8 (3.9) 44 (21.3) 95 (45.9) 59 (28.5) 16. I am confident that I can teach all of my children in my care to recognize letter sounds. 6 (2.9) 27 (13.0) 83 (39.9) 92 (44.2) 17. I would value having a better understanding of children’s early language development. 2 (1.0) 1 (.5) 34 (16.6) 93 (45.4) 75 (36.6) 18. I would have to give up things I enjoy doing in order to invest time in learning about children’s development of early reading and writing skills. 32 (15.7) 66 (32.4) 47 (23.0) 37 (18.1) 22 (10.8) 19. I am confident that I can teach all of the children in my care all their alphabet letters. 2 (1.0) 9 (4.4) 27 (13.1) 70 (34.0) 98 (47.6) 20. I am confident that I can help all of the children in my care make significant progress in their language skills this year. 4 (1.9) 31 (15.0) 88 (42.5) 84 (40.6) Appendix V: Summary Findings - Caregiver/Teacher Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX VI: SUMMARY FINDINGS PARENT SURVEY SUMMARY OF PARENT RESPONSES Caregiver's warmth and interest in your child Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always ? NA 1. My caregiver is happy to see my child. 3 (1.9) 2 (1.3) 11 (7.1) 133 (85.3) 7 (4.5) 2. The caregiver is warm and affectionate toward my child. 3 (1.9) 2 (1.3) 13 (8.4) 129 (83.2) 1 (.6) 7 (4.5) 3. My child is treated with respect. 1 (.6) 2 (1.3) 13 (8.4) 133 (85.8) 6 (3.9) 4. The caregiver takes an interest in my child. 1 (.7) 6 (3.9) 15 (9.8) 124 (81.0) 1 (.7) 6 (3.9) 5. My child gets a lot of individual attention. 2 (1.3) 3 (2.0) 12 (7.9) 27 (17.8) 89 (58.6) 11 (7.2) 8 (5.3) 6. The caregiver seems happy and content. 4 (2.6) 6 (3.9) 18 (11.6) 116 (74.8) 5 (3.2) 6 (3.9) Rich environment and activities for your child Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always ? NA 7. There are lots of creative activities going on 2 (1.3) 28 (18.3) 31 (20.3) 84 (54.9) 4 (2.6) 4 (2.6) 8. It's an interesting place for my child. 3 (2.0) 13 (8.5) 25 (16.3) 107 (69.9) 1 (.7) 4 (2.6) 9. There are plenty of toys, books, pictures, and music for my child. 1 (.6) 6 (3.9) 19 (12.3) 122 (79.2) 2 (1.3) 4 (2.6) 10. In care, my child has many natural learning experiences. 1 (.7) 1 (.7) 16 (10.5) 24 (15.7) 105 (68.6) 3 (2.0) 3 (2.0) 11. The caregiver provides activities that are just right for my child. 1 (.6) 1 (.6) 15 (9.7) 21 (13.6) 105 (68.2) 6 (3.9) 5 (3.2) Caregiver' skill Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always ? NA 12. The caregiver changes activities in response to my child's needs. 3 (2.0) 18 (11.8) 23 (15.0) 82 (53.6) 20 (13.1) 7 (4.6) 13. My caregiver knows a lot about children and their needs. 3 (1.9) 6 (3.9) 21 (13.6) 114 (74.0) 3 (1.9) 7 (4.5) 14. My caregiver is open to new information and learning. 1 (.6) 13 (8.4) 12 (7.7) 113 (72.9) 9 (5.8) 7 (4.5) Note: The word "caregiver" in this study applies to the provider, teacher, nanny, sitter, or other person who was most directly involved in your child's care. QUALITY OF CARE FROM A PARENT’S POINT OF VIEW: A QUESTIONNAIRE ABOUT CHILD CARE Appendix VI: Summary Findings - Parent Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Your relationship with the caregiver Never Rarely Sometime Often Always ? NA 15. My caregiver and I share information. 1 (.7) 5 (3.3) 25 (16.6) 23 (15.2) 91 (60.3) 1 (.7) 5 (3.3) 16. We've talked about how to deal with problems that might arise. 3 (2.0) 5 (3.3) 20 (13.2) 21 (13.8) 89 (58.6) 4 (2.6) 10 (6.6) 17. My caregiver is supportive of me as a parent. 4 (2.6) 11 (7.2) 8 (5.3) 118 (77.6) 3 (2.0) 8 (5.3) 18. My caregiver accepts the way I want to raise my child. 3 (2.0) 6 (4.0) 19 (12.6) 104 (68.9) 10 (6.6) 9 (6.0) 19. I'm free to drop in whenever I wish. 4 (2.6) 4 (2.6) 11 (7.2) 12 (7.9) 109 (71.7) 5 (3.3) 7 (4.6) 20. I feel welcomed by the caregiver. 2 (1.3) 9 (5.9) 14 (9.2) 121 (79.6) 6 (3.9) How your child feels Never Rarely Sometime Often Always ? NA 21. My child feels safe and secure. 4 (2.6) 18 (11.7) 129 (83.8) 1 (.6) 2 (1.3) 22. My child has been happy in this arrangement. 8 (5.2) 27 (17.5) 114 (74.0) 3 (1.9) 2 (1.3) 23. My child has been irritable since being in this arrangement. 71 (46.7) 29 (19.1) 11 (7.2) 8 (5.3) 24 (15.8) 3 (2.0) 6 (3.9) 24. My child feels accepted by the caregiver. 1 (.7) 1 (.7) 3 (2.0) 20 (13.1) 121 (79.1) 3 (2.0) 4 (2.6) 25. My child likes the caregiver. 7 (4.6) 17 (11.1) 122 (79.7) 4 (2.6) 3 (2.0) 26. My child feels isolated and alone in care. 94 (61.8) 23 (15.1) 3 (2.0) 5 (3.3) 14 (9.2) 5 (3.3) 8 (5.3) Risks to health, safety, and well-being Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always ? NA 27. My child is safe with this caregiver. 4 (2.6) 12 (7.8) 130 (85.0) 2 (1.3) 5 (3.3) 28. There are too many children being cared for at the same time. 71 (47.0) 24 (15.9) 12 (7.9) 8 (5.3) 15 (9.9) 9 (6.0) 12 (7.9) 29. The caregiver needs more help with the children. 62 (40.8) 27 (17.8) 26 (17.1) 3 (2.0) 15 (9.9) 10 (6.6) 9 (5.9) 30. The caregiver gets impatient with my child. 94 (61.4) 24 (15.7) 8 (5.2) 5 (3.3) 3 (2.0) 9 (5.9) 10 (6.5) 31. The children seem out of control. 95 (62.5) 26 (17.1) 10 (6.6) 1 (.7) 5 (3.3) 7 (4.6) 8 (5.3) 32. The conditions are unsanitary. 117 (77.0) 13 (8.6) 4 (2.6) 2 (1.3) 6 (3.9) 3 (2.0) 7 (4.6) 33. The children watch too much TV. 89 (58.2) 20 (13.1) 21 (13.7) 2 (1.3) 3 (2.0) 9 (5.9) 9 (5.9) 34. It's a healthy place for my child. 3 (2.0) 6 (3.9) 22 (14.5) 109 (71.7) 8 (5.3) 4 (2.6) 35. I worry about bad things happening to my child in care. 95 (62.1) 25 (16.3) 10 (6.5) 3 (2.0) 9 (5.9) 3 (2.0) 8 (5.2) 36. Dangerous things are kept out of reach. 8 (5.2) 1 (.6) 1 (.6) 13 (8.4) 116 (75.3) 10 (6.5) 5 (3.2) QUALITY OF CARE FROM A PARENT’S POINT OF VIEW: A QUESTIONNAIRE ABOUT CHILD CARE Appendix VI: Summary Findings - Parent Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment The flexibility you have in your situation from work, family, and caregiver Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always ? NA F1. I work a regular day shift. 17 (11.2) 11 (7.2) 21 (13.8) 9 (5.9) 61 (40.1) 3 (2.0) 30 (19.7) F2. My schedule makes it easy to be on time. 2 (1.3) 12 (7.9) 31 (20.4) 24 (15.8) 59 (38.8) 3 (2.0) 21 (13.8) F3. Our work schedule keeps changing. 55 (36.4) 23 (15.2) 17 (11.3) 4 (2.6) 18 (11.9) 4 (2.6) 30 (19.9) F4. My shift and work schedule cause extra stress for me and my child. 54 (35.8) 27 (17.9) 22 (14.6) 5 (3.3) 5 (3.3) 4 (2.6) 34 (22.5) F5. Where I work it's difficult to deal with child-care problems during working hours. 62 (41.3) 18 (12.0) 25 (16.7) 3 (2.0) 5 (3.3) 2 (1.3) 35 (23.3) F6. My life is hectic. 50 (32.9) 21 (13.8) 41 (27.0) 12 (7.9) 10 (6.6) 2 (1.3) 16 (10.5) F7. I find it difficult to balance work and family. 54 (36.0) 24 (16.0) 26 (17.3) 6 (4.0) 9 (6.0) 2 (1.3) 29 (19.3) F8. In my work schedule I have enough flexibility to handle family needs. 11 (7.3) 10 (6.6) 23 (15.2) 28 (18.5) 50 (33.1) 4 (2.6) 25 (16.6) F9. I have good backup care arrangements in case of emergency. 7 (4.7) 13 (8.7) 28 (18.7) 16 (10.7) 73 (48.7) 4 (2.7) 9 (6.0) F10. My caregiver understands my job and what goes on for me at work. 5 (3.3) 5 (3.3) 15 (9.9) 17 (11.2) 67 (44.1) 9 (5.9) 34 (22.4) F11. My caregiver is willing to work with me about my schedule. 8 (5.3) 6 (3.9) 10 (6.6) 22 (14.5) 68 (44.7) 6 (3.9) 32 (21.1) F12. I rely on my caregiver to be flexible about my hours. 20 (13.3) 17 (11.3) 16 (10.7) 13 (8.7) 42 (28.0) 7 (4.7) 35 (23.3) F13. I can count on my caregiver when I can't be there. 8 (5.2) 3 (2.0) 13 (8.5) 26 (17.0) 72 (47.1) 4 (2.6) 27 (17.6) F14. I have someone I can share home and care responsibilities with. 9 (5.9) 12 (7.8) 18 (11.8) 24 (15.7) 75 (49.0) 1 (.7) 14 (9.2) F15. I'm on my own in raising my child. 46 (31.1) 14 (9.5) 20 (13.5) 18 (12.2) 34 (23.0) 1 (.7) 15 (10.1) QUALITY OF CARE FROM A PARENT’S POINT OF VIEW: A QUESTIONNAIRE ABOUT CHILD CARE Appendix VI: Summary Findings - Parent Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment About your child's special needs No Yes N1. My child needs more attention than most children. 136 (88.3) 18 (11.7) N2. My child's special needs require a lot of extra effort. 137 (89.5) 16 (10.5) N3. My caregiver feels that my child's special needs are quite demanding. 145 (95.4) 7 (4.6) N4. I've had caregivers who quit or let my child go because of behavioral problems. 150 (98.7) 2 (1.3) N5. My child can be quite difficult to handle. 133 (86.9) 20 (13.1) N6. My child has a physical or developmental disability that requires special attention. 143 (94.1) 9 (5.9) N7. My child has a health care need that requires extra attention. 142 (93.4) 10 (6.6) N8. My child has an emotional or behavioral problem that requires special attention. 