# data[].attributes.headline
International Handbook on Decolonizing Justice

# data[].attributes.subject
International Handbook on Decolonizing Justice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The development of this Library took place on colonised and unceded Aboriginal Land. We acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of this Land and Elders past and present. We recognise First Nations peoples as the world's first researchers, knowledge creators, and creative thinkers. We pay our respects to First Nations and Indigenous peoples everywhere, whose struggle for sovereignty and self-determination is ongoing.

This website was designed to meet Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2 requirements.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Library - Anti-Colonial Research Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The development of this Library took place on colonised and unceded Aboriginal Land. We acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of this Land and Elders past and present. We recognise First Nations peoples as the world's first researchers, knowledge creators, and creative thinkers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than 100 carefully selected lists of multicultural and social justice books for children, young adults, and educators. When you find a book at this site, please purchase it here. Our titles are linked to Bookshop. A portion of your book purchase helps sustain our work. New Releases Activism and Organizing Africa Afro-Latinx American Indians Arabs […]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This introductory video introduces the theme of observation, or looking closely to notice, name, and draw differences between individuals - whether that's individual, unique trees or individual, unique people.

We have put together a starter guide with useful framing and tips families, educators, librarians and all caregivers engaging with the lessons for the first time.
Each affirmation section includes the following:

An activity guide featuring specific ideas and suggestions for educators, families,
and librarians

An assortment of handouts and visual resources that support planning, creating,
and reflecting on the affirmation

A video guide offering a kid- and adult-friendly overview of the featured
affirmation

A conversation tip sheet to help adults respond thoughtfully to children's
questions about race and physical differences

A student-facing slide deck geared to teachers as an instructional tool

Children learn ways artists can mix colors to represent our vast array of skin colors. No need to run out and buy more art supplies. They can blend unique skin tones using tools that are likely available at home or in school. Three media-crayon, colored pencils, and watercolor paint-are explored.

Affirmation #1 Lesson Materials:
Children are encouraged to notice how hair and facial features are similar and/or different with reference to curly afros, thick braids, straight bangs, head coverings, and tight fades, among other styles. They also see differences in sizes and shapes of lips, eyes, and noses.
Affirmation #2 Lesson Materials:
Children explore and draw diversity in community. They start by reflecting on paintings of various people by some popular, professional artists. They are then invited to a playful Portrait Party to draw family and friends in booklets.
Affirmation #3 Lesson Materials:
Drawing Differences was created by arts educators Libya Doman, Khadesia Latimer and Paula Liz in collaboration with EmbraceRace.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
EmbraceRace supports parents to raise children who are brave, informed and thoughtful about race. Join the movement!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the past year, we heard from people across the country - child care providers to pediatricians to parents- to learn more about how climate change will impact young children and importantly what we can do to promote healthy development in a changing climate.

Flourishing Children, Healthy Communities and a Stronger Nation, The U.S. Early Years Climate Action Plan outlines recommendations for policymakers at the federal, state, and local level, as well as early years providers, businesses, philanthropic funders, and researchers to work together to support young children and their families in a changing climate.

To view the full plan, visit:

Click below to download:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Early Years Climate Action Task Force Report - This Is Planet Ed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the past year, we heard from people across the country - child care providers to pediatricians to parents- to learn more about how climate change will impact young children and importantly what we can do to promote healthy development in a changing climate. Flourishing Children, Healthy Communities and a Stronger Nation, The U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
OSEP Fast Facts: Children Identified with Intellectual Disability

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
OSEP released a new OSEP Fast Facts: Children Identified with Intellectual Disability, which explores IDEA, Section 618 data. This Fast Fact takes a closer look at our data on children whose primary disability is intellectual disability.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The UDL Guidelines are a tool used in the implementation of Universal Design for Learning, a framework to improve and optimize teaching and learning for all people based on scientific insights into how humans learn. Learn more about the Universal Design for Learning framework from CAST. The UDL Guid…

# data[].attributes.headline
Woodson Collaborative: Teaching of Black Hx 

# data[].attributes.subject
Woodson Collaborative: Teaching of Black Hx 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Virginia Museums and Organizations were invited to assist the Carter G. Woodson Collaborative in providing learning resources that could help teachers address the new AAHEC standards. Scroll through our slides to see the participants!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Virginia Museums and Organizations were invited to assist the Carter G. Woodson Collaborative in providing learning resources that could help teachers address the new AAHEC standards. Scroll through our slides to see the participants!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Personalized Oral Language Learning (POLL) Strategies – Videos and resources to help early childhood educators support dual-language learners

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Integrated Measurement, Program Assessment, and Collaboration Tools. Our tool allows anyone interested in early childhood measurement and evaluation to search, compare, and access measures scored on four key categories of usability, cost, cultural relevance, and technical merit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Explore Gaithersburg High School in Gaithersburg, MD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gaithersburg High School located in Gaithersburg, Maryland - MD. Find Gaithersburg High School test scores, student-teacher ratio, parent reviews and teacher stats.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The browser you are using does not support the features required to use this tool. Please switch to a modern browser (MS Edge, Safari, Firefox, Google Chrome, etc.) and ensure WebGL is enabled.

What would you like to explore?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Educational Opportunity Project at Stanford

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The browser you are using does not support the features required to use this tool. Please switch to a modern browser (MS Edge, Safari, Firefox, Google Chrome, etc.) and ensure WebGL is enabled.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President & CEO, Dr. Rosemarie Allen

Dr. Rosemarie Allen has served as a leader in early childhood education for nearly 40 years. Her life's work is centered on ensuring children have access to high quality early childhood programs that are developmentally and culturally appropriate. She is currently an Associate Professor in the School of Education at Metropolitan State University of Denver. Her classes are focused on ensuring teachers are aware of how issues of equity, privilege, and power impact teaching practices. Rosemarie has served in directorship roles with the Colorado Department of Human Services, most recently in the Division of Youth Corrections (DYC). As Director of Programs at DYC, she was responsible for the education, health, and mental health of all adjudicated youth in the State. She was also responsible for the professional development of all Division staff members in order to ensure state-wide culture change. From 2007-2012 Rosemarie served as the Director of the Division of Child Care. In that role, she oversaw the State's child care licensing program, the federal child care assistance program, the redesign of the State's quality rating and improvement system, the implementation of the State's professional development plan, and assisted in the creation of Colorado's early learning guidelines.

Rosemarie is a national expert on racial equity, implicit bias and culturally responsive practices, speaking at conferences across the country. She is the Equity Expert for 9News KUSA with a weekly segment on racial equity at all levels of society. Dr. Allen is a respected keynote speaker and has the distinct honor of being appointed as a "Global Leader" for Early Childhood and works with professionals from more than 80 countries, sharing inspiration and information on issues impacting children and families worldwide. Rosemarie earned her B. A. from California State University, Master's of Education from Lesley University and Doctorate in Leadership for Educational Equity at the University of Colorado, Denver.

Chief Financial Officer, Don C. Allen

Don C. Allen, has worked as a financial analyst, accountant, and finance supervisor for more than 4 decades. His passion is ensuring the financial integrity of organizations and enhancing the financial literacy of employees. Mr. Allen worked for Raytheon Systems Company as a Principle Systems Analyst for nearly 30 years. He developed and implemented Earned Values Systems for Five major defense contracts. He also served as the skilled Financial Expert for Proposal support, cost budgeting and compliance assessment for Federal (FAR) and Raytheon Regulations. His proficiency with the tool "PC Pricing" for proposals projects led to various contract awards and ensured cost alignment. He demonstrated expert analysis and presentation skills with monthly, quarterly and annual reviews to product line executives. Mr. Allen also effectively worked with external and governmental auditors for year-end review for compliance to accounting and DCAA regulations. He has many years of experience with developing and managing overhead rates to capture cost in a Matrix environment. Over the course of his career, Mr. Allen has trained and mentored Junior analysts in all aspects of defense contracting financial operations. He earned his Bachelor's Degree from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and his MBA from the school of Business at UCLA.

Chief Operating Officer, Val Gill

Val has more than 30 years' experience in business, process and project management. She most recently served as a Sr. Business Analyst at Kaiser Permanente supporting the company with data integration, analysis and process procedures. Prior to joining Kaiser, Val worked as a Sr. Process Analyst of CenturyLink, where she assisted in multiple projects to create processes for numerous acquisitions and daily operations. Val also held senior roles at Transamerica Finance and GE Capital. She has a depth of knowledge in operations and process improvement. She served on the Board of IREE and is a member of several local organizations in the community. Val earned her Bachelor's Degree from Catawba College, Salisbury, NC in Communications. She is the wife of a retired Navy man, mother of two adult children and grandmother of two grand boys!

Executive Director of Licensing, Niki Gill Adams

Niki Gill is deeply passionate about our nation's youngest citizens. She is also dedicated to ensuring the best outcomes for direct caregivers, children, and their families. Early childhood education has allowed Niki to realize her passion, be innovative, and utilize her leadership skills to enhance the lives of young children and those who care for them. She has witnessed a transformation in the field of early care and learning in her role as advocate, director, teacher of young children, college instructor, Quality Rating Specialist, child care licensing specialist and supervisor, and in her current role as Executive Director of Community Based Licensing. Niki actively partners with child care providers and the community to ensure that all children are thriving academically, socially, physically, and mentally. In her role as part-time instructor at Metropolitan State University of Denver, she enjoys connecting with students, joining them in their educational aspirations, and adapting course content to their needs. Niki's goal is to meet programs' highest needs and to mentor them in providing best practices for children. Recently, Niki was selected to participate in an intensive community leadership program hosted by Urban Leadership Denver. The program provided invaluable experiences that enhanced her ability to more deeply engage and collaborate with community leaders. Niki takes great pride in her community involvement activities and has served as a board member of Restoration Christian Academy, as well as serving as a leader in Restoration Christian Fellowship Children's Ministry. She has served on many early childhood task forces, presented at statewide conferences and served as the keynote speaker at the Colorado Association for the Education of Young Children early childhood conference, the Alpha Kappa Alpha Senior Girls Scholarship Program, and the Northeast Family Child Care Association Conference. Niki completed her undergraduate degree at The University of New Mexico in Communication and Journalism and Spanish. Later she completed her Masters degree, Magna Cum Laude, in the Early Childhood Education Master's program at the University of Colorado Denver.

Deputy Director of Licensing, Brenda Beadling

Brenda Beadling, has worked in the field of early care and learning for over 10 years. Her passion is supporting those who care for Colorado's children. Having served in the capacity of Director for many years, Brenda understands first-hand, the joys and the challenges of leading a child care facility. Her expert and in-depth knowledge of rules and regulations, both as one who was responsible for implementing the rules at the center level and for monitoring the rules at the regulation level, gives Brenda a unique perspective as supervisor. As Deputy Director of Licensing, Brenda oversees the day-to-day operations of Licensing Specialists and provides guidance and support to specialists as they perform and carry out their duties. Her attention to detail and ability to serve with competence and compassion is evident in all of her endeavors.