147 (96.7) 5 (3.3) N9. My child has a learning disability that requires specialized approaches. 143 (94.7) 8 (5.3) The choices you've had No Somewhat Yes O1. I've had difficulty finding the child care I want. 107 (69.9) 29 (19.0) 17 (11.1) O2. There are good choices for child care where I live. 36 (23.8) 56 (37.1) 59 (39.1) O3. In my neighborhood, child care is hard to find. 70 (46.1) 39 (25.7) 43 (28.3) O4. When I made this arrangement, I had more than one option. 64 (42.4) 39 (25.8) 48 (31.8) O5. In choosing child care, I've felt I had to take whatever I could get. 79 (52.0) 44 (28.9) 29 (19.1) O6. I found a caregiver who shares my values. 15 (9.9) 43 (28.5) 93 (61.6) O7. I like the way my caregiver views the world. 10 (6.6) 44 (29.1) 97 (64.2) O8. My caregiver and I see eye to eye on most things. 9 (6.0) 39 (25.8) 103 (68.2) QUALITY OF CARE FROM A PARENT’S POINT OF VIEW: A QUESTIONNAIRE ABOUT CHILD CARE Appendix VI: Summary Findings - Parent Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX VII: LEARNING ACCOMPLISHMENT PROFILE THIRD EDITION [LAP-3] LEARNING ACCOMPLISHMENT PROFILE THIRD EDITION (LAP-3) GROSS MOTOR Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Gross Motor VIDE 1415 Beginning HeadStart 269 Home: Family and Friends 84 NA 152 Private 140 End-year HeadStart 407 Home: Family and Friends 124 NA 172 Private 221 1516 Beginning HeadStart 382 Home: Family and Friends 142 NA 169 Private 173 End-year HeadStart 367 Home: Family and Friends 137 NA 157 Private 165 1617 Beginning HeadStart 393 Home: Family and Friends 71 NA 123 Private 202 End-year HeadStart 258 Home: Family and Friends 38 NA 99 Private 106 1819 Beginning HeadStart 323 Home: Family and Friends 39 NA 137 Private 181 End-year HeadStart 266 Home: Family and Friends 29 NA 126 36.8% 46.1% 17.1% 32.1% 45.2% 22.6% 38.8% 40.8% 20.4% 46.4% 40.7% 12.9% 79.6% 14.0% 6.4% 73.4% 18.5% 8.9% 74.4% 18.0% 7.6% 84.2% 8.6% 7.2% 55.2% 38.0% 7.1% 34.5% 44.4% 21.1% 52.1% 38.5% 9.5% 60.1% 34.1% 5.8% 85.8% 5.4% 8.7% 70.1% 21.2% 8.8% 76.4% 15.3% 8.3% 91.5% 4.8% 49.1% 41.5% 9.4% 39.4% 36.6% 23.9% 45.5% 42.3% 12.2% 56.9% 36.1% 6.9% 86.0% 7.0% 7.0% 76.3% 21.1% 76.8% 14.1% 9.1% 87.7% 5.7% 6.6% 35.9% 47.1% 17.0% 23.1% 41.0% 35.9% 27.0% 60.6% 12.4% 31.5% 49.2% 19.3% 77.8% 13.9% 8.3% 58.6% 34.5% 6.9% 11.9% 73.0% 15.1% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age Appendix VII.A: LAP-3 Performance - Gross Motor Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment LAP-3 GROSS MOTOR DOMAIN RESULTS - VIDE KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Gross Motor VIDE 1819 End-year Private 162 84.6% 6.2% 9.3% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age Appendix VII.A: LAP-3 Performance - Gross Motor Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment LEARNING ACCOMPLISHMENT PROFILE THIRD EDITION (LAP-3) PRE-WRITING Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Pre-Writing VIDE 1415 Beginning HeadStart 274 Home: Family and Friends 87 NA 151 Private 140 End-year HeadStart 408 Home: Family and Friends 124 NA 172 Private 221 1516 Beginning HeadStart 388 Home: Family and Friends 144 NA 170 Private 175 End-year HeadStart 366 Home: Family and Friends 137 NA 158 Private 163 1617 Beginning HeadStart 381 Home: Family and Friends 72 NA 124 Private 198 End-year HeadStart 264 Home: Family and Friends 38 NA 99 Private 109 1819 Beginning HeadStart 325 Home: Family and Friends 38 NA 135 Private 182 End-year HeadStart 280 Home: Family and Friends 32 NA 129 24.1% 59.9% 16.1% 26.4% 50.6% 23.0% 21.2% 54.3% 24.5% 41.4% 50.7% 8.6% 80.1% 12.5% 7.4% 11.3% 73.4% 15.3% 75.6% 17.4% 7.0% 85.5% 8.6% 5.9% 28.6% 58.0% 13.7% 20.1% 54.9% 25.0% 30.6% 51.2% 18.2% 53.1% 41.1% 5.7% 83.9% 11.2% 4.9% 10.2% 67.2% 22.6% 75.9% 16.5% 7.6% 92.0% 4.9% 18.4% 63.8% 17.8% 12.5% 51.4% 36.1% 15.3% 66.1% 18.5% 36.9% 53.5% 9.6% 84.8% 6.4% 8.7% 71.1% 26.3% 78.8% 16.2% 5.1% 89.9% 5.5% 4.6% 15.7% 64.9% 19.4% 13.2% 55.3% 31.6% 11.9% 60.7% 27.4% 31.3% 57.1% 11.5% 75.0% 17.1% 7.9% 65.6% 31.3% 76.0% 16.3% 7.8% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age LAP-3 PRE-WRITING DOMAIN RESULTS - VIDE KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS Appendix VII.B: LAP-3 Performance - Pre-Writing Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Pre-Writing VIDE 1819 End-year Private 165 84.2% 7.3% 8.5% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age Appendix VII.B: LAP-3 Performance - Pre-Writing Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment LEARNING ACCOMPLISHMENT PROFILE THIRD EDITION (LAP-3) FINE MOTOR Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Fine Motor VIDE 1415 Beginning HeadStart 274 Home: Family and Friends 87 NA 151 Private 140 End-year HeadStart 408 Home: Family and Friends 124 NA 172 Private 221 1516 Beginning HeadStart 388 Home: Family and Friends 145 NA 168 Private 175 End-year HeadStart 366 Home: Family and Friends 137 NA 158 Private 163 1617 Beginning HeadStart 379 Home: Family and Friends 71 NA 124 Private 198 End-year HeadStart 263 Home: Family and Friends 38 NA 99 Private 106 1819 Beginning HeadStart 322 Home: Family and Friends 38 NA 136 Private 182 End-year HeadStart 279 Home: Family and Friends 32 NA 129 27.4% 48.9% 23.7% 31.0% 42.5% 26.4% 32.5% 39.7% 27.8% 43.6% 45.0% 11.4% 77.0% 15.9% 7.1% 73.4% 16.9% 9.7% 75.6% 18.0% 6.4% 83.3% 8.6% 8.1% 40.2% 45.9% 14.2% 28.3% 48.3% 23.4% 36.3% 43.5% 20.2% 57.7% 34.3% 8.0% 83.3% 11.2% 5.5% 67.9% 23.4% 8.8% 74.7% 17.7% 7.6% 89.6% 4.9% 5.5% 36.7% 43.0% 20.3% 19.7% 52.1% 28.2% 34.7% 44.4% 21.0% 50.0% 39.4% 10.6% 84.0% 6.1% 9.9% 76.3% 21.1% 82.8% 13.1% 85.8% 5.7% 8.5% 23.6% 54.3% 22.0% 26.3% 47.4% 26.3% 16.9% 56.6% 26.5% 31.9% 53.8% 14.3% 72.0% 20.1% 7.9% 71.9% 28.1% 72.1% 20.9% 7.0% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age LAP-3 FINE MOTOR DOMAIN RESULTS - VIDE KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS Appendix VII.C: LAP-3 Performance - Fine Motor Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Fine Motor VIDE 1819 End-year Private 166 82.5% 10.2% 7.2% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age Appendix VII.C: LAP-3 Performance - Fine Motor Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment LEARNING ACCOMPLISHMENT PROFILE THIRD EDITION (LAP-3) LANGUAGE Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Language VIDE 1415 Beginning HeadStart 516 Home: Family and Friends 93 NA 310 Private 144 End-year HeadStart 618 Home: Family and Friends 128 NA 308 Private 225 1516 Beginning HeadStart 537 Home: Family and Friends 145 NA 306 Private 177 End-year HeadStart 500 Home: Family and Friends 137 NA 254 Private 164 1617 Beginning HeadStart 539 Home: Family and Friends 68 NA 367 Private 200 End-year HeadStart 413 Home: Family and Friends 38 NA 297 Private 105 1819 Beginning HeadStart 529 Home: Family and Friends 37 NA 317 Private 185 End-year HeadStart 476 Home: Family and Friends 32 NA 291 14.0% 40.7% 45.5% 10.8% 36.6% 52.7% 15.8% 37.4% 46.8% 32.6% 34.7% 32.6% 22.7% 53.1% 24.3% 58.6% 35.2% 6.3% 25.0% 47.7% 27.3% 78.2% 12.9% 8.9% 19.2% 40.8% 40.6% 22.8% 69.7% 7.6% 19.3% 44.1% 36.6% 33.9% 33.3% 33.3% 21.0% 57.4% 21.6% 50.4% 46.0% 29.1% 50.8% 20.1% 81.1% 14.6% 4.3% 18.7% 40.6% 40.6% 29.4% 61.8% 8.8% 27.2% 41.1% 31.6% 22.5% 47.5% 30.0% 22.5% 57.4% 20.1% 50.0% 47.4% 40.1% 37.4% 22.6% 83.8% 6.7% 9.5% 16.1% 44.4% 39.5% 32.4% 62.2% 5.4% 12.9% 47.0% 40.1% 22.2% 40.5% 37.3% 27.3% 46.4% 26.3% 43.8% 56.3% 35.7% 40.9% 23.4% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age LAP-3 LANGUAGE DOMAIN RESULTS - VIDE KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS Appendix VII.D: LAP-3 Performance - Language Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Language VIDE 1819 End-year Private 168 72.6% 19.0% 8.3% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age Appendix VII.D: LAP-3 Performance - Language Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment LEARNING ACCOMPLISHMENT PROFILE THIRD EDITION (LAP-3) PERSONAL SOCIAL Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Pesonal/Social VIDE 1415 Beginning HeadStart 262 Home: Family and Friends 79 NA 149 Private 138 End-year HeadStart 400 Home: Family and Friends 119 NA 169 Private 218 1516 Beginning HeadStart 380 Home: Family and Friends 140 NA 165 Private 165 End-year HeadStart 361 Home: Family and Friends 131 NA 154 Private 156 1617 Beginning HeadStart 377 Home: Family and Friends 72 NA 125 Private 197 End-year HeadStart 249 Home: Family and Friends 37 NA 97 Private 100 1819 Beginning HeadStart 320 Home: Family and Friends 37 NA 135 Private 179 End-year HeadStart 281 Home: Family and Friends 32 NA 125 40.5% 41.6% 17.9% 41.8% 35.4% 22.8% 39.6% 38.9% 21.5% 50.7% 34.8% 14.5% 77.8% 15.8% 6.5% 11.8% 70.6% 17.6% 69.8% 23.7% 6.5% 84.4% 6.9% 8.7% 52.9% 35.3% 12.1% 39.3% 39.3% 21.4% 50.9% 31.5% 17.6% 67.3% 28.5% 82.0% 12.2% 5.8% 67.2% 25.2% 7.6% 72.7% 19.5% 7.8% 90.4% 5.1% 52.5% 31.6% 15.9% 41.7% 29.2% 29.2% 48.8% 34.4% 16.8% 64.5% 27.9% 7.6% 85.5% 7.2% 7.2% 73.0% 24.3% 79.4% 15.5% 5.2% 92.0% 33.8% 43.4% 22.8% 35.1% 29.7% 35.1% 28.1% 45.2% 26.7% 46.9% 38.5% 14.5% 75.4% 16.7% 7.8% 65.6% 31.3% 74.4% 18.4% 7.2% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age LAP-3 PERSONAL-SOCIAL DOMAIN RESULTS - VIDE KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS Appendix VII.E: LAP-3 Performance - Personal-Social Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Pesonal/Social VIDE 1819 End-year Private 165 83.0% 7.9% 9.1% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age Appendix VII.E: LAP-3 Performance - Personal-Social Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment LEARNING ACCOMPLISHMENT PROFILE THIRD EDITION (LAP-3) SELF-HELP Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Self-Help VIDE 1415 Beginning HeadStart 263 Home: Family and Friends 79 NA 149 Private 138 End-year HeadStart 400 Home: Family and Friends 119 NA 169 Private 218 1516 Beginning HeadStart 376 Home: Family and Friends 139 NA 167 Private 166 End-year HeadStart 359 Home: Family and Friends 131 NA 153 Private 156 1617 Beginning HeadStart 381 Home: Family and Friends 72 NA 126 Private 197 End-year HeadStart 251 Home: Family and Friends 37 NA 95 Private 99 1819 Beginning HeadStart 313 Home: Family and Friends 34 NA 127 Private 170 End-year HeadStart 276 Home: Family and Friends 32 NA 121 27.0% 46.0% 27.0% 26.6% 34.2% 39.2% 30.9% 34.9% 34.2% 31.2% 39.9% 29.7% 77.0% 16.5% 6.5% 66.4% 24.4% 9.2% 69.2% 24.3% 6.5% 80.3% 12.8% 6.9% 44.4% 40.2% 16.0% 36.7% 30.2% 33.1% 42.5% 35.3% 22.2% 57.8% 31.9% 10.8% 83.8% 10.9% 5.3% 71.0% 21.4% 7.6% 71.9% 19.6% 8.5% 89.1% 4.5% 6.4% 41.7% 39.9% 18.4% 26.4% 38.9% 34.7% 38.1% 42.1% 19.8% 48.7% 34.5% 16.8% 84.9% 10.0% 5.2% 64.9% 32.4% 74.7% 21.1% 4.2% 82.8% 12.1% 5.1% 27.2% 43.1% 29.7% 14.7% 32.4% 52.9% 19.7% 45.7% 34.6% 34.7% 37.6% 27.6% 73.9% 18.8% 7.2% 59.4% 40.6% 66.9% 24.0% 9.1% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age LAP-3 SELF-HELP DOMAIN RESULTS - VIDE KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS Appendix VII.F: LAP-3 Performance - Self-Help Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Self-Help VIDE 1819 End-year Private 165 81.8% 13.3% 4.8% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age Appendix VII.F: LAP-3 Performance - Self-Help Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment LEARNING ACCOMPLISHMENT PROFILE THIRD EDITION (LAP-3) COGNITIVE Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Cognitive VIDE 1415 Beginning HeadStart 272 Home: Family and Friends 87 NA 151 Private 140 End-year HeadStart 408 Home: Family and Friends 124 NA 172 Private 221 1516 Beginning HeadStart 386 Home: Family and Friends 143 NA 168 Private 175 End-year HeadStart 367 Home: Family and Friends 137 NA 157 Private 162 1617 Beginning HeadStart 381 Home: Family and Friends 70 NA 124 Private 198 End-year HeadStart 264 Home: Family and Friends 38 NA 99 Private 108 1819 Beginning HeadStart 320 Home: Family and Friends 38 NA 133 Private 181 End-year HeadStart 280 Home: Family and Friends 32 NA 128 12.5% 51.1% 36.4% 13.8% 42.5% 43.7% 15.2% 42.4% 42.4% 33.6% 40.7% 26.4% 75.7% 18.6% 5.6% 62.9% 29.0% 8.1% 68.0% 25.6% 6.4% 83.7% 7.7% 8.6% 14.2% 54.1% 31.6% 13.3% 38.5% 49.0% 17.3% 45.2% 37.5% 29.1% 54.3% 17.1% 76.6% 19.3% 60.6% 34.3% 5.1% 72.6% 21.0% 6.4% 88.9% 4.9% 6.2% 19.9% 45.7% 34.4% 38.6% 52.9% 8.6% 23.4% 46.0% 30.6% 33.8% 49.0% 17.2% 80.7% 14.0% 5.3% 60.5% 36.8% 73.7% 23.2% 86.1% 5.6% 8.3% 13.1% 51.6% 35.3% 50.0% 44.7% 5.3% 53.4% 37.6% 9.0% 26.5% 54.7% 18.8% 70.0% 24.3% 5.7% 53.1% 46.9% 71.9% 21.1% 7.0% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age LAP-3 COGNITIVE DOMAIN RESULTS - VIDE KINDERGARTEN STUDENTS Appendix VII.G: LAP-3 Performance - Cognitive Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Domains Territory SY Test Admin Cohort Count Preschool Status 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of Total Cognitive VIDE 1819 End-year Private 165 85.5% 6.7% 7.9% VIDE LAP3 Results | % Performing Above/Below Age Equivalent Learning Accomplishment Above Age Average Age Below Age Appendix VII.G: LAP-3 Performance - Cognitive Domain USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX VIII: CHILD OBSERVATION RECORD (COR) DATA SY2016 - 2017 COR ASSESSMENT RESULTS: TERRITORY AND DISTRICTS SY2016-2017 COR ASSESSMENT RESULTS: TERRITORY AND DISTRICTS Territory Assessment 1 Assessment 2 Assessment 3 Creative Representation 2.47 3.24 3.78 Initiative 2.68 3.46 4.00 Language and Literacy 2.21 2.98 3.56 Mathematics and Science 2.22 3.02 3.62 Movement and Music 2.70 3.49 4.07 Social Relations 2.56 3.37 3.92 Territory Average: 2.42 3.20 3.77 St. Croix Creative Representation 2.62 3.42 3.94 Initiative 2.83 3.61 4.14 Language and Literacy 2.36 3.15 3.74 Mathematics and Science 2.43 3.26 3.85 Movement and Music 2.86 3.67 4.23 Social Relations 2.78 3.57 4.12 St. Croix Average: 2.59 3.39 3.96 St. Thomas-St. John Creative Representation 2.24 3.00 3.56 Initiative 2.48 3.26 3.81 Language and Literacy 1.99 2.74 3.34 Mathematics and Science 1.91 2.69 3.32 Movement and Music 2.48 3.24 3.85 Social Relations 2.26 3.08 3.67 St. Thomas-St. John Average: 2.17 2.94 3.53 Appendix VIII.A: COR Assessment Results - SY2016-2017 USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment SY2017 - 2018 COR ASSESSMENT RESULTS: TERRITORY AND DISTRICTS SY2017-2018 COR ASSESSMENT RESULTS: TERRITORY AND DISTRICTS Territory Assessment 1 Assessment 2 Assessment 3 Creative Representation 2.58 3.42 3.75 Initiative 2.77 3.56 3.95 Language and Literacy 2.28 3.11 3.47 Mathematics and Science 2.29 3.15 3.49 Movement and Music 2.80 3.59 3.98 Social Relations 2.67 3.48 3.80 Territory Average: 2.50 3.33 3.68 St. Croix Creative Representation 2.74 3.59 4.05 Initiative 2.88 3.70 4.15 Language and Literacy 2.45 3.33 3.76 Mathematics and Science 2.49 3.44 3.95 Movement and Music 2.92 3.76 4.21 Social Relations 2.84 3.68 4.10 St. Croix Average: 2.66 3.54 4.00 St. Thomas-St. John Creative Representation 2.27 3.17 3.58 Initiative 2.58 3.36 3.83 Language and Literacy 1.96 2.80 3.31 Mathematics and Science 1.92 2.73 3.23 Movement and Music 2.59 3.35 3.84 Social Relations 2.35 3.18 3.63 St. Thomas-St. John Average: 2.20 3.02 3.50 Appendix VIII.B: COR Assessment Results - SY2017-2018 USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment SY2018 - 2019 COR ASSESSMENT RESULTS: TERRITORY AND DISTRICTS 2018-2019 COR ASSESSMENT RESULTS: TERRITORY AND DISTRICTS Territory Assessment 1 Assessment 2 Assessment 3 Creative Representation 2.41 3.23 3.82 Initiative 2.62 3.43 4.07 Language and Literacy 2.11 2.93 3.58 Mathematics and Science 2.11 2.92 3.61 Movement and Music 2.62 3.48 4.12 Social Relations 2.44 3.29 3.93 Territory Average: 2.32 3.15 3.80 St. Croix Creative Representation 2.56 3.34 3.93 Initiative 2.73 3.51 4.12 Language and Literacy 2.24 3.04 3.68 Mathematics and Science 2.27 3.03 3.72 Movement and Music 2.73 3.59 4.20 Social Relations 2.62 3.41 4.04 St. Croix Average: 2.46 3.26 3.90 St. Thomas-St. John Creative Representation 2.18 3.08 3.66 Initiative 2.46 3.32 4.00 Language and Literacy 1.91 2.77 3.43 Mathematics and Science 1.88 2.75 3.45 Movement and Music 2.45 3.31 3.99 Social Relations 2.16 3.10 3.77 St. Thomas-St. John Average: 2.11 2.99 3.66 Appendix VIII.C: COR Assessment Results - SY2018-2019 USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX IX: AMENDED INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT [AIA] Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment Appendix IX: Amended Interagency Agreement USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX X: SUMMARY FINDINGS SELF- ASSESSMENT FOR AN EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSITION INFRASTRUCTURE [ECTI] SELF- ASSESSMENT FOR AN EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSITION INFRASTRUCTURE - 1 I. Content and Scope of Services A. Families have access to a broad array of child developmental and educational services, supports, an/or settings to meet individual child and family needs. 3 (10.7) 6 21.4) 13 (46.4) 5 (17.9) 1 (3.6) Families lack access to a broad array of child developmental and educational services, supports, an/or settings to meet individual child and family needs. B. Families have access to a broad array of health and medical services to promote overall well-being in order to meet individual child and family needs. 4 (14.3) 5 (17.9) 11 (39.3) 5 (17.9) 3 (10.7) Families lack access to a broad array of health and medical services to promote overall well-being in order to meet individual child and family needs. C. Families have access to a broad array of services to support their needs. 4 (14.3) 5 (17.9) 14 (50.0) 3 (10.7) 2 (7.1) Families lack access to a broad array of services to support their needs. II. Interagency Structure A. We have an interagency entity(s) that has membership with the authority to influence agencies’ transition policies and procedures. 2 (7.4) 5 (18.5) 11 (40.7) 6 (22.2) 3 (11.1)) We do not have an interagency entity(s) with authority to influence agencies’ transition policies and procedures. B. We have a shared philosophy that serves as a foundation for transition policies, procedures and the determination of responsibilities and actions. 2 (7.4) 6 (22.2) 10 (37.0) 5 (18.5) 4 (14.8) We do not have a shared philosophy that serves as a foundation for transition policies, procedures and the determination of responsibilities and actions. C. We have identified a primary contact person for transition within each program or agency at the state and local level (e.g., Part C, Section 619, LEA). 4 (15.4) 7 (26.9) 9 (34.6) 3 (11.5) 3 (11.5) We do not have a primary contact person for transition within each program or agency at the state and local level (e.g., Part C, Section 619, LEA). Appendix X: Summary Findings - Transition Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment SELF- ASSESSMENT FOR AN EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSITION INFRASTRUCTURE - 2 III. Interagency Communication & Relationships A. We use effective, ongoing mechanisms for communication between and across agencies and programs. 3 (10.7) 6 (21.4) 12 (42.9) 6 (21.4) 1 (3.6) We do not have effective, ongoing mechanisms for communication between and across agencies and programs. B. Working relationships among agencies/programs and staff are effective. 3 (10.7) 4 (14.3) 11 (39.3) 7 (25.0) 3 (10.7) Working relationships among agencies/programs and staff are not effective. C. Parent organizations and family consumers meaningfully participate as partners in transition planning efforts at all levels. 2 (7.1) 5 (17.9) 11 (39.3) 6 (21.4) 4 (14.3) Parent organizations and family consumers are not involved in transition planning efforts at all levels. IV. Interagency Agreements (IA/MOU/MOA) A. We have an Interagency Agreement that provides clear statements of transition processes that are compliant with federal and state regulations. 3 (11.5) 5 (19.2) 12 (46.2) 5 (19.2) 1 (3.8) We do not have an Interagency Agreement that provides clear statements of transition processes that are compliant with federal and state regulations. B. The Interagency Agreement clearly assigns agency roles and responsibilities related to transition. 4 (14.3) 2 (7.1) 12 (42.9) 6 (21.4) 1 (3.6) The Interagency Agreement does not clearly assign agency roles and responsibilities related to transition. C. The Interagency Agreement specifies critical policies. 1 (3.6) 5 (17.9) 15 (53.6) 2 (7.1) 1 (3.6) The Interagency Agreement is not specific about critical policies. D. The format, content, and level of specificity of our state-level agreement serves as a model for local agreements. 4 (14.3) 13 (46.4) 3 (10.7) 3 (10.7) Our state-level agreement has not been used as a model for local agreements. E. We routinely review and revise our Interagency Agreement based on data and input from stakeholders. 2 (7.7) 3 (11.5) 16 (61.5) 4 (15.4) 1 (3.8) We do not routinely review and revise our Interagency Agreement based on data and input from stakeholders. Appendix X: Summary Findings - Transition Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment SELF- ASSESSMENT FOR AN EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSITION INFRASTRUCTURE - 3 V. Policy Alignment A. Transition requirements and timelines are aligned across agencies. 6 (23.1) 15 (57.7) 3 (11.5) 2 (7.7) Transition requirements and timelines are not aligned across agencies. B. Curriculum development and expectations for child interventions and performance are delineated and aligned across agencies. 2 (7.7) 2 (7.7) 15 (57.7) 4 (15.4) 3 (11.5) Curriculum development and expectations for child interventions and performance are not delineated and aligned across agencies. C. Procedures for coordination of services are being implemented effectively. 2 (7.7) 5 (19.2) 11 (42.3) 6 (23.1) 2 (7.7) Procedures for coordination of services are not being implemented effectively. D. Mechanisms to minimize disruption in services before, during, and after transitions are developed. 2 (7.7) 8 (30.8) 11 (42.3) 5 (19.2) Mechanisms to minimize disruption in services before, during, and after transitions have not been developed. VI. Personnel Development, Staff Training and Resources A. There are designated personnel or entities at state, regional and local levels who share responsibility for interagency training and TA. 2 (7.4) 8 (29.6) 9 (33.3) 4 (14.8) 4 (14.8) We do not have designated personnel or entities at state, regional and local levels who share responsibility for interagency training and TA. B. Agencies and programs jointly design, implement, and evaluate personnel development activities. 2 (7.7) 3 (11.5) 12 (46.2) 5 (19.2) 4 (15.4) Agencies and programs do not jointly design, implement, and evaluate personnel development activities. C. We involve parents in the design, implementation and evaluation of professional development. 5 (18.5) 9 (33.3) 8 (29.6) 5 (18.5) We do not involve parents in the design, implementation and evaluation of professional development. D. We have mechanisms at the local level to inform personnel development activities and promote networking and problem solving. 2 (7.7) 2 (7.7) 12 (46.2) 9 (34.6) 1 (3.8) We do not have mechanisms at the local level to inform personnel development activities and promote networking and problem solving. E. We use a variety of personnel development strategies to promote development of knowledge and skills over time. 3 (11.5) 4 (15.4) 10 (38.5) 8 (30.8) 1 (3.8) We do not use a variety of personnel development strategies to promote development of knowledge and skills over time. F. Programs require and support participation of cross agency representation at joint training activities. 1 (3.8) 6 (23.1) 12 (46.2) 6 (23.1) 1 (3.8) Programs do not require and support participation of cross agency representation at joint training activities. Appendix X: Summary Findings - Transition Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment SELF- ASSESSMENT FOR AN EARLY CHILDHOOD TRANSITION INFRASTRUCTURE - 4 VII. Data System and Processes A. The state data system has the capacity to collect necessary data to support effective transition within programs. 3 (12.0) 7 (28.0) 9 (36.0) 2 (8.0) 4 (16.0) The state data system does not have the capacity to collect necessary data to support effective transition within programs. B. Programs have protocols for data entry to support accurate and timely collection of data. 4 (15.4) 7 (26.9) 8 (30.8) 4 (15.4) 3 (11.5) Programs do not have protocols for data entry to support accurate and timely collection of data. C. We have protocols and procedures for data sharing across agencies that are clearly defined. 3 (11.5) 4 (15.4) 11 (42.3) 3 (11.5) 5 (19.2) We do not have protocols and procedures for data sharing across agencies that are clearly defined. D. We analyze and use transition data to improve performance across agencies and address interagency transition issues. 2 (7.7) 5 (19.2) 10 (38.5) 3 (11.5) 6 (23.1) We do not analyze and use transition data to improve performance across agencies and address interagency transition issues. E. We analyze and use data collected through monitoring regarding transition for decision- making within and across programs. 2 (7.7) 5 (19.2) 11 (42.3) 4 (15.4) 4 (15.4) We do not analyze and use data collected through monitoring regarding transition for decision- making within and across programs. VIII. Monitoring & Evaluation A. State monitoring of federal and state transition requirements is aligned across agencies. 9 (34.6) 12 (46.2) 3 (11.5) 2 (7.7) State monitoring of federal and state transition requirements is not aligned across agencies. B. Interagency participation is an integral part of state monitoring activities. 2 (7.7) 7 (26.9) 11 (42.3) 3 (11.5) 3 (11.5) Interagency participation is not an integral part of state monitoring activities. C. Evaluation is an integral part of all components of the transition system. 1 (3.8) 10 (38.5) 7 (26.9) 6 (23.1) 2 (7.7) Evaluation is not an integral part of all components of the transition system. Appendix X: Summary Findings - Transition Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX XI: LICENSED CHILDCARE FACILITIES LICENSED CHILDCARE FACILITIES ST. CROIX DISTRICT NAME OF PRESCHOOL / ECE Center CAPACITY AGES Church of God Holiness Preschool 94 3yrs - 5yrs Clifton Hill 12 5months- 3yrs 6 Birth- 3yrs Do Re Mi Day-Care Group Home Inc. 12 3 weeks- 2yrs Early Head Start Program – Concordia East 81 Birth- 3yrs Early Head Start Program – Concordia West 31 Free Will Baptist Preschool 71 3yrs - 5yrs Good Hope Country Day Preschool 60 3yrs - 5yrs Granny Pre-School Bridge Program (Estate Mars) 20 3yrs - 5yrs Granny Pre-School Bridge Program (Estate St. Peters) 24 Happy Faces II Academy, LLC. 54 2yrs - 5yrs 12 6 weeks- 2yrs Kids Can Do It Adventure Center 8 2 months- 2yrs 6 La Petite Learning Center 10 Birth- 2yrs Little Achiever's Childcare and Learning Center 12 2- 4yrs 12 3 months- 2yrs Little Kidz Klub 34 2yrs - 5yrs 8 6 weeks- 2yrs 6 Nana's Learning Center 13 2yrs - 5yrs 8 2 months- 2yrs Nurturing Minds Developmental Care Center 4 Birth- 2yrs St. Croix Seventh Day Adventist Preschool 15 2yrs- 5yrs St. Croix Christian Academy 93 3yrs - 5yrs St. Croix Montessori Preschool 30 2.5yrs- 5yrs Star Apple Montessori Preschool 30 2yrs- 5yrs Tenacious Toddlers Learning Center 12 6 weeks- 2yrs 11 Watch Me Grow Academy, LLC. 14 2yrs- 4yrs 9 1 month- 2yrs 6 2yrs-4yrs Word of Life Preschool Day Care& Learning Center 10 2 months- 3yrs 10 Zion Christian Academy 59 2yrs- 4yrs Annas's Hope Complex I- II 20 2yrs 9 mos-5yrs 20 LICENSED CHILDCARE FACILITIES – ST. CROIX DISTRICT Appendix XI.A: Licensed Childcare Facilities - St. Croix USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment NAME OF PRESCHOOL /ECE Center CAPACITY AGES Christiansted I- VI 20 2yrs 9 mos-5yrs 20 20 20 20 20 Concordia 20 2yrs 9 mos-5yrs Frederiksted I- X 20 2yrs 9 mos-5yrs 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Kingshill I- II 20 2yrs 9 mos-5yrs 20 Richmond I- II 18 2yrs 9 mos-5yrs 20 Appendix XI.A: Licensed Childcare Facilities - St. Croix USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment LICENSED CHILDCARE FACILITIES ST. THOMAS-ST. JOHN DISTRICT NAME OF PRESCHOOL /ECE Center CAPACITY AGES Angels of Love II 12 1 month - 2yrs 6 Antilles School Inc ELC 54 2.5yrs- 6.5yrs 12 15 months- 4yrs 12 15 months- 4yrs Baby's Inn Nursery I & II 12 2 months- 5yrs 5 Beyond Bright Daycare 12 6wks- 2yrs Bright Beginnings for Early Explorers 12 3yrs- 5yrs Building Blocks of Love IV & V 12 1 week- 5yrs 12 Christian Outreach Ministry Learning Ctr. 12 2yrs- 5yrs 8 2 months- 3yrs Christian Unity Church Academy 32 2 months- 3yrs DHS- Bergs Home Head Start I & II 20 2yrs 9 months- 5yrs 20 DHS- Bovoni Head Start 20 2yrs 9 months- 5yrs 20 DHS- Wilhelm George I-IV Head Start 16 2yrs 9 months- 5yrs 20 2yrs 9 months- 5yrs 20 20 DHS- Sugar Estate I-IV Head Start 20 2yrs 9 months- 5yrs 20 20 20 Faith Alive Christian Academy 9 2 months- 3 yrs 10 10 Hibiscus Nursery 11 2 months- 2yrs Kid's Preschool 5 Birth- 2yrs Learn and Play 8 Birth- 2yrs Little Blossom Day Care I & II 12 3 month- 2yrs Little People's Learning Center 40 2yrs- 6yrs Minds in Motion Academy 6 1 month- 4 yrs 8 4yrs- 5yrs Mommy's Precious Hand 10 Birth- 2yrs Moravian Mary's Daycare 12 Birth- 3yrs 10 Newton Kids Academy 5 1 month- 5yrs LICENSED CHILDCARE FACILITIES – ST. THOMAS-ST. JOHN DISTRICT Appendix XI.B: Licensed Childcare Facilities -STT-STJ USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment NAME OF PRESCHOOL /ECE Center CAPACITY AGES Newton Kids Academy 8 1 month- 5yrs Precious Moments Preschool & Nursery 12 weeks- 2yrs Rosie's Angels Day Care, Inc. 24 2yrs- 4yrs St. Paul Little Stars Group Home I,II, & III 9 1 month- 5 yrs 12 9 St. Peter and Paul Preschool 20 4yrs- 5yrs St. Thomas Calvary Christian Academy 52 3yrs- 5yrs Sunbeam Preschool 12 3 month- 2yrs Sunshine Bear Daycare & Preschool 3 2 months- 2yrs Ti Moun Group Daycare 5 Birth- 6yrs UVI School of Education Child Care Lab/Diagnostic Center 12 2yrs- 6yrs Ursula's Child Care 13 2yrs- 3yrs 5 2 months- 2yrs VI Montessori Preschool, La Casa 12 12 months- 3yrs 12 Wesley Methodist Preschool 73 2yrs-4yrs Appendix XI.B: Licensed Childcare Facilities -STT-STJ USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX XII: SUMMARY FINDINGS STAKEHOLDER SURVEY 1 STAKEHOLDER SURVEY SUMMARY RESPONSES HOW ARE CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS MEETING THE NEEDS OF INFANTS, TODDLERS, AND THEIR FAMILIES? COLLABORATION AND SYSTEM BUILDING SECTION Policy Have not started to address this goal. Have started initial conceptual and planning work. Have begun to implement. Have made solid progress. Promote collaboration 1. Transition policies ensure continuity of services between various infant–toddler program settings, as well as programs for older children. 25 (32.1) 25 (32.1) 11 (14.1) 17 (21.8) 2. Mechanisms exist to coordinate among infant– toddler programs and to link them with other services such as health, mental health, education, child welfare, family support, etc. 25 (32.1) 17 (21.8) 20 (25.6) 16 (20.5) Recruit and engage stakeholders 1. Early childhood system development efforts involve diverse representation from stakeholders, from both public and private sectors, who are interested in infants and toddlers. 30 (38.5) 13 (16.7) 24 (30.8) 11 (14.1) 2. Public awareness efforts build public and political will around the needs of infants and toddlers. 25 (33.3) 23 (30.7) 16 (21.3) 11 (14.7) 3. There are champions for investing in high- quality infant–toddler programs who can reach a range of constituent bases. 29 (39.7) 20 (27.4) 14 (19.2) 10 (13.7) 4. Influential state policymakers are supportive of early childhood system-building efforts. 26 (34.7) 25 (33.3) 11 (14.7) 13 (17.3) Define and coordinate leadership 1. A state-level governance entity oversees and coordinates early childhood services and programs. 17 (23.0) 19 (25.7) 19 (25.7) 19 (25.7) 2. The State Advisory Council on Early Childhood Education and Care includes a focus on the needs of infants and toddlers. 20 (28.2) 25 (35.2) 18 (25.4) 8 (11.3) 3. The state has established leaders inside and/or outside of government promoting improvement in policies for infants and toddlers. 22 (30.6) 23 (31.9) 18 (25.0) 9 (12.5) 4. The state supports connections between state and local system-building efforts. 19 (26.8) 27 (38.0) 18 (25.4) 7 (9.9) Appendix XII: Summary Findings - General Stakeholder Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 2 Ensure accountability 1. The state has a shared systemic vision for supporting young children and their families. 17 (22.7) 31 (41.3) 17 (22.7) 10 (13.3) 2. Early childhood system-building efforts are informed by research and data on infants, toddlers, and their families. 23 (31.1) 25 (33.8) 18 (24.3) 8 (10.8) 3. The state has an integrated, comprehensive early childhood plan that includes a focus on infants and toddlers, and the plan is reviewed and updated regularly. 27 (38.0) 25 (35.2) 11 (15.5) 8 (11.3) 4. The state has identified desired outcomes for infants and toddlers and monitors key indicators associated with these outcomes. 22 (31.0) 29 (40.8) 15 (21.1) 5 (7.0) 5. The state has a coordinated early childhood data system that houses data on various programs serving infants and toddlers and is used to promote quality improvement. 24 (32.9) 28 (38.4) 14 (19.2) 7 (9.6) Enhance and align standards 1. The state has performed a cross-walk to compare various sets of infant–toddler program standards to assure that they are aligned and supported by research. 28 (38.4) 23 (31.5) 12 (16.4) 10 (13.7) 2. Various quality improvement strategies for infant–toddler programs (early learning guidelines, quality rating and improvement system [QRIS], professional development, etc.) are aligned rather than parallel efforts. 24 (33.3) 20 (27.8) 22 (30.6) 6 (8.3) Create and support improvement 1. The state has clearly defined career pathways for the infant–toddler workforce that are inclusive of a variety of roles for infant–toddler professionals. 19 (25.7) 33 (44.6) 14 (18.9) 8 (10.8) 2. The state has a professional development system that supports the infant–toddler workforce across all service sectors. 22 (29.7) 25 (33.8) 18 (24.3) 9 (12.2) 3. The state supports the use of reflective practice to support infant–toddler professionals in improving their practice. 22 (29.7) 28 (37.8) 17 (23.0) 7 (9.5) Appendix XII: Summary Findings - General Stakeholder Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 3 4. The state supports quality improvement initiatives in various infant–toddler programs and settings. 20 (25.0) 35 (43.8) 17 (21.3) 8 (10.0) 5. The state supports research and evaluation efforts aimed at continuous improvement of services for infants, toddlers, and their families. 18 (23.4) 35 (45.5) 15 (19.5) 9 (11.7) Finance strategically 1. Available funding sources are used strategically to promote system-building capacity. 33 (42.9) 24 (31.2) 15 (19.5) 5 (6.5) 2. The state addresses the needs of infants and toddlers when investing in Pre-K initiatives 22 (28.9) 30 (39.5) 17 (22.4) 7 (9.2) 3. Services for infants, toddlers, and their families have adequate and stable funding. 30 (41.7) 24 (33.3) 12 (16.7) 6 (8.3) POSITIVE EARLY LEARNING EXPERIENCES SECTION Policy No/ None Some Most Yes/All Don’t Know Early intervention 1. Infants and toddlers with potential developmental disabilities or delays are referred to and receive Part C Early Intervention services, when eligible. 3 (3.5) 31 (36.5) 17 (20.0) 10 (11.8) 24 (28.2) 2. Infants and toddlers exiting early intervention have either completed the Individualized Family Service Plan or transitioned to appropriate services to support their development. 6 (7.1) 28 (32.9) 12 (14.1) 12 (14.1) 27 (31.8) 3. Infants and toddlers who have a substantiated case of child abuse or neglect are referred to Part C Early Intervention for evaluation. 2 (2.4) 24 (28.6) 13 (15.5) 6 (7.1) 39 (46.4) 4. Infants and toddlers in the child welfare system who have developmental delays, but do not meet Part C eligibility, receive needed services. 7 (8.2) 22 (25.9) 7 (8.2) 6 (7.1) 43 (50.6) Child care 1. Families in need of child care for their infants and toddlers can access affordable, high-quality care in their communities. 5 (5.8) 46 (53.5) 6 (7.0) 16 (18.6) 13 (15.1) Appendix XII: Summary Findings - General Stakeholder Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 4 2. Families can access a network of child care resource and referral agencies to help identify their needs and refer to appropriate child care programs. 8 (9.3) 27 (31.4) 17 (19.8) 16 (18.6) 18 (20.9) 3. Infant–toddler child care programs are culturally responsive and address the needs of young children learning English as a second language. 8 (9.4) 28 (32.9) 16 (18.8) 7 (8.2) 26 (30.6) 4. Infants and toddlers with disabilities can access supports needed to participate in child care programs 2 (2.4) 37 (43.5) 12 (14.1) 17 (20.0) 17 (20.0) 5. Infant–toddler child care providers regularly use family engagement strategies to support parents as their child’s first teachers. 2 (2.4) 31 (36.5) 15 (17.6) 14 (16.5) 23 (27.1) 6. Infant–toddler specific professional development is available to child care professionals through the following: Higher education 4 (4.9) 23 (28.0) 12 (14.6) 15 (18.3) 28 (34.1) In-service training 3 (3.7) 27 (32.9) 14 (17.1) 12 (14.6) 26 (31.7) Technical assistance 6 (7.4) 23 (28.4) 11 (13.6) 9 (11.1) 32 (39.5) 7. Infant–toddler child care professionals are paid at wages comparable to those of other early care and education professionals. 21 (25.3) 21 (25.3) 5 (6.0) 4 (4.8) 32 (38.6) 8. State technical assistance providers, coaches, licensing specialists, and other individuals providing support to child care providers are trained in infant– toddler development. 6 (7.0) 27 (31.4) 20 (23.3) 9 (10.5) 24 (27.9) 9. Early care and education programs regularly work with community partners such as libraries, museums, parks and recreation, the faith community, etc. 6 (6.8) 33 (37.5) 18 (20.5) 6 (6.8) 23 (26.1) 10. Family, friend, and neighbor caregivers have access to supports such as training, consultation, lending libraries, etc. 10 (11.5) 28 (32.2) 7 (8.0) 11 (12.6) 31 (35.2) Appendix XII: Summary Findings - General Stakeholder Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 5 How are current policies and programs meeting the needs of infants, toddlers, and their families? (Stakeholder) STRONG FAMILIES SECTION Policy No/ None Some Most Yes/All Don’t Know 1. Families can find the services they need for their infants and toddlers through cross- program referrals and information and referral agencies. 7 (8.0) 31 (35.6) 13 (14.9) 19 (21.8) 17 (19.5) 2. Families receive information and services responsive to their home culture and language. 8 (9.2) 29 (33.3) 19 (21.8) 11 (12.6) 20 (23.0) 3. State policies support a coordinated multigenerational approach to addressing the needs of at-risk children and their families. 8 (9.5) 26 (31.0) 14 (16.7) 7 (8.3) 29 (34.5) 4. Families with infants and toddlers who face multiple risk factors (e.g., very low income, homelessness, and family violence) can access programs and services that work together to support them. 6 (7.0) 31 (36.0) 18 (20.9) 14 (16.3) 17 (19.8) Basic needs 1. Families can access needed education, skill training, job opportunities, and work supports to move into stable work that generates a livable wage. 5 (5.8) 38 (44.2) 17 (19.8) 11 (12.8) 15 (17.4) 2. Adequate housing options are available to low- income families. 13 (15.3) 23 (27.1) 20 (23.5) 12 (14.1) 17 (20.0) 3. Adequate energy assistance options are available to low-income families. 12 (14.1) 24 (28.2) 17 (20.0) 7 (8.2) 25 (29.4) Home visiting/parent education 1. Expectant parents and families with infants and toddlers can access evidence- based home visiting programs. 14 (16.3) 18 (20.9) 7 (8.1) 12 (14.0) 35 (40.7) 2. Families with infants and toddlers can access evidence-based parent education programs, as needed. 12 (14.0) 22 (25.6) 10 (11.6) 6 (7.0) 36 (41.9) 3. Home visiting supports extend to families, friends, and neighbors caring for children with working parents. 13 (15.1) 20 (23.3) 7 (8.1) 5 (5.8) 41 (47.7) 4. Families who wish to increase their leadership and advocacy skills can access leadership initiatives. 11 (12.8) 26 (30.2) 7 (8.1) 7 (8.1) 35 (40.7) Appendix XII: Summary Findings - General Stakeholder Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 6 5. Parenting resources are readily available to all parents of young children seeking information on how to support healthy child development. 8 (9.4) 23 (27.1) 23 (27.1) 16 (18.8) 15 (17.6) Child welfare 1. Infants and toddlers in out-of-home placements have frequent contact with birth parents, when safe and appropriate. 2 (2.4) 23 (27.1) 10 (11.8) 6 (7.1) 44 (51.8) 2. Child welfare workers and judges receive ongoing training about child development and the effect of trauma and use that knowledge to guide their work with infants and toddlers in the child welfare system. 5 (5.9) 23 (27.1) 10 (11.8) 3 (3.5) 44 (51.8) 3. Families (including birth families, permanent guardians, and adoptive families) have access to continued post-permanency supports, such as adoption subsidies and therapeutic services, after permanency has been achieved. 2 (2.3) 20 (23.3) 6 (7.0) 6 (7.0) 52 (60.5) 4. Families who are investigated for maltreatment, but whose cases do not receive substantiation, are connected to support services. 3 (3.6) 19 (22.6) 8 (9.5) 9 (10.7) 45 (53.6) 5. Children in the child welfare system receive screenings and services to promote their learning and development, such as early intervention and high- quality early care and education. 2 (2.4) 26 (30.6) 15 (17.6) 11 (12.9) 31 (36.5) Family leave 1. Working families can access paid family leave after birth or adoption. 8 (9.3) 29 (33.7) 7 (8.1) 13 (15.1) 29 (33.7) 2. Working families can access paid sick leave when a young child is sick. 10 (11.5) 28 (32.2) 8 (9.2) 16 (18.4) 25 (28.7) 3. Working parents in the state receive work–life benefits that allow them to balance work with caring for young children. 13 (15.3) 16 (18.8) 7 (8.2) 3 (3.5) 46 (54.1) Appendix XII: Summary Findings - General Stakeholder Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 7 HOW ARE CURRENT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS MEETING THE NEEDS OF INFANTS, TODDLERS, AND THEIR FAMILIES? HEALTH SECTION Policy No/ None Some Most Yes/All Don’t Physical health 1. Pregnant women have access to and regularly receive prenatal care throughout pregnancy, as well as postpartum care. 5 (6.0) 22 (26.5) 18 (21.7) 21 (25.3) 17 (20.5) 2. Infants and toddlers regularly receive recommended well-child visits. 3 (3.6) 25 (30.1) 18 (21.7) 13 (15.7) 24 (28.9) 3. Infants and toddlers have an identified medical home. 2 (2.5) 17 (21.0) 15 (18.5) 4 (4.9) 43 (53.1) 4. Primary care providers are reimbursed adequately for the time to provide child development guidance in well-child visits. 11 (13.1) 12 (14.3) 7 (8.3) 5 (6.0) 49 (58.3) 5. Eligible women and children utilize the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Program. 2 (2.4) 19 (22.6) 33 (39.3) 20 (23.8) 10 (11.9) 6. Eligible families with infants and toddlers utilize the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). 2 (2.4) 16 (19.0) 29 (34.5) 27 (32.1) 10 (11.9) 7. Infant–toddler caregivers and programs access health care consultation as needed. 2 (2.4) 25 (30.1) 16 (19.3) 11 (13.3) 29 (34.9) 8. Young children live in healthy environments, free from environmental hazards. 3 (3.6) 39 (46.4) 16 (19.0) 3 (3.6) 23 (27.4) 9. Families with young children have opportunities to access nutritious food. 2 (2.4) 30 (35.3) 27 (31.8) 14 (16.5) 12 (14.1) Developmental screening 1. Families with infants and toddlers access developmental screening in pediatric and/or early care and education settings. 3 (3.6) 36 (42.9) 17 (20.2) 10 (11.9) 18 (21.4) 2. When developmental screening indicates a need for services, families with infants and toddlers are referred to and have access to appropriate services. 2 (2.4) 35 (41.2) 14 (16.5) 17 (20.0) 17 (20.0) 3. Screening results are regularly shared (with parent consent) with the providers making referrals, so that they can continue to support and monitor children’s needs. 2 (2.4) 31 (36.9) 16 (19.0) 16 (19.0) 19 (22.6) 4. Primary care providers are adequately reimbursed for use of standardized developmental screening tools. 7 (9.3) 12 (16.0) 5 (6.7) 7 (9.3) 44 (58.7) Appendix XII: Summary Findings - General Stakeholder Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 8 Social–emotional health Policy No/ None Some Most Yes/All Don’t Know 1. Pregnant and postpartum women have access to and receive maternal depression screenings and mental health services, as needed. 5 (5.9) 23 (27.1) 7 (8.2) 12 (14.1) 38 (44.7) 2. Parents access resources on how to support the social–emotional development of their infants and toddlers. 5 (5.9) 37 (43.5) 5 (5.9) 12 (14.1) 26 (30.6) 3. Infant–toddler professionals receive training on how to address the mental health needs of infants and toddlers. 6 (7.2) 27 (32.5) 10 (12.0) 5 (6.0) 35 (42.2) 4. Infant-toddler caregivers and programs access mental health consultation services, as needed. 5 (6.0) 29 (34.5) 9 (10.7) 7 (8.3) 34 (40.5) 5. Infants and toddlers with social-emotional or behavioral issues are assessed, diagnosed, and treated by trained professionals. 3 (3.6) 28 (33.3) 16 (19.0) 13 (15.5) 24 (28.6) 6. Families with infants and toddlers access mental health services in pediatric primary care settings. 5 (6.0) 24 (28.6) 6 (7.1) 8 (9.5) 41 (48.8) 7. Primary care providers are adequately reimbursed for use of standardized early childhood mental health screening tools. 6 (7.1) 12 (14.3) 2 (2.4) 6 (7.1) 58 (69.0) Appendix XII: Summary Findings - General Stakeholder Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment APPENDIX XIII: SUMMARY FINDINGS STATE EARLY CHILDHOOD INCLUSION SELF-ASSESSMENT SURVEY STATE EARLY CHILDHOOD INCLUSION SELF-ASSESSMENT SURVEY SUMMARY RESPONSES 1. CREATE A STATE-LEVEL INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE AND PLAN FOR INCLUSION Not Yet Planning but not Implemented In process, and/or partially Implemented In place/fully Implemented 1a. Does your State have a State Interagency Task Force with the authority to create or strengthen early childhood inclusion? This can be any team working on inclusion such as such as a council, Leadership Team, or workgroup. 0 1 5 3 1b. Does your State Interagency Task Force include representatives from different sectors and groups within the State? At a minimum include representatives from all early childhood sectors and programs as referenced in the joint policy statement. 0 2 3 4 1c. Does your State Interagency Task Force have a cross-sector vision and mission for expanding access to and participation in high-quality inclusive early childhood programs? 2 3 3 1 1d. Do your State Interagency Task Force and their respective agencies have established expectations and resources for programs to implement the vision and mission locally? 2 6 1 0 1e. Does the State Interagency Task Force have a cross-sector interagency strategic plan in place based on existing data? 3 5 1 0 1f. Do your State Interagency Task Force and their respective agencies take an active role in identifying barriers and ensuring policies and investments support a coordinated, comprehensive early childhood system that provides access to inclusive early learning opportunities? 1 5 3 0 1g. Do your State Interagency Task Force planning efforts build on existing State early childhood efforts/initiatives to ensure that early childhood inclusion and the necessary services and supports for children with disabilities are consistently addressed across existing State strategic plans? 1 3 4 1 1h. Does your State Interagency Task Force have a strategic plan for inclusion that utilizes applicable technical assistance (TA) networks within the State? 3 4 2 0 1i. Is the strategic plan being implemented? 4 3 2 0 Note: n=9 Appendix XIII: Summary Findings - Inclusion Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 2. ENSURE STATE POLICIES SUPPORT HIGH-QUALITY INCLUSION Not Yet Planning but not Implemented In process, and/or partially Implemented In place/fully Implemented 2a. Do State policies address implementing evidence-based inclusive practices to provide the necessary supports and services to young children with disabilities in early care and education programs? 1 2 2 3 2b. Do State policies consistently align with federal and/or State legal requirements? 0 0 6 2 2c. Do State policies facilitate high-quality inclusion rather than create barriers? 1 1 3 3 2d. Do State policies promote coordinated and culturally and linguistically responsive, comprehensive services across early childhood programs, including health, mental health, and other social services? 1 2 3 2 2e. Do State policies address children who are dually placed in more than one program and specifically address practices that create unnecessary transitions between service providers and different locations? 3 1 2 2 2f. Do State policies ensure children with a disability stay in their existing early childhood program while still receiving early intervention/special education services? 1 1 3 3 2g. Do State policies promote the principle of natural proportions in inclusive early childhood programs? 2 1 2 3 2h. Do State early learning guidelines and standards address the learning and developmental needs of children with disabilities? 0 2 2 3 2i. Do current or prospective early learning initiatives include policies and procedures to recruit, enroll, and support children with a range of disabilities? 0 1 3 4 2j. Do State policies promote and support a mixed delivery system of high-quality inclusive early learning opportunities by establishing partnerships with public and private early learning programs? 1 2 2 3 2k. Does your state ensure that families, administrators, practitioners and other key stakeholders are meaningfully involved in policy decisions, discussions, planning and evaluating state progress towards the inclusion plan? 0 2 4 2 Appendix XIII: Summary Findings - Inclusion Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 3. SET GOALS AND TRACK DATA Not Yet Planning but not Implemented In process, and/or partially Implemented In place/fully Implemented 3a. Do individual state agencies have concrete goals aligned with the State Interagency Task Force goals on the agreed upon vision and mission for expanding access to inclusive and high-quality learning opportunities? 1 6 2 0 3b. Do state agencies track the enrollment of children with disabilities in early childhood programs? 1 2 4 1 3c. Do the State Interagency Task Force and their respective agencies establish a baseline that identifies the number of high-quality early learning childhood slots available and the number of children under five with and without disabilities in those slots? 3 4 0 1 3d. Does the State use data and have benchmarks to track the progress toward increasing the number of high-quality early childhood program slots available and the number of children under five with and without disabilities in those slots? 1 4 1 0 3e. Do State agencies have and use data that provide information about children and family having equal access to high-quality early childhood programs (such as suspension and expulsion data, IDEA educational environments, mediation and due process data, enrollment information, and child care subsidy program, etc.)? 1 1 4 0 3f. Do State agencies have and use data that provide information about program quality and inclusive program practices (QRIS standards, tools to measure inclusive practices)? 0 1 6 0 3g. Do State agencies use data to monitor program quality and inclusive program practices? 0 1 4 2 3h. Do State agencies provide data on access and quality to local programs in user-friendly formats with the expectation that local programs will use it for decision-making and program improvement? 1 4 1 0 Appendix XIII: Summary Findings - Inclusion Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 4. REVIEW AND MODIFY RESOURCE ALLOCATIONS Not Yet Planning but not Implemented In process, and/or partially Implemented In place/fully Implemented 4a. Do State agencies review how resources are allocated to better support access to inclusive programs? 3 2 0 0 4b. Do State agencies allow the braiding of funds across early childhood programs, when appropriate to support inclusion? 3 2 1 0 4c. Do State agencies have guidance or procedures for braiding and coordinating resource allocation to their programs with each other to support inclusion? 3 1 2 0 4d. Do the State Interagency Task Force and/or their state agencies develop finance mapping plans to determine how to most efficiently and effectively utilize funds from different funding streams to support the participation of children with disabilities across the full range of early childhood programs? 5 2 0 0 5. ENSURE QUALITY RATING FRAMEWORKS ARE INCLUSIVE Not Yet Planning but not Implemented In process, and/or partially Implemented In place/fully Implemented 5a. Does your State Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) include early childhood programs beyond child care? 3 2 1 0 5b. Do your State QRIS framework indicators address the learning and developmental needs of children with disabilities within each level of the framework? 1 5 0 0 5c. Does your States QRIS offer incentives and supports to effectively provide inclusive program practices? 3 2 1 0 5d. Does your State QRIS supplement traditional environmental assessments with tools that specifically measure the quality of inclusion? 4 3 0 0 Appendix XIII: Summary Findings - Inclusion Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 6. STRENGTHEN ACCOUNTABILITY AND BUILD INCENTIVE STRUCTURES Not Yet Planning but not Implemented In process, and/or partially Implemented In place/fully Implemented 6a. Do State agencies address barriers to early childhood inclusion as part of their accountability systems? 3 2 2 1 6b. Do State agencies hold local programs accountable for providing access to inclusive learning environments for children with disabilities (e.g., rules, requirements, policies, monitoring)? 3 1 2 2 6c. Do State agencies incorporate inclusion indicators in their child care licensing standards and/or in agreements made with providers who offer subsidized placement options? 4 0 1 1 6d. Does your State Education Agency (SEA) and Lead Agency (LA) for Early Intervention require documentation from local programs for how Least Restrictive (LRE) and Natural Environments requirements are met? 3 0 2 2 6e. Do State agencies offer incentives to support high-quality inclusive early learning models (e.g., publicly recognizing high-quality inclusive programs, using tiered reimbursement in their QRIS, providing child care subsidy payment differentials per child with a disability, ensuring all trainings on children with disabilities and inclusion are credit bearing, providing tuition assistance for credit bearing courses on inclusion and offering TA to programs to implement inclusive practices)? 4 3 0 0 Appendix XIII: Summary Findings - Inclusion Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 7. BUILD A COORDINATED EARLY CHILDHOOD PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (PD) SYSTEM Not Yet Planning but not Implemented In process, and/or partially Implemented In place/fully Implemented 7a. Do State agencies have a common knowledge and competency base across early childhood, early intervention and early childhood special education programs so that all personnel supporting with young children have knowledge of child development and learning and include considerations for children with disabilities? 0 3 2 1 7b. Do State agencies ensure that personnel standards, certifications, credentials, licensure requirements, and workforce preparation programs for early childhood program personnel, including administrators, include competencies for supporting with children with disabilities and their families? 1 1 3 3 7c. Do State agencies partner with institutions of higher education (IHEs) to ensure that early childhood preparation degree programs include specific pedagogy for children with disabilities woven throughout the entire curriculum, including coursework and practicum experiences, rather than contained in a small number of supplemental courses or a separate program? 2 4 1 0 7d. Do State agencies partner with IHEs to ensure that there are programs within the State that prepare early childhood personnel to collaborate to support young children with disabilities, including children with low- incidence disabilities? 2 1 3 0 7e. Do State agencies ensure personnel policies support the delivery of services and supports to children with disabilities through consultation with and under the supervision of professionals with specialized training and certifications (e.g., early childhood special educators, early interventionists, occupational therapists, physical therapists, and speech-language pathologists, teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing)? 0 2 3 2 7f. Do State agencies promote co-teaching models where specialists and teachers or providers work jointly with children in inclusive settings? 3 0 2 2 7g. Do State agencies promote and recommend coaching/mentoring models to support teachers and providers in developing competencies? 3 1 2 1 7h. Do State agencies offer cross-sector professional development, ongoing access to resources and TA tied to specific competencies? Examples of cross-sector PD and TA are referenced in the joint policy statement. 2 2 0 2 7i. Do State agencies offer on-site professional development and TA in evidence-based practices that support inclusion? 0 1 3 3 Appendix XIII: Summary Findings - Inclusion Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment 8. IMPLEMENT STATEWIDE SUPPORTS FOR CHILDREN’S SOCIAL EMOTIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH Not Yet Planning but not Implemented In process, and/or partially Implemented In place/fully Implemented 8a. Do early childhood programs have access to guidance to build capacity in working with young children, with an emphasis on fostering social-emotional and behavioral health such as the early childhood mental health (e.g., ECMHC, PBIS or Pyramid Model [PM])? 1 1 5 1 8b. Do early childhood programs have access to guidance to build capacity in working with young children, with an emphasis on fostering social-emotional and behavioral health such as the early childhood mental health (e.g., ECMHC, PBIS or PM)? 1 2 2 2 8c. Do State agencies have specialists or policies around funding and hiring specialists to work with public and private early childhood programs to support children with social-emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs, as well as their teachers? 1 2 2 1 8d. Does your State have a Statewide system that offers program supports so that children with disabilities, including those with emotional and behavior difficulties, can be successful (e.g., ECMHC, PBIS or PM)? 2 3 1 1 8e. Do State agencies have policies and provide guidance and technical assistance to early care and education programs to prevent and address suspension/expulsion? 2 3 1 1 9. RAISE PUBLIC AWARENESS Not Yet Planning but not Implemented In process, and/or partially Implemented In place/fully Implemented 9a. Do the State Interagency Task Force and its respective agencies have established partnerships with state and community leaders to communicate the benefits of early childhood inclusion? 2 2 2 1 9b. Do the State Interagency Task Force and its respective agencies affirm and communicate laws and research that provide the foundation for inclusion to key partners (e.g., families of children with and without disabilities, pediatric healthcare providers, businesses and private sector partners and other relevant community leaders)? 3 2 1 1 9c. Do the State Interagency Task Force and its respective agencies communicate their expectations to local communities that they are responsible for ensuring all children and their families have access to high-quality early childhood programs and the individualized supports they need to fully participate in these programs? 3 3 0 1 9d. Do your State’s public awareness efforts address the attitudes and beliefs about inclusion? 4 2 0 1 Appendix XIII: Summary Findings - Inclusion Survey USVI ECE MDS Needs Assessment