Licensing Supervisor, Beth Chase

Beth Chase began her work in early childhood in 2003 as a teacher's aide while attending college. This first experience in a childcare setting steered her in the educational path of child development. Beth learned the importance of the role that the early childhood educator plays in children at a critical time in their development. Beth obtained a Bachelor's Degree in Child Development from California State University Chico before moving to Colorado. Beth held several roles including assistant director and acting director of a childcare center before beginning her career with licensing in 2009. Beth worked as a licensing specialist for the State Department of Human Services before beginning her career with IREE in 2019 as Licensing Supervisor for El Paso County. In her free time, she enjoys spending time with her husband and two sons.

Director of Health & Well Being, Jasmine Crane

Jasmine Crane, MS, MA, NCC, LPC is a Licensed professional counselor in the state of Colorado, where she has worked as a teacher at nearly every level of education. She has worked as a lead teacher and two-year-old classroom management trainer, she was a middle school and high school reading and writing and language arts teacher and currently holds a substitute teaching license in the state of Colorado. Jasmine works as an adjunct faculty member for the University of Colorado Denver, in their Masters-level counseling department. Jasmine currently works as the Director of Health and Wellness for the Institute for Racial Equity and Excellence (IREE) and is the owner and primary therapist of Transcendent Counseling LLC, where she provides counseling to families of school-aged children, couples, individuals and adolescents. She is also a contracted trainer with the Pyramid Model Consortium, where she provides training on equity and culturally responsive practices, especially as it relates to implementing the Pyramid Model. She has served on the board of the Denver County Cultural Commission, where she helped allocate SCFD funds to tier 3 arts and science organizations serving the Denver Metro Area. Jasmine has also served on the board of their Inclusivity Committee, a committee dedicated to ensuring that SCFD funds are reserved for organizations serving lower-income, diverse and otherwise marginalized populations in the Denver Metro Area. She has also served as a member of the 2019-2020 Denver Public School Bond and Mill board. Jasmine was recognized by the Denver Business Journal as one of Denver's top 40 under 40 in 2017 and continues to promote her passion for social justice in early education, as well as the social and emotional development of children in various capacities.

Director of Equity and Social Justice, Kamau Allen

Kamau Allen is a Howard University graduate and the Director of Equity and Social Justice for the Institute of Racial Equity and Excellence. Through his passion for racial justice and criminal justice transformation, he has worked to help communities achieve police accountability and criminal justice reform. In 2018, his involvement with Together Colorado allowed him to help manage the steering committee for the grassroots campaign that abolished slavery from Colorado's constitution. Kamau is currently the Lead Organizer of the Abolish Slavery National Network, a national organization dedicated to abolishing slavery and involuntary servitude from state constitutions and the constitution of the United States.

Executive Director of Language Justice & Multilingual Education, Carola Oliva-Olson

Dr. Carola Oliva-Olson has more than 30 years of experience in early childhood education, workforce development, technical assistance, and research. Carola's work centers around advancing equity and quality education for all children. She is a leading expert on multilingualism, diversity, equity, early childhood programming, professional development, and family engagement. Before joining IREE, she was SRI International's Senior Principal Education Researcher, developing and implementing changes that directly benefited superdiverse children, their families, communities, and educators. She is the co-author of the Personalized Oral Languages Learning (POLL) with Dr. Linda Espinosa, Elizabeth Magruder, and Whit Hayslip. She's the lead author of the Dual Language Supports (DLS) assessment and a measure of quality for programming and teaching practices in early learning settings.

As an associate professor at California State University Channel Islands, Carola helped prepare future early childhood educators to work in settings serving young children from infancy to third grade. Carola also worked as the principal investigator for the California Department of Education's Dual Language Learner Professional Development Grant and the California State Superintendent of Public Instruction's Early Initiatives Dual Language Learner Professional Development Grant. In 2020, she was appointed to the California Governor's Early Childhood Policy Council and continues to lead multilingual education efforts at California Educare Silicon Valley. In addition, she has worked on numerous Head Start and Migrant Head Start projects to help reduce disparities and promote equitable access to high-quality early childhood programs.

As her interests and accomplishments show, Carola has dedicated her life to promoting early childhood education that values, celebrates, and embraces children's cultural background, home life, and linguistic diversity. She received her PhD in education with an emphasis on special education and applied linguistics from the University of California Santa Barbara in 2008. She was also awarded the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation's Early Care and Education Head Start Graduate Research Grant and the Foundation for Child Development's Young Scholars Award. Finally, she received her MS in preschool-primary education from Barry University and an applied literacy postgraduate certificate from Johns Hopkins University.

Licensing Supervisor, Cammile Espinosa

Cammile has more than 22 years' experience in early childhood. She's held roles as a Licensing Specialist, Lead Teacher and Family Childcare Provider. Her main objective is to make a difference for families to have access to highly quality licensed childcare facilities where children can develop to their full potential in a safe, healthy, and nursing environment. Cammile obtained her bachelor's degree in Early Childhood Education from Metropolitan State University.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leadership Team : About Us : Institute for Racial Equity & Excellence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President & CEO, Dr. Rosemarie Allen Dr. Rosemarie Allen has served as a leader in early childhood education for nearly 40 years. Her life's work is centered on ensuring children have access to high quality early childhood programs that are developmentally and culturally appropriate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Equity in Teaching Institute | The Center for Faculty Excellence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Midwest and Plains Equity Assistance Center (MAP) is one of four regional Equity Assistance Centers, funded by the United States Department of Education under Title IV of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The MAP Center provides technical assistance and training, upon request, in the areas of race, sex, national origin, and religion to public school districts and other responsible governmental agencies to promote equitable educational opportunities and work in the areas of civil rights, equity, and school reform. The Center serves 13 State Educational Agencies, 7,025 Public School Districts, and 11,249,050 Public School Students.**

Our Mission

Mission: Equitable, Responsive Education for All.

Core Activity Domains

To achieve our mission, we seek to:

Improve distribution of effective teachers and principals;

Improve school engagement, environment, and school safety, as well as family and community engagement in schools;

Increase and support data-based decision making related to use of research-based, culturally responsive curricula and instructional practices in classrooms, schools, and districts;

Build coalitions between higher education, PreK-12 systems, communities, and families;

Promote equity by addressing needs of historically underserved students, including students from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds;

Address the disproportionate representation of minority students in special, gifted, and advanced placement (AP) programs as well as STEM education;

Support, develop, and disseminate effective approaches to school dropout prevention and reentry;

Support districts transitioning to unitary status in desegregation cases.

Tiered Service Delivery Framework

Great Lakes Equity Center's and Midwest and Plains Equity Assistance Center's approach to resource and service delivery is grounded in a multi-tiered framework of technical assistance. Our goal is to engage in well-defined, content-rich technical assistance such that knowledge and expertise are shared in a way that results in transformative systemic change, as well as personal reflection and growth.

We offer a variety of tools, publications, and resources to a broad public audience.

We bring together role-alike stakeholders across district and state boundaries, support peer-to-peer mentoring, and offer opportunities to share information quickly across individuals focused on similar problems of practice.

We engage in sustained partnerships of transformative professional learning and improvement grounded in examination of local data and historical contexts and action-research case studies that bring practitioners and researchers together in inquiry. These partnerships are entered into through development of a formalized agreement with agency leadership, and include the development of a memorandum of understanding detailing the proposed project scope, timeline, and responsibilities of both the requesting agency and the Great Lakes Equity Center.

*US Department of Education (2016). Programs: Training and Advisory Services Equity Assistance Centers. Retrieved from: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/equitycenters/index.html

**National Center for Education Statistics, Elementary/ Secondary Information System Table Generator: 2014-15 State Data.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Midwest and Plains Equity Assistance Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Midwest and Plains Equity Assistance Center (MAP) is one of four regional Equity Assistance Centers, funded by the United States Department of Education under Title IV of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

# data[].attributes.headline
Migration Policy Institute-ELs in general

# data[].attributes.subject
Migration Policy Institute-ELs in general

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Charting a New Regional Course of Action: The Complex Motivations and Costs of Central American Migration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The English Language Learner (ELL) Information Center examines the demography and trends of immigrant families and their children who are English Language Learners. The share of ELL students in K-12 schools in the United States increased by more than 50 percent between 1997-98 and 2007-08. While mos…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Census Bureau's mission is to serve as the nation's leading provider of quality data about its people and economy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Education Commission of the States tracks state education policy on a wide variety of education topics. There are three options available:

1. Scroll down to view enacted and vetoed bills on a wide variety of education topics for the 2017 - 2021 legislative sessions.

2. Click here to view our 2021 State Education Policy Watch List, which includes pending legislation in a few issue areas.

3. Click here to view an archive of state policy tracking for the 1996 through 2016 legislative sessions.

For more information about how to navigate this interactive map, click here.

If you have questions or comments, please contact Jennifer Thomsen (jthomsen@ecs.org).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
State Education Policy Tracking - Education Commission of the States

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Education Commission of the States tracks state education policy on a wide variety of education topics. There are three options available: Scroll down to view enacted and vetoed bills on a wide variety of education topics for the 2017 - 2021 legislative sessions.

# data[].attributes.headline
Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) Policies Database

# data[].attributes.subject
Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) Policies Database

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Immigrant Learning Center has compiled a list of quick United States immigration statistics and facts to answer your most pressing questions about the current immigration landscape in the U.S.

If you don't see what you need here, our Immigration Research Library contains more than 1,300 studies from reputable sources, and new reports are added as they become available. If you're looking for more detailed data or want to examine specific immigrant populations, you can request a free, personalized fact sheet through the Immigration Data on Demand service from our partner, the Institute for Immigration Research at George Mason University, or explore our page of resources on U.S. immigration data and policy. To learn more about the immigrants of our home state of Massachusetts, visit our Quick Immigration Statistics: Massachusetts page. If you have questions or suggestions about our Quick U.S. Immigration Stats, feel free to contact us at public.education@ilctr.org.

How many immigrants are there in the United States, and who are they?

What is the migration status of immigrants in the United States?

The majority of U.S. immigrants (77%) have authorization.

Source: Pew Research Center estimates based on augmented 2017 U.S. Census Bureau data

More than half (50.9%) of all immigrants have become United States citizens.

Source: U.S. Census 2020 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates

Immigrants have a higher workforce participation rate.*

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Quick Immigration Statistics: United States > The Immigrant Learning Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Immigrant Learning Center has compiled a list of quick United States immigration statistics and facts to answer your most pressing questions about the current immigration landscape in the U.S. If you don't see what you need here, our Immigration Research Library contains more than 1,300 studies from reputable sources, and new reports are added as they become available.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Annie E. Casey Foundation today urged policymakers and child advocates to prioritize policies that would expand opportunity for America's 74 million children, noting measurable but still inadequate progress over the past three decades to ensure all children can realize their full potential.

The 30 th edition of the - the most comprehensive annual report on child well-being in the United States - notes progress in helping children thrive since the first Data Book was published in 1990. But it finds the nation has failed to tear down barriers affecting children of color and underscores that America's future will be brighter if all kids in all communities have the opportunity to thrive.

Among top-line findings: More than 13 million U.S. children live in poverty, and the nation is failing to equip many children, particularly in communities of color, with what they need to reach their full potential.

"America's children are one quarter of our population and 100% of our future," said Casey Foundation President and CEO Lisa Hamilton. ​"All of the 74 million kids in our increasingly diverse country have unlimited potential, and we have the data, knowledge and evidence to create the policies that will help them realize it. It's incumbent on us to do just that."
Download news release as a PDF
National Findings from the

This report compares past data on 16 indicators with figures from 2017, the most recent year available in most cases.

Broadly speaking, children in the United States had a better chance at thriving in 2017 than in 1990 - with improvements in 11 of the 16 KIDS COUNT index measures of child well-being - but racial and ethnic disparities persisted.

One in six American kids grew up in poverty, presenting tremendous risks to child well-being. Despite economic growth and reduced unemployment, there's been virtually no progress on child poverty since the publication of the first Data Book in 1990.

2017 was the first year since 2010 that saw an increase in the number of uninsured kids. Four million American kids didn't have health insurance. The 5% uninsured rate is 62% better than it was three decades ago - thanks to the Affordable Care Act, the Children's Health Insurance Program and state-by-state Medicaid expansion.

Low birth weight, which often portends developmental challenges, had increased three years in a row, matching the four-decade high of 8.3% of all live births (2006).

State Rankings in the

Six of the top 10 states for overall child well-being are in the Northeast. New Hampshire and Massachusetts are again in first and second place, followed by Iowa (3), Minnesota (4), New Jersey (5), Vermont (6), Utah (7), Connecticut (8), Maine (9) and Virginia (10).

Mississippi (48), Louisiana (49) and New Mexico (50) are again the lowest-ranked states.

States in the South and West populate the bottom of the overall rankings. These regions contain the 18 lowest-ranked states.

View the Interactive Data Book
Along with the annual state-by-state rankings, the 2019 Data Book explores the growth in America's child population since 1990 - the year the first Data Book was published. Among the major developments:

The U.S. child population increased by more than 9 million from 64.2 million to 73.7 million between 1990 and 2017. Texas (2.5 million more kids), Florida (1.2 million) and California (1.1 million) accounted for half of the nation's total growth.

All 15 of the states where growth in the child population outpaced the national average since 1990 are in the South or West. Most states that had declines in the child population are in the Northeast and Midwest.

The percentage of American children who were Latino more than doubled from 12 to 26%. The proportion of Asian and Pacific Islander children also doubled, from 3 to 6%. The percentage of white children declined from 69 to 53%.

From 1990 to 2017, 38 states and the District of Columbia saw the percentage of children from immigrant families double; 12 have seen those percentages quadruple. More than one in four U.S. children is growing up in an immigrant family.

Direct lines can be drawn between areas of tremendous improvement in well-being - including health insurance coverage, decreased rates of teen childbearing and increased rates of high school graduation - and policies that have supported these successes. Policymakers should take additional steps to help all children thrive. The Casey Foundation calls on elected officials and representatives to:

Expand the programs that make and keep kids healthy. For the sake of all children, regardless of their immigration status, states should expand access to Medicaid.

Provide the tools proven to help families lift themselves up economically. Federal and state earned income tax credits (EITC) and child tax credit programs mean working parents can devote more take-home pay to meet their children's needs.

Tear down obstacles faced by kids of color. Every child has incredible individual potential, and communities thrive when all kids thrive. African American, Latino and Native American children remain more likely than others to encounter barriers - from living in high-poverty neighborhoods to not having health insurance - to that contribute to disparate outcomes. Our public policies must acknowledge and eliminate those obstacles.

Count all kids. Ensure the 2020 census counts all children, especially those under 5 years old and from hard-to-count areas. The 2010 census missed 2.2 million such kids, and the upcoming count may miss even more if young children are not a priority. The stakes are high: 55 major federal programs, including Head Start and the Children's Health Insurance Program, allocate more than $880 billion each year based on census data.

The is the 30 th edition of an annual study based on publicly available data for all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.
View state news releases

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
U.S. Child Population Grows and Changes: 74 Million Kids to Shape Future of More Diverse America

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In its 2019 KIDS COUNT Data Book , the Annie E. Casey Foundation today urged policymakers and child advocates to prioritize policies that would expand opportunity for America's 74 million children. Learn more about this report on child well-being from 1990 to 2017.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Early Childhood Systems Collective Impact Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arizona Early Childhood Professional Development ECHO

# data[].attributes.headline
Early Literacy Development and Instruction for Dual Language Learners in Early Childhood Education

# data[].attributes.subject
Early Literacy Development and Instruction for Dual Language Learners in Early Childhood Education

# data[].attributes.headline
Child Care & Early Education Inclusion-Key Findings from Research + Policy Recs 

# data[].attributes.subject
Child Care & Early Education Inclusion-Key Findings from Research + Policy Recs 

# data[].attributes.headline
Hx of Inequities in Early Childhood Personnel: 

# data[].attributes.subject
Hx of Inequities in Early Childhood Personnel: 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The authors focused on five different time frames for the landscape analysis and report development-years 1400-1619, 1619-1870s, 1870s-1940s, 1945-1970s, and 1970s-2020s-to understand the social and policy contexts that have impacted ECE policy through history. In total, more than 200 articles, books, gray literature, and other resources were reviewed.

Download a timeline of key dates, context, and policies highlighted in the research.
Findings
Child Trends' research illuminates the stark history of inequity-from the racism, sexism, and oppression that is codified in U.S. policy to wage disparities and racialized compensation, ultimately devaluing the early childhood workforce. The findings also shed light on solutions-the accompanying policy and practice report offers actionable recommendations for centering racial equity in conversations about early childhood educator pay and benefits, preparation, and stability for policymakers, practitioners, and the philanthropic community. We are pleased to share these findings with the early childhood field and funders and are hopeful for the ways this will guide learning and progress in a diverse and well-prepared early childhood workforce.
Note: This resource was reposted on April 4, 2022, to reflect updates made by the authors. Specifics regarding the updates can be found in the acknowledgments.
Suggested Citation: Lloyd, C.M., Carlson, J., Barnett, H., Shaw, S., & Logan, D. (2021). Mary Pauper: A historical exploration of early care and education compensation, policy, and solutions. Child Trends.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mary Pauper: A Historical Exploration of Early Care and Education Compensation, Policy, and Solutions - Early Educator Investment Collaborative

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The authors focused on five different time frames for the landscape analysis and report development-years 1400-1619, 1619-1870s, 1870s-1940s, 1945-1970s, and 1970s-2020s-to understand the social and policy contexts that have impacted ECE policy through history. In total, more than 200 articles, books, gray literature, and other resources were reviewed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This brief explores the importance of inclusion for young children with disabilities and the relationship between inclusion and quality in early childhood education. The brief includes a table with state examples of inclusion-related indicators in Quality Rating and Improvement Systems, and a...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
National Center on Early Childhood Quality Assurance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This brief explores the importance of inclusion for young children with disabilities and the relationship between inclusion and quality in early childhood education. The brief includes a table with state examples of inclusion-related indicators in Quality Rating and Improvement Systems, and a...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What We Do

Grants

APS Teacher Campaign

APS Teacher Campaign

ATN awards grants to educators and community members who strive to disrupt inequalities and injustice within their schools, communities, or both. We will be launching our 3rd annual grant cycle in late October 2023.

APS Teacher Campaign

APS Teacher Campaign

APS Teacher Campaign

Explore resources to learn about the Atlanta Public Schools "Cheating Scandal" and support the educators facing prison

Programming

Programming

Programming

Year round, we host political education, healing justice, and affinity group events for educators, organizers, students, and parents/caregivers. Follow us on socials to stay up to date.

Resources

Programming

Programming

From our founding guide for racial justice and abolitionist social and emotional learning to a database for queer, trans, and non-binary educators + students, we pride ourselves on being a resource hub for education communities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Abolitionist Teaching Network's mission is simple: develop and support educators to fight injustice within their schools and communities. Utilizing the intellectual work and direct action of community organizers, Abolitionist Teachers will organize and take action for educational freedom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Data Profiles - Department of Education Open Data Platform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The documents on this page support the state level data files. They should be used in concert with those files.

# data[].attributes.headline
Building a more ethnically diverse teaching force guide: Kapplan Special Report 

# data[].attributes.subject
Building a more ethnically diverse teaching force guide: Kapplan Special Report 

# data[].attributes.body
1. DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., & Bindra, V. G. (2022). How does teacher bias influence students?: An introduction to the special issue on teachers’ implicit attitudes, instructional practices, and student outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 78, 101523.

2. Creswell, J. W., Fetters, M. D., Plano Clark, V. L., & Morales, A. (2009). Mixed methods intervention trials. Mixed methods research for nursing and the health sciences, 161-180.

# data[].attributes.headline
Salorzano & Yosso (2002): CRT in Research

# data[].attributes.subject
Salorzano & Yosso (2002): CRT in Research

# data[].attributes.headline
OSEP Fact Sheet: Part B Race & Disability 2019-2020 

# data[].attributes.subject
OSEP Fact Sheet: Part B Race & Disability 2019-2020 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
OSEP Fast Facts: Race and Ethnicity of Children with Disabilities Served under IDEA Part B

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This OSEP Fast Facts looks at race and ethnicity of children with disabilities served under IDEA Part B.

# data[].attributes.headline
Memorandum of Understanding on how to Embed Inclusion in ECE: Department of Education

# data[].attributes.subject
Memorandum of Understanding on how to Embed Inclusion in ECE: Department of Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Vision:

The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and the Office of Head Start (OHS) envision a seamless system of early care and education with a coordinated approach to service delivery for infants, toddlers, and preschool children (young children) with disabilities and their families. This requires heightened and sustained levels of ongoing collaboration between the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part C early intervention and Part B, Section 619 preschool special education programs and Head Start[1] programs. This may also include other early childhood programs such as childcare and State preschool programs.

Objective:

The purpose of this document is to provide an overview of factors to consider when developing, implementing, and sustaining memoranda of understanding (MOUs)[2] at the State level to create a coordinated approach to service delivery to improve outcomes for young children who are at risk for or have a developmental delay or disability. While this document focuses on IDEA and Head Start programs, States may wish to consider whether MOUs with the relevant early care and education partners may be helpful to provide seamless services to young children with disabilities and their families.

There are at least four potential purposes that the MOU can serve under Parts B and C of the IDEA. If an MOU or interagency agreement is needed for the delivery of IDEA services, an interagency agreement may serve as a method under IDEA sections 612 and 640. As a method under 34 CFR 303.511, the MOU must include appropriate service provision and dispute resolution provisions. A second purpose under both IDEA Parts B and C is the IDEA child find mandate under 34 CFR 300.111 and 303.115, which many States codify through an interagency agreement.

The IDEA Part C mandates for child find and seamless transitions for children are the bases for the very specific coordination required between IDEA Part C and Head Start (see 34 CFR 303.118(a)(3) (personnel development), 303.210 (collaboration), 303.302(c)(1)(ii)(E) (coordination and Advisory Panel) and 303.601(8) (SICC). Additionally, an early childhood transition intra-agency or interagency agreement is required under IDEA section 637(a)(9) and 34 CFR 303.209(a)(3), which may include the Head Start program. Finally, a fourth purpose of the MOU may be to permit data sharing--whether in the aggregate (deidentified) or individually (with parental consent where required and/or through an MOU that utilizes a specific exception under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) that is codified separately under the IDEA Part B and Part C privacy regulations in 34 CFR 300.622 and 303.414).[3] Thinking through which of these four purposes that the MOU will serve is critical to ensuring that it both meets applicable legal requirements and serves to improve coordination and delivery of services to young children with disabilities and their families.

The intended audience for this document includes:

IDEA Part C State and local level staff;

IDEA Part B, Section 619 (preschool) State and local level staff;

Head Start State Collaboration Directors;

Head Start Disability Services Coordinators;

OHS's Program Specialists;

OSEP- and OHS-funded Training and Technical Assistance Centers and Providers; and

State and local level leadership of other early care and education programs

Rationale

Early intervention and early childhood special education can support young children with disabilities in meeting high expectations and enhancing their developmental and learning outcomes. The earlier children receive services and support, the greater the opportunity to minimize the potential of developmental delays. Research identifies the benefits of providing these services and supports in high-quality inclusive learning environments.[4] However, there has been little change in national inclusion data over the last 40 years. The percentage of preschool children with disabilities attending regular early childhood programs and receiving the majority of their special education services in those settings has remained at an almost constant level of around 50 percent. This data and additional State and national data about young children with disabilities who receive early intervention, special education, or related services under the IDEA, collected through the U.S. Department of Education, can be found on the OSEP Fast Facts website.

Additionally, families and providers continue to express concern and frustration with delays and inconsistencies in identification and evaluation processes, service delivery in inclusive programs, and transition into different services, as well as the expectations programs have for their child. The data, combined with reports from families, providers, and programs, highlight the need for State and local leaders to prioritize developing MOUs to formalize the collaborative efforts needed to build a seamless and coordinated inclusive system for all young children and their families.

Through the work of the National Early Childhood Inclusion Indicators Initiative, a cross-sector partnership of early childhood stakeholders, led by the OSEP-funded Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center (ECTA) and the National Center for Pyramid Model Innovations (NCPMI), four sets of indicators were developed to support improved and increased inclusive opportunities for young children with disabilities and their families. The indicators address system and practice refinements at every level: State, Community, Local Program, and Early Care and Education Environments. Formal agreements are one of the elements identified as critical to support inclusive opportunities.

A comprehensive MOU is an agreement that can help form the foundation of a State's integrated early childhood system for young children who are at risk for or have a developmental delay or disability. It is a document that includes shared understanding, plans, and responsibilities between programs regarding the common goal of identifying young children with disabilities and promoting increased access to, and meaningful participation in, early childhood programs for young children who are at risk for or have a developmental delay or disability. Finally, an MOU can define and operationalize implementation of best and recommended practices that support meeting the requirements that infants and toddlers with disabilities be provided, to the maximum extent appropriate, services in natural environments and preschool children with disabilities be provided, to the maximum extent appropriate, services in the least restrictive environment.

Program Requirements

The development of strong, effective partnerships can be challenging. One barrier can be the lack of understanding of each early childhood program's requirements. The IDEA statute and regulations and the Head Start Performance Standards include specific requirements related to collaboration, identifying young children who may have or be at risk for disabilities, and the provision of services in inclusive environments. These requirements can be found at:

Additionally, State and local leaders can review other documents that provide guidance and define expectations for the provision of IDEA Part C and Part B, Section 619 services in inclusive early childhood programs. The U.S. Departments of Education and Health and Human Services released the Policy Statement on Inclusion of Children with Disabilities in Early Childhood Programs and the Policy Statement on Expulsion and Suspension Polices in Early Childhood Settings. OSEP released the Dear Colleague Letter on Preschool Least Restrictive Environment.

The interagency coordination provisions and natural and least restrictive environments requirements included in Part C and Part B, Section 619 of IDEA and their implementing regulations, the Head Start Performance Standards, and the relevant policy and position statements provide the necessary policy framework to build and sustain statewide infrastructure that supports an integrated early care and education system. State and local leaders should reference the appropriate regulations in the development of MOUs.

Development of MOUs

Who: The first step in developing an MOU or revising an existing MOU, at any level, is to identify members of a leadership team across agencies to work on the document and to then oversee its implementation. It is important to ensure membership includes representation from diverse perspectives, areas of expertise, and responsibilities (e.g., director, provider, family member, fiscal manager) as well as those with the authority to make decisions. This supports agreements that are well-informed and have a greater chance of successful implementation. For example, at the State level, the team would, at a minimum, include the: Head Start Collaboration Director, IDEA Part C and Part B Section 619 coordinators, monitoring, and legal personnel from both the State educational agency and State lead agency, local program leaders and service providers, other partner agencies, family members, and pertinent stakeholders from the State and regional levels.

Why: When developing relationships to establish an MOU, it is critical to review the benefits of having a formalized agreement and have shared values and understanding of the collective purpose, for example, to:

1. Create an equitable and coordinated early childhood system.

Equity in early childhood education is providing all children high-quality equitable services that allow them to grow and succeed. The provision of early care and education that meets the unique needs of each and every young child requires coordination among multiple State systems. When State agencies that serve young children come together and define each other's roles in providing services to young children who are at risk for or have a developmental delay or disability and their families, they are better able to create a more coordinated system.

2. Improve relationships across agencies and staff.

IDEA programs, Head Start and other early care and education agencies, and their respective staff should connect regularly and intentionally about serving young children who are at risk for or have a developmental delay or disability and their families. Outlining how often agencies will regularly meet and what collaborative efforts they are working to improve (e.g., child find, delivery of services, resource allocations, and MOU development and revisions) will help them build their partnerships.

3. Maximize resources, including fiscal resources.

IDEA programs, Head Start and other early care and education agencies should share resources to promote a coordinated approach to delivering services to young children who are at risk for or have a developmental delay or disability and their families. Fiscal resources may be blended, braided, and layered to the extent allowable under applicable laws. Agencies can more efficiently use their resources by outlining relevant resources each agency can share, including space, staff time, data, professional development, and funding.

4. Improve child and family outcomes.

IDEA programs require that State agencies report child and family outcomes data. Head Start is encouraged to share data from the Program Information Report (PIR) at the State and local levels to complement data collected from IDEA partners. A cohesive approach to improving services for young children who are at risk for or have a developmental delay or disability and families, requires that agencies outline child and family outcome data points collected by each agency and include steps each agency will take toward supporting the improvement of those data.

5. Identify young children with disabilities as early as possible.

Many early care and education agencies have requirements for screening and identifying children with suspected developmental delays or disabilities. Outlining their child find processes in the MOU may help agencies identify ways in which they could improve their child find efforts.

6. Increase IDEA services in the natural environment and in inclusive settings.

IDEA programs require that eligible young children are provided services in a natural setting where a child would be educated if they were not identified with a disability. Head Start programs must ensure enrolled children with disabilities, including but not limited to those who are eligible for services under IDEA, and their families receive all applicable program services delivered in inclusive environments and that they fully participate in all program activities. Agencies can review the range of settings that services are currently being provided in to identify areas that do not have inclusive settings and develop steps to expand the number of inclusive settings.

7. Increase cross-fertilization of ideas among interagency members.

IDEA programs, Head Start and early care and education agencies should share and consider how they can support one another in implementing innovative solutions or approaches to providing services to young children who are at risk for or have a developmental delay or disability and their families.

8. Increase understanding and implementation of transdisciplinary practices.

IDEA programs, Head Start and early care and education agencies should promote practices that include coaching and the implementation of cross-disciplinary team support that improves service delivery of early childhood services. Being clear on the services each agency provides will allow the agencies to identify gaps in services and plan for increasing transdisciplinary practices to improve child and family outcomes.

9. Increase staff collaboration skills.

IDEA programs, Head Start and early care and education agency staff members require an understanding of each other's work to support young children who are at risk for or have a developmental delay or disability and their families. Identifying strategies to bring staff together and ensuring time where they can work together can help them build their collaboration skills.

10. Increase cross-sector professional development opportunities.

IDEA programs, Head Start and early care and education agencies can provide professional development and technical assistance that staff from other agencies can access. Establishing areas for joint professional development and trainings can support the mission and shared values of the MOU.

11. Define roles and share responsibilities across agencies.

The roles of IDEA programs, Head Start, and early care and education agencies in serving young children with disabilities and their families should be clearly stated. In instances where service areas overlap, the expectations for collaboration and oversight should be described. An MOU can help each agency clearly define its role, which will assist with maintaining the group's focus on improving child and family outcomes.

12. Share data and information to strengthen services to young children with disabilities and their families.

IDEA programs, Head Start, and early care and education agencies collect data that can enhance service delivery for young children with disabilities and their families. Data sharing may be done in the aggregate (on a deidentified basis) or individually (with parental consent where required and/or through an MOU that utilizes a specific exception under the IDEA privacy regulations in 34 CFR 300.622 and 303.414). It is critical to include legal review to ensure that the IDEA Part C and Part B confidentiality and privacy requirements are met.[5] The development of the MOU may reveal additional areas for data collection and analysis across systems.

13. Meet requirements of IDEA and Head Start.

Under IDEA Part C, to the maximum extent appropriate, infants and toddlers with disabilities must receive early intervention services in the natural environment. Under IDEA Part B, to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities must be educated with children without disabilities. Under Head Start program requirements, HS programs must ensure enrolled children with disabilities, including but not limited to those who are eligible for services under IDEA, and their families receive all applicable program services delivered in the least restrictive possible environment and that they fully participate in all program activities. An MOU that ensures services across programs supports implementation of these and other requirements of the applicable laws and regulations and should improve outcomes for young children with disabilities and their families.

What: In order to effect system changes, States need time to consider factors across the implementation components (leadership, organization, and capacity-personnel & program) that make up their infrastructure. For example, MOUs might address leadership components through agreed upon commitments and community awareness strategies. Organization components include policies, procedures, data, funding, quality assurance, early learning and program standards, family engagement, and the systems to support and sustain these organization components. Capacity components include looking across programs to align early childhood personnel standards, preservice preparation, credential and licensing requirements, and ongoing cross-sector professional development, teaming, and coaching. The Early Childhood Indicators of High Quality Inclusion offer specific focus areas at each system level for States to consider including in their MOUs.

At the State and local levels, discussions should also consider each agency's role and responsibilities to address the successful implementation of IDEA requirements within Head Start programs at each major point of the service delivery continuum:

Child find and referral;

Evaluation and eligibility;

Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP)/Individualized Education Program (IEP) development and reviews;

Child and family outcomes;

Placement decisions;

IFSP/IEP implementation;

Ongoing service delivery;

Collaborative teaming, coaching, communication;

Transition from IDEA Part C to IDEA Part B, Section 619 programs, and to kindergarten; and

Contingency plans for national, State, or local emergencies.

The Head Start Disabilities Services Coordinator Orientation Guide Appendix A: Building an Interagency MOU provides additional details to consider in developing State and local level agreements. Also, the Service Delivery Component Considerations for Effective Early Childhood Memorandums of Understanding (attached Table A) offers examples of collaborative practices throughout service delivery to stimulate thoughts and discussions as MOUs are developed and reviewed.

An MOU should be written so that it is clearly understood. The language of an MOU should be simple and straightforward. A good approach is to use language that makes all parties feel important and vital to the relationship, keeping in mind that the written document should reflect what has been negotiated and agreed upon.

There is no standard MOU format. A common-sense approach should guide both the development of the instrument and the decisions regarding inclusions and exclusions.

Where: Many States and local programs have existing MOUs. In this case it is important to look at where the MOU is located, who has access to the MOU, how often it is reviewed, and who from each agency is responsible for updating the MOU. State-level MOUs should be in place and shared with local programs as a model to develop local agreements that detail more day-to-day service delivery process collaborations.

When: Specify an annual review schedule for the agreement to ensure that it is of high quality. Once the MOU has been written and signed by the agencies involved, the next steps are to implement and sustain the agreement. There are several strategies to help successfully implement and sustain the MOU:

Maintain an open dialogue between the agencies involved as this will facilitate the ongoing development and evolution of the agreement;

Establish a regular (e.g., quarterly, semi-annually, annually) schedule of formal meetings or workgroups to discuss the progress of the implementation of the MOU and potential areas of change to consider;

Address potential conflicts and resolve in a respectful and professional manner;

Maintain intentional and purposeful collaboration;

Provide training and orientation on the collaboration for all new staff at each agency involved;

Provide a centralized file location or repository for MOU documentation and meeting notes to be accessible by all involved; and

Determine timelines for revisions, updates and overall schedules of MOU reoccurring activities, including revisions based on needs, leadership and staff changes, natural disasters, or health emergencies.

These strategies may serve as the foundation for successful collaborative work and to increase partnerships and joint activities to strengthen inclusive services for young children with disabilities and their families.

Resources and Support

OSEP- and OHS-funded technical assistance centers have a wealth of tools and resources to promote collaboration within and across agencies and programs at the State and local levels. States are highly encouraged to engage in technical assistance activities and utilize resources to support the development and implementation of effective MOUs to build and sustain high-quality inclusive systems of early care and education for young children with disabilities and their families.

Additional Resources:

Table A: Service Delivery Component Considerations for Effective Early Childhood Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs)

An effective MOU describes what each agency will do within each component of the service delivery continuum to ensure an equitable, coordinated, family-centered approach and the efficient use of all agency resources (e.g., time, personnel, fiscal), within the parameters of all applicable local, State, and federal requirements. The chart below provides examples of collaborative practices for consideration. MOU development teams are encouraged to be creative and innovative when thinking about coordinated responsibilities during different processes and procedures.

TABLE NOTE 1: This table can be horizontally scrolled at the bottom to reveal additional columns
TABLE NOTE 2: *with parental consent

Service Delivery Component Key Points
Early Intervention (EI) (IDEA Part C)

Local Educational Agency (LEA)
(IDEA Part B Section 619 - Preschool)

Head Start (HS)
(Inclusive of Early Head Start, Head Start, Migrant Head Start, and American Indian and Alaska Native Head Start)

Outreach/
Referral Process
All programs have requirements to identify children with disabilities, including timelines once referred. Personnel should understand eligibility criteria for different agencies for appropriate referrals. States and local programs should develop relationships with the contact people that work on eligibility across programs. Consider responsibilities based on which program first comes in contact with the family and child.

Evaluation, Assessment, and Eligibility
EI programs and LEAs have required timelines for conducting evaluations to determine eligibility. Information from other adults who know the child and family is valuable in that process.

IFSP/IEP Development
EI programs, LEAs, and HS have requirements for individualized service plans. Consider meeting with families* to simultaneously develop the program-specific plans to ensure the process is family-friendly and support coordinated service delivery.

IEP Teams consider the child's functioning in HS classrooms when developing goals and when making placement decisions. [The IEP must include a description of the child's present levels of academic achievement and functional performance (including how the disability affects the child's participation in appropriate activities) and measurable annual goals (including academic and functional goals) designed to meet the child's needs resulting from their disability to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum, and meet each of the child's other educational needs resulting from their disability ( 34 CFR 300.320).]

Child Outcome Ratings
EIS providers and LEAs use data from three early childhood outcomes to measure results and improve systems and services.
IFSP Teams use information from all sources, including HS observations and reports, to determine child outcomes ratings. IEP Teams use information from all sources, including HS observations and reports, to determine child outcomes ratings. HS providers contribute information and participate in child outcomes rating discussions.

Service Delivery
EI and special education and related services support the child's meaningful participation in everyday routines and activities in home, classroom, and community settings. IFSP and IEP Teams have flexibility when identifying services, including the frequency and duration, based on individual child (and family) needs and resources. HS has service frequency requirements.

IEP services are planned with HS teachers and provided within HS classroom routines and activities. [IEP services must be provided in the least restrictive environment to the maximum extent appropriate ( 34 CFR 300.114(a).]

HS providers support families in implementing IFSP strategies during HS home visits. HS teachers integrate IFSP/IEP strategies throughout classroom routines and activities. [HS programs must ensure enrolled children with disabilities, including but not limited to those who are eligible for services under IDEA, and their families receive all applicable program services delivered in the least restrictive possible environment and that they fully participate in all program activities. ( https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/policy/45-cfr-chap-xiii/1302-60-full-participation-program-services-activities)]

IFSP/IEP Reviews
All programs have requirements for reviewing children's individualized plans. Coordinating reviews and sharing information* supports robust and functional plans and service delivery.

Transition Planning and Process
Smooth and seamless transitions are important for child, family, and program success. Everyone involved should understand their roles and responsibilities, and families need enough information to make informed decisions.

IFSP Teams invite HS and LEA personnel to transition meetings to provide information about options for parents. IFSP providers support family visits to different program options. [Transition planning meetings must occur no later than 90 days before the child's 3 rd birthday ( 34 CFR 303.209(c)).]

IEP Teams provide information to families transitioning from Part C to Part B services, including how IEP services might be provided in HS classrooms. [LEA personnel must participate in transition planning conferences ( 34 CFR 3 0 0.124).]

EHS providers facilitate discussions with Part C families and HS programs. HS providers attend transition meetings to describe program options, including services for children with disabilities available in HS classrooms. [HS programs must work to develop interagency agreements with the local agency responsible for implementing IDEA to improve service delivery to children eligible for services under IDEA, including transition services as children move from services provided under Part C of IDEA to services provided under Part B of IDEA and from preschool to kindergarten. ( https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/policy/45-cfr-chap-xiii/1302-71-transitions-head-start-kindergarten)]

Training and Technical Assistance
Joint professional development across programs builds shared understanding of program requirements, knowledge of integrated child development, and the capacity to implement evidence-based practices with fidelity. It also contributes to raising the early childhood profession and building comprehensive and coordinated early childhood systems.
EI programs invite HS personnel to coaching meetings, regular trainings, and special workshops and conferences. LEAs invite HS personnel to coaching meetings, regular trainings, and special workshops and conferences. HS programs invite EI and LEA personnel to coaching meetings, regular trainings, and special workshops and conferences.

[1] Head Start, as referenced in this document, includes all Head Start program types: Head Start, Early Head Start (EHS), Migrant and Seasonal Head Start (MSHS), and American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Head Start.

[2] How this agreement is labeled will vary from State to State, as some States may refer to these agreements as a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), or inter-/intra-agency agreement. For the purposes of this document, the term MOU will be used to refer to any agreement that is established between agencies to facilitate the provision of special education and related services in Head Start or other early childhood program settings.

[3] The IDEA confidentiality/privacy regulations are codified in 34 CFR Part 300 (for the 2006 IDEA Part B regulations) and 34 CFR Part 303 (for the IDEA Part C regulations). The FERPA statute is at 20 U.S.C. 1232g and the FERPA regulations are in 34 CFR Part 99. IDEA contains provisions that are broader than, and incorporate provisions of, FERPA and must be reviewed first before reviewing the applicable FERPA provisions. See, also IDEA/FERPA Crosswalk.

[4] U.S. Departments of Education and Health and Human Services, Policy Statement on Inclusion of Children with Disabilities in Early Childhood Programs (2015).

[5] The IDEA/FERPA cross-walk provides a helpful comparison of IDEA and FERPA requirements. Also helpful is the Early Childhood FAQs at Understanding the Confidentiality Requirements Applicable to IDEA Early Childhood Programs FAQs Oct. 2016.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Guidance on Creating an Effective Memorandum of Understanding to Support High-Quality Inclusive Early Childhood Systems (Oct. 5, 2022) - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Guidance on Creating Effective MOU to Support Early Childhood Systems (Oct. 5, 2002) PDF Vision: The Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and the Office of Head Start (OHS) envision a seamless system of early care and education with a coordinated approach to service delivery for infants, toddlers, and preschool children (young children) with disabilities...

# data[].attributes.headline
Inclusion in Head Start-Dear Colleague Letter 

# data[].attributes.subject
Inclusion in Head Start-Dear Colleague Letter 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
October 5, 2022

Dear State Directors of Special Education, Local Educational Agency Special Education Directors, Part B Section 619 Coordinators, Part C Coordinators, and Head Start Grant Recipients:

The U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Head Start (OHS) thank you for your tireless efforts and commitment to serving children and their families. You have worked incredibly hard to meet the individual needs of all children, including children with disabilities and their families, during the COVID-19 pandemic. OSEP and OHS acknowledge the disruptions to program operations and the additional challenges to provide a seamless continuum of early childhood education services, including for those children with disabilities who receive preschool special education and related services under section 619 of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), during the pandemic. This disruption has impacted the social, emotional, and academic development and functional performance of many young children. We also recognize the additional challenges associated with socio-economic factors affecting children and their families that have occurred during the pandemic.

Young children with disabilities and their families have been disproportionately affected by service disruptions.[2] As we start this new school year, OSEP and OHS want to emphasize the importance of providing children with disabilities and their families the services and supports that they need to thrive. The purpose of our correspondence is threefold. First, we want to remind you of the requirements under Part B of the IDEA to provide special education and related services to eligible preschool-aged children with disabilities. Second, we want to emphasize the importance of ongoing collaboration between the State educational agency (SEA), local educational agencies (LEAs), and their Head Start program partners to effectively meet IDEA requirements and ensure the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to children with disabilities. Lastly, our letter provides resources that may be helpful under both Parts B and C of the IDEA as well as Head Start to assist you in implementing high-quality early childhood programs for all children.

It is the long-standing policy of our Departments that young children with disabilities be included in high-quality early childhood programs, including Head Start. Expectations and requirements were outlined in the Departments' Policy Statement on Inclusion of Children with Disabilities in Early Childhood Programs (2015) and in OSEP's Dear Colleague Letter on Preschool Least Restrictive Environments (2017). Additionally, the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) released several Return to School Roadmap documents in 2021 to provide guidance interpreting requirements of IDEA, including providing FAPE in the least restrictive environment (LRE), in light of the many challenges of the pandemic and as schools and programs returned to in-person services. In January 2020, OHS released an Information Memorandum (IM) on Inclusion of Children with Disabilities ( ACF-IM-HS-20-01)highlighting requirements in the Head Start Program Performance Standards (HSPPS) related to the inclusion of children with disabilities or suspected delays, including a list of resources for recipients' use in implementation efforts. In 2021, OHS included guidance and resources on the Early Childhood Learning and Knowledge Center (ECLKC) website to support programs as they returned to in-person operations, with special considerations for children with disabilities and suspected delays.

The Departments acknowledge that the pandemic continues to present challenges to implementing appropriate programs and services for young children. Further, opportunities for some young children with disabilities to participate in inclusive early childhood settings have been more limited. However, OSEP and OHS want to emphasize that, notwithstanding these challenges, children with disabilities retain their rights under IDEA to receive appropriate special education and related services in accordance with their individualized education programs (IEP). No IDEA requirements have been waived. However, particularly since the pandemic, both OSEP and OHS have quantitative data and other information that indicate-

Initial evaluations to determine eligibility of children suspected of having a disability are being delayed;

Special education and related services included in IEPs are not being provided timely, or IEPs are not being fully implemented; and

Educational placement decisions for children with disabilities are not being made in accordance with IDEA's LRE requirements.

SEAs, LEAs, and Head Start programs all have responsibilities for implementing IDEA:

SEAs are responsible for establishing and enforcing policies and procedures to ensure full implementation of child find and other IDEA requirements to ensure that FAPE is made available to all eligible children with disabilities in the State;

LEAs are responsible for identifying, locating, and evaluating children suspected of having disabilities in a timely fashion and developing and implementing IEPs for eligible children with disabilities in accordance with the applicable IDEA requirements; and

Head Start programs are responsible for referring children and families for IDEA evaluations as well as supporting implementation of children's IEPs.

Understanding the roles and responsibilities of each of these partners is imperative to successfully implement IDEA and ensure FAPE in the LRE is made available for all children with disabilities in the State.[4]

The child find requirements in IDEA Part B require SEAs and LEAs to have policies and procedures in effect to ensure that all children with disabilities residing in the State who need special education and related services are identified, located, and evaluated, regardless of the severity of the disability, and consistent with IDEA requirements and the State's child find and eligibility standards. It should be noted that OSEP has previously issued guidance making clear that response to intervention strategies cannot be used to delay or deny a timely evaluation for a preschool child suspected of having a disability.

OSEP guidance issued throughout the pandemic has consistently communicated that IDEA requirements, including child find, are not waived and that the appropriate implementation of these requirements is more important than ever. As part of the IDEA Return to School Roadmap documents, OSERS issued additional guidance to SEAs, LEAs, parents, and other stakeholders, including Head Start programs, to reaffirm the importance of appropriate implementation of the child find obligations under Part B of the IDEA in Child Find Under Part B of the IDEA (Aug. 24, 2021).

Local Head Start programs are required to complete or obtain a current developmental screening to identify any concerns regarding a child's developmental skills within 45 calendar days of when the child first attends the program to identify children who may need further evaluation. With parental consent, Head Start personnel are then required to make a referral to the LEA. 45 C.F.R § 1302.33(a)(1).

Initial Evaluation and Eligibility Determination: LEAs must conduct the initial evaluation within 60 days from the date parental consent for the evaluation is received, or, if the State establishes a timeframe within which the initial evaluation must be conducted, within that timeframe. 34 C.F.R. § 300.301(c)(1). Upon completion of the administration of assessments and other evaluation measures, a group of qualified professionals and the parent of the child must determine whether the child is a child with a disability as defined in 34 C.F.R. § 300.8 (i.e., whether the child has a disability and, by reason thereof, needs special education and related services) and the child's educational needs. 34 C.F.R. § 300.306(a)(1). If the child is found eligible as a child with a disability under IDEA, a meeting to develop an IEP must be conducted within 30 days of the determination that the child needs special education and related services. 34 C.F.R. § 300.323(c)(1). As soon as possible following development of the IEP, special education and related services must be made available to the child in accordance with the IEP. 34 C.F.R. § 300.323(c)(2).

Development of the IEP: The IEP is a written statement developed by the IEP Team, which must include the child's parent, and is intended to guide the educational program of a child with a disability. The IEP includes a statement of the child's present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, including how the child's disability affects the child's involvement and progress in the general education curriculum or, in the case of a preschool-aged child, as appropriate, how the disability affects the child's participation in appropriate activities. The IEP also includes a statement of the measurable annual goals that are designed to meet the child's needs that result from their disability to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum; and to meet each of the child's other educational needs that result from their disability. 34 C.F.R. § 300.320(a). The IEP documents the special education and related services, supplementary aids and services, and program modifications and supports for school and program personnel that are necessary to enable the child (1) to advance appropriately toward attaining the annual goals; (2) to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum and to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities; and (3) to be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and children without disabilities in those activities. 34 C.F.R. § 300.320(a)(4). In addition, the IEP must include an explanation of the extent, if any, to which the child will not participate with children without disabilities in the regular class and in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities. 34 C.F.R. § 300.320(a)(5).

Determination of the Educational Placement in the LRE for the Child: After the child's IEP has been developed, the placement in which the IEP will be implemented is determined. Placement decisions for children with disabilities must be made on an individualized basis, based on the unique needs of each child (as described in the IEP), by a group of persons, including the parents, and other persons knowledgeable about the child, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the placement options. 34 C.F.R. § 300.116(a)(1). The child's placement must be decided in conformity with the LRE provisions in 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.114 through 300.118, must be based on the child's IEP, and must be determined at least annually. 34 C.F.R. § 300.116(a)(2), (b)(1), and (b)(2). To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, must be educated with children without disabilities.

The placement group should consider how the child is developing and learning in their current early childhood program (e.g., Head Start), and must determine whether and what supplementary aids and services would be needed to enable the education of the child in the regular education setting to be achieved satisfactorily.[5] The placement group, which always includes the parent (34 C.F.R. § 300.116(a)), may determine that the Head Start classroom is the LRE in which the child's IEP can be implemented. In all cases, placement decisions must be individually determined on the basis of each child's abilities and needs (which are reflected in the child's IEP), and not solely on factors such as category of disability, severity of disability, availability of special education and related services, configuration of the service delivery system, availability of space, or administrative convenience. Therefore, provider-related matters such as a shortage of IDEA personnel or differences in personnel requirements of the preschool program unrelated to the needs of the child (e.g., vaccination status or masking requirements), may not be factors considered when determining the educational placement in the LRE for a child with a disability.

Collaboration with Head Start to Support Implementation of IEPs: Head Start programs are required to design and implement a coordinated approach that ensures the full and effective participation of all children with disabilities and their families (45 C.F.R. § 1302.101(b)(3)). The Head Start Disability Services Coordinator serves as a resource for families to help navigate the special education system and to support the Head Start program's coordination with the LEA. The Disability Services Coordinator works in collaboration with Head Start program staff to ensure services are provided with appropriate facilities, program materials, curriculum, instruction, staffing, supervision, and partnerships, at a minimum, consistent with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The IDEA Return to School Roadmap guidance documents, including Development and Implementation of Individualized Education Programs in the Least Restrictive Environment under the IDEA (Sept. 30, 2021), clarify that, regardless of the COVID-19 pandemic, or the mode of instruction, children with disabilities are entitled to FAPE. The document provides guidance on topics that include meeting timelines, ensuring implementation of initial evaluation and reevaluation procedures, determining eligibility for special education and related services, and providing the full array of special education and related services that children with disabilities need in order to receive FAPE, as well as the implications of delayed evaluations and/or provision of special education and related services as identified on a child's IEP.

If a parent disagrees with an IEP Team decision or believes a public agency (e.g., LEA) has not followed IDEA requirements (e.g., initial evaluations are not completed timely or are not sufficiently comprehensive, special education and related services are not being provided in accordance with their child's IEP), IDEA provides a mechanism to file formal complaints - State complaints pursuant to 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.151 through 300.153 and due process complaints pursuant to 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.507 through 300.518 - and to request mediation pursuant to 34 C.F.R. § 300.506. Additional information is available in OSEP's Questions and Answers on IDEA Part B Dispute Resolution Procedures ( Jul. 23, 2013 and Jun. 22, 2020). The Center for Appropriate Dispute Resolution in Special Education (CADRE), an OSEP-funded technical assistance provider, has developed a series of guides and videos for parents and family members to use as companion resources[6] to OSEP's guidance documents.

The State complaint procedures in the IDEA implementing regulations provide for compensatory services as an available remedy when the SEA has found a failure or inability to provide appropriate services under IDEA in order to address the needs of the child (34 C.F.R. § 300.151(b)(1)). Similarly, courts have ordered such services to address the child's needs after a failure or inability to provide FAPE over a given period of time. For further information about compensatory services, see, in particular, Section D of Development and Implementation of Individualized Education Programs in the Least Restrictive Environment under the IDEA.

The IEP Team, with Head Start personnel, are encouraged to collaboratively strategize ways to ensure each child's IEP is implemented in the LRE as required by IDEA. For example, if there is a shortage of available special education and related services providers, the IEP Team may consider whether delivering the service virtually while the child is in the Head Start program is an appropriate methodology to meet the child's needs for the service identified on the child's IEP. The IEP Team may also consider if providing virtual coaching and consultation to Head Start personnel is an appropriate way to meet the child's needs for the service identified on the child's IEP. In addition, the IEP Team may consider using paraprofessionals and assistants who are appropriately trained and supervised in accordance with State law, regulation, or written policy, to assist in the provision of special education and related services to the child.

OSEP and OHS strongly encourage SEAs, LEAs, and Head Start programs to prioritize building and maintaining collaborative relationships to ensure that young children with disabilities eligible under IDEA Part B and enrolled in Head Start programs receive FAPE in the LRE. Collaborative relationships require effort during normal operations. During challenging circumstances such as the pandemic, collaboration must be more intentional to ensure effective communication and coordination, particularly when programs have differing policies and procedures. The companion document, Guidance on Creating an Effective Memorandum of Understanding to Support High Quality Inclusive Early Childhood Systems (2022), provides strategies and considerations to effectively formalize working partnerships.

Additionally, our Departments and affiliated technical assistance centers have developed multiple resources to support programs in carrying out the requirements of IDEA and the program requirements of Head Start and implementing high-quality inclusive early childhood programming. The list attached to the end of this letter provides links to many resources that address important topics such as implementing IDEA child find requirements under both Parts B and C of the IDEA, development, and implementation of IEPs, making sound placement decisions, supporting children's social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health needs, and tools to develop and sustain high-quality inclusive early childhood systems at the State, community, program, and classroom levels. We encourage you to use this information as you collaborate to educate young children with disabilities in your State and local communities.

We value your continued partnerships to provide special education and related services while maintaining the health and safety of young children with disabilities enrolled in Head Start programs. On behalf of our Departments, thank you for your hard work and dedication during these ever-changing times.

Sincerely,

/s/
Valerie C. Williams
Director
Office of Special Education Programs
U.S. Department of Education

/s/
Katie Hamm
Acting Director
Office of Head Start
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

General Information

Office of Head Start (OHS)

U.S. Department of Education (ED)

Joint Guidance/Policy Statements/Letters

Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center (ECTA)

[1] U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Supporting Child and Student Social, Emotional, Behavioral, and Mental Health Needs (2021).

[2] Center for Translational Neuroscience (2020, December 17). Overloaded: Families with Children Who Have Special Needs Are Bearing an Especially Heavy Weight, And Support Is Needed. Medium. https://medium.com/rapid-ec-project/overloaded-families-with-children-who-have-special-needs-are-bearing-an-especially-heavy-weight-4e613a7681bd.

[3] Free appropriate public education (FAPE) means special education and related services that (1) are provided at public expense, under public supervision, and without charge; (2) meet the standards of the SEA, including the requirements of IDEA; (3) include an appropriate preschool, elementary school, or secondary school education in the State involved; and (4) are provided in conformity with an individualized education program that meets the requirements of 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.320 through 300.324.

[4] Although not discussed here, other Federal laws protect preschool-aged children with disabilities participating in public programs: Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Section 504) and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (ADA). These laws prohibit discrimination based on disability. Information about these laws is available on the websites of the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights.

[5] IDEA also requires that, if the nature or severity of the child's disability is such that education in regular classes cannot be achieved satisfactorily, even with the provision of supplementary aids and services, the placement group could then determine the child's placement in a setting other than the regular educational environment. 45 34 C.F.R. § 300.114(a)(2). The LEA must make available the full continuum of alternative placements, including instruction in regular classes, special schools, home instruction, and instruction in hospitals and institutions, to meet the needs of all children with disabilities for special education and related services. 45 34 C.F.R. § 300.115. If there is an LEA public preschool program available, the LEA may choose to make FAPE available to a preschool child with a disability in the LEA's public preschool program. If the LEA does not offer, or offers only a limited range of, public preschool programs, the LEA must explore alternative methods to ensure that the LRE requirements are met for each preschool child with a disability. These methods may include: (1) providing opportunities for the participation of preschool children with disabilities in preschool programs operated by public agencies other than the LEA (e.g., Head Start or community-based childcare); (2) enrolling preschool children with disabilities in private preschool programs for nondisabled preschool children; (3) locating classes for preschool children with disabilities in regular public elementary schools; or (4) providing home-based services.

[6] This document contains examples of resources that are provided for the user's convenience. The inclusion of these resources is not intended to reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or products or services offered, by these entities. These resources may include materials that contain the views and recommendations of various subject-matter experts as well as hypertext links, contact addresses, and websites to information created and maintained by other public and private organizations. The opinions expressed in any of these materials do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of the U.S. Department of Education. The U.S. Department of Education does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of any outside information included in the materials that may be provided by these resources.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dear Colleague Letter on IDEA Services in Head Start (Oct. 5, 2022) - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ED and HHS Letter on Collaboration on HeadStart and FAPE. Oct. 5, 2022 (PDF) PDFView PDFED and HHS Letter on Collaboration on HeadStart and FAPE. Oct. 5, 2022 (PDF)October 5, 2022 Dear State Directors of Special Education, Local Educational Agency Special Education Directors, Part B Section 619 Coordinators, Part C Coordinators, and Head Start Grant...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Center for the Study of Child Care Employment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Original materials on the ECHOES site not otherwise published or attributed should be cited as follows:

Early Childhood History, Organizing, Ethos and Strategy, a project of the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment (2022) : Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, University of California, Berkeley.

Retrieved from https://cscce.berkeley.edu/projects/echoes/

©2022 Center for the Study of Child Care Employment

Questions about permission to reproduce ECHOES materials should be directed to the CSCCE Information Department, cscceinfo@berkeley.edu.

Acknowledgments

ECHOES is generously supported by the Heising-Simons Foundation.

The ECHOES Team includes Marcy Whitebook, Project Lead, and team members Claudia Alvarenga, Peggy Haack, Andrea Hernández, Silvia Muñoz, Rosemarie Vardell, Rachel Williams, and Barbara Zheutlin.

Design: The ECHOES website and accompanying material was built by and designed in collaboration with Benjamin Kuehn and Ana Fox-Hodess.

Editor: Deborah Meacham.

ECHOES could not have been accomplished without the advice and assistance of current and former CSCCE staff, especially the History Work Group: Lea Austin, Hopeton Hess, Caitlin McLean, Abby Copeman Petig, Penelope Whitney, and Ashley Williams.

Thanks also to other CSCCE staff members who supported the ECHOES project: Tobi Adejumo, Cynthia Dunn, Da-yup Kim, Yoonjeon Kim, Elena Montoya, Wanzi Muruvi, Krista Olson, Anna Powell, Jennifer Recinos, Jasmine Rivera, Marisa Schlieber, and Ferheen Abbasi.

We especially appreciate the time, advice, thought partnership, and review provided by many colleagues over the several years this project took shape: Richard Berger, Olivia Bloechinger, Miriam Calderón, Raúl Chávez, Ira Cutler, Rory Darrah, Deanna Gomby, Sabine Hattinger-Allende, Joan Lombardi, Justine Modica, Stacey Oliker, Carl Price, Sharon Ryan, Sandra Smith, Ruby Takanishi, and Linda Wilshusen.

We extend special thanks to: Dan Golodner, Archivist at the Center for the Child Care Workforce Collection of the Reuther Library at Wayne State University; Rebecca Federman, Electronic Resources Coordinator at the New York Public Library; and the archivists who helped us locate historical documents. ECHOES was greatly assisted by initial research grants from the New York Public Library and the Radcliffe Institute.

The views presented in ECHOES are those of the ECHOES team and may not reflect the views of the project's funders or those acknowledged for lending their expertise or providing input.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ECHOES: Early Childhood History, Organizing, Ethos, and Strategy Project - Center for the Study of Child Care Employment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Original materials on the ECHOES site not otherwise published or attributed should be cited as follows: Early Childhood History, Organizing, Ethos and Strategy, a project of the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment (2022) : Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, University of California, Berkeley.

# data[].attributes.headline
Early Childhood Systems Building Report: Leaders' Guide

# data[].attributes.subject
Early Childhood Systems Building Report: Leaders' Guide

# data[].attributes.body
Password: DECequity2021

# data[].attributes.headline
Language Access in ECE Program: Migration Policy Institute

# data[].attributes.subject
Language Access in ECE Program: Migration Policy Institute

# data[].attributes.headline
State-by-State Access to ECE by DLLs: Migration Policy Institute

# data[].attributes.subject
State-by-State Access to ECE by DLLs: Migration Policy Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dual Language Learners: Key Characteristics and Considerations for Early Childhood Programs

Dual Language Learners (DLLs)-that is, young children who have at least one parent who speaks a language other than English in the home-make up a large and growing share of U.S. children ages 0 to 5. This is the case both nationwide and in many states. And while Spanish is the top language in DLLs' households, dozens of other languages are also spoken, reflecting the diversity within this population.

This series of fact sheets shares important characteristics of DLLs' families that should be considered in early childhood education and care (ECEC) program and policy design and implementation, and particularly in efforts to adress barriers that have led DLLs to enroll in such programs at lower rates than non-DLL children. Among other things, the fact sheets look at languages spoken, household income, parental education, and access to the internet and computers. This information is based on MPI analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey, and the 25 states featured are those with the largest DLL populations.

Read the state fact sheets below:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dual Language Learners: Key Characteristics and Considerations for Early Childhood Programs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How many Dual Language Learner (DLL) children live in your state, and what share do they comprise of all children under age 5? What languages are most commonly spoken in their households? Answers to these and other questions that are critical to the design and implementation of early childhood programs that reach all children equitably are presented in a series of state-level data fact sheets.

# data[].attributes.headline
State-by-State Early Learning Assessments and Data Systems

# data[].attributes.subject
State-by-State Early Learning Assessments and Data Systems

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Early learning assessments are a critical source of information. Educators can use assessment data to tailor instruction, families to better understand their children's development, and state and local leaders to make policy and resource allocation decisions. We interviewed 53 state partners to gather information about their assessment and data practices. The information highlighted in this overview is not exhaustive or necessarily meant to serve as an exemplar, but rather is meant to provide examples of work states are doing in a few fundamental areas related to pre-k assessments and data systems. We hope this resource can assist states and spark ideas about possibilities for continuing to improve these systems.

Early Learning Assessments

Note: Hover over each state in the map above for a detailed description.

In Maryland, assessments are locally determined. Use of the Kindergarten Readiness Assessment and the Early Learning Assessment, both developed by the state, is encouraged, but providers determine if they want to administer the tools and which components of the tools to use.

In Wisconsin, assessments are locally determined. District and community-based providers must demonstrate that the tools are aligned with the early learning standards framework.

In Michigan, comprehensive, authentic assessments are selected from an approved list. The curriculum review committee regularly assesses potential child assessment tools. Approval decisions are made using a rubric, which is tightly connected to the state's early learning standards. Those standards hit all of the academic and non-academic domains for children, as well as standards for the classroom level.

In Minnesota, statute requires that Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten programs use Kindergarten Entry Profile (KEP) approved assessments, which must be aligned with the state's early learning standards. School Readiness Plus programs are required to use KEP-approved assessments as well. Both programs are required to collect entry and exit data, at a minimum. Assessment requirements vary by early learning program.

In North Carolina, assessments are selected from an approved list. Providers must use tools approved by the North Carolina Child Care Commission, which must be aligned with the state's early learning standards.

Ohio's QRIS has five levels. At level two, programs identify a comprehensive child-level assessment they plan to implement and complete any required training to administer it. At level three and above, providers must administer a comprehensive child-level assessment to all enrolled children.

Rhode Island providers must demonstrate they administer a child assessment if they reach level three on the QRIS. Standards for use of child assessment become more rigorous as providers move up QRIS levels.

Tennessee developed student growth portfolios to serve as a growth measure for children in grades and subjects that are not included in the Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System. All districts or charters serving children through Tennessee Voluntary Pre-K must use the pre-k/kindergarten student growth portfolio or an alternative growth measure (a state board approved universal reading screener). Data from the portfolios can be included in VPK teachers' annual evaluations.

Indiana requires that all On My Way Pre-K providers administer the Kindergarten Readiness Indicator.

Virginia requires, as of 2021, that all publicly supported pre-K classrooms participate in the Virginia Kindergarten Readiness Program (VKRP). VKRP includes the Phonological Awareness Literacy Screening, Early Mathematics Assessment System, and Child Behavior Rating Scale assessments.

California's Desired Results Developmental Profile (DRDP) assessment is designed so that educators can observe children's progress across multiple domains in both their home language and English. Because children learn English in different ways and at different rates, the four English Language Development (ELD) measures are related to the child's experiences with English and not the child's age. This approach allows educators to develop a comprehensive profile of each child's skills and behaviors. California originally developed the DRDP, but it is now used in other states, such as Minnesota.

Indiana requires training and certification for Kindergarten Readiness Assessment (KRA) assessors. The process is free and offered through the Indiana-Licensing and Education Access Depot (I-LEAD). Training is approximately 90 minutes and is available asynchronously or live. The certification process is approximately 30 to 45 minutes and conducted through a one-on-one virtual appointment where the assessor-in-training will use the KRA to assess the meeting host.

Mississippi requires the administrator of each school district pre-K program to complete the BRIGANCE training webinar. BRIGANCE is a screening tool used to identify children for delays and giftedness. The 45-minute webinar includes an overview of the Online Management System and information on how to prepare to screen, score a screener, interpret results, and identify the next steps.

New Jersey offers in-person and online training courses on using curriculum and assessments. This includes courses on Teaching Strategies GOLD, Classroom Assessment Scoring System, and Child Observation Record (COR) Advantage Assessment.

Ohio requires training for Early Learning Assessment (ELA) assessors. The three trainings are only open to educators employed in licensed early childhood programs. The ELA initial training is designed for those who will be observing, assessing, and scoring the ELA. This 10-hour training requires participants to attend three virtual sessions, complete on-demand modules, and pass a simulator and content knowledge test. Two additional optional trainings are available. The ELA training for support teachers is designed for assistant teachers, paraprofessionals, and educational aides. This training gives an overview of the ELA and how to document observations. The ELA technology training is for individuals who have been trained to use the ELA but need to be trained to use the technology supports in the Ready for Kindergarten Online system. Individuals will be required to pass the simulator and content knowledge test during this training.

The Virginia Kindergarten Readiness Program (VKRP) team provides online and in-person training on how to use and navigate VKRP and how to interpret VKRP data. There is also a Train-the-Trainer program that produces VKRP affiliate trainers who can teach others about the VKRP system.

Early Learning Data

Georgia's Cross Agency Child Data System (CACDS) stores data from programs and services for children birth to five and their families. The system serves as a single repository for early childhood data from Georgia's Department of Early Care and Learning, Department of Education, Department of Public Health, Department of Human Services, Division of Family and Children Services, and Head Start Association. CACDS provides information to help state leaders and researchers better understand how well programs are serving children and families. Programs contributing data to CACDS include Early Head Start, Head Start, Preschool Special Education Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA Part B), Childcare and Parent Services, Georgia's Pre-K, Rising Kindergarten Summer Transition program, Babies Can't Wait (IDEA Part C), Children 1st, and Georgia Home Visiting. Pre-K child-level and classroom participation data as well as de-identified child-level data and provider-level data are stored in CACDS.

The New Jersey Enterprise Analysis System for Early Learning (NJ-EASEL) is the state's early childhood integrated data system (ECID). Planning for NJ-EASEL, a cross-agency collaboration designed to collect and integrate early childhood data to measure the impact of early care and education programs on the children and families they serve, began in 2014, and production began in November 2018. When fully operational, the system will store information from 15 data systems regarding child, family, classroom, program, and workforce characteristics. The complete system will draw on data from the state Department of Education, Department of Human Services, Department of Children and Families, and Department of Health. It will provide longitudinal data to assess outcomes and the effectiveness of early learning programs. It will also help the state make informed business, fiscal, and policy decisions to provide better program delivery, and access to, early care and education.

Pennsylvania's Enterprise to Link Information for Children Across Networks (PELICAN), combines the state's early learning programs into a single information management system. PELICAN includes data on provider access to and participation in a range of social services. The systems that make up PELICAN include: child care provider licensing, Child Care Works (low-income subsidized child care), Keys to Quality (quality rating and improvement), Pre-K Counts (state-funded pre-K and state-funded Head Start Supplemental Assistance Program), Early Learning Network, Early Intervention, Provider Management, and Provider Self-Service. Data include early learning provider/program information as well as parent/caretaker and/or child information for the early learning programs previously mentioned. The Pennsylvania Office of Child Development and Early Learning (OCDEL), a joint project of the Departments of Education and Human Services, is currently underway to link general information about children participating in OCDEL's home visiting/family support programs to the PELICAN data.

Wisconsin's Early Childhood Integrated Data System links data from the state Department of Children and Families (DCF), Department of Health Services (DHS), and Department of Public Instruction (DPI). DCF shares child welfare, child care subsidy, TANF, and child support data. DHS shares birth record, maternal and child health, immunization, early hearing detection and intervention, lead screening and remediation, and birth to three developmental delay data. DPI shares student demographic data, attendance, enrollment, retention, suspension, English proficiency, and third-grade math and reading assessment data.

Texas's early childhood data system houses both kindergarten and prekindergarten student information (student demographics, classroom information, and assessment data). Data reporting is mandatory for public pre-K and kindergarten programs. These data are used to provide information about the effectiveness of early childhood education programs to families, school administrators, community stakeholders, and policymakers.

Ohio collects Early Learning Assessment (ELA) data from preschool special education programs and state-funded pre-K programs. The ELA data is used to monitor trends, understand children's growth, and measure progress for two literacy grants.

Louisiana collects Teaching Strategies GOLD data three times a year and holds public pre-K programs accountable for completing the assessment and uploading the data into the performance dashboard.

South Carolina's First Steps 4K program collects Teaching Strategies GOLD data. The data is used to evaluate programs, prevent duplicative services, and assign unique identifiers to link children to their longitudinal data records. Legislation requires First Steps 4K to include how children are doing on the Teaching Strategies GOLD assessment in the annual reports.

Alabama generates a unique identifier for children receiving child care subsidies and for children receiving Part C/Part B 619 services.

Florida assigns a unique identifier to children in Voluntary Pre-K, a state-funded program. This allows the Office of Early Learning at the Department of Education to access an unduplicated count of children and better understand factors that affect early childhood education participation.

Louisiana contracted with a vendor to create and maintain the statewide unique identification system, eScholar. Students served, and staff members working, in K-12 schools that serve children from birth through grade 12 are assigned a unique identifier. The unique identifier system allows school systems to assign identifiers and also acts as a central matching and validation hub for the data system. The identifier remains unchanged across time, location, and source. The Department is exploring ways to expand the unique identifiers to children served in mixed delivery early childhood settings (independent Head Start Centers and/or publicly funded seats in child care sites participating in the state accountability system).

New Mexico uses the eScholar Uniq-ID as the foundation for its Early Childhood Integrated Data System. The identifier tracks children's progress over time and as they move among programs, schools, and locations.

South Carolina is required by law to create a student unique identification number for children in the state-funded pre-K program, which is operated by the Department of Education and First Steps. The state is working on getting identifiers for children served in other programs, such as home visiting and parenting groups.

Georgia began its development of an integrated child care data system in 2010, using a grant from the State Advisory Council. In 2013, Georgia used the Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge grant to create the infrastructure needed to link data across state agencies. The CACDS Policy Manual outlines the system's goals, contents, governance, rules, and structure. Georgia also received a grant from ECDataWorks at the University of Pennsylvania to design a data visualization tool to improve the delivery of early childhood data.

Rhode Island has used multiple federal grant opportunities for the Executive Office of Health and Human Services Data Ecosystem. The Ecosystem was initially funded by a State Innovation Models (SIM) Test Grant in 2017. In 2019, the Ecosystem began receiving a 90/10 match for all costs from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Since then, the state has used a variety of funding sources to cover the 10 percent match, including the Preschool Development Grant B-5 (PDG B-5) and COVID-19 (CARES) stimulus funds. In particular, the state used PDG B-5 funds to expand early care and education data assets, develop data dashboards, and track children's participation in state-funded pre-K, Head Start, Early Intervention, and other subsidized child care programs. The Ecosystem is currently funded by CMS, state general revenue appropriation, the sale of data products, and a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) health disparities grant.

South Carolina is using the Preschool Development Grant B-5 and Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems Grant to build its early childhood integrated data system. The five goals of the system are to inform policies, create standard definitions and reports, identify and resolve disparities, connect early childhood data to longitudinal data systems, and understand the impacts of investment from birth through workforce.

Iowa transmits data from partners through Cybox, Iowa State University's Box.com service, which is a secure, cloud-based file storage system. The data are then automatically transferred to secure internal hosting in the data management platform.

Rhode Island hosts data in a cloud-based data warehouse. Data are linked using a custom-built matching algorithm and master person index. The data team uses R, Python, and other analytic resources to conduct exploratory work.

Acknowledgments

Thank you to the state and local leaders who contributed valuable insights and information to this project. We appreciate Abby Thorman, Alicia Miao, Amanda Williford, Amy Poirier, Beth Meloy, Bridget Cullen, Charlie Greir, Chelsea Richard, Crys O'Grady, Dan Harris, Deb Wise, Erika Anderson, Ginny Vitiello, Herman Knopf, Jan Hume, Janice Cole, Jeannie Allen, Jessica Whittaker, Jon Vaupel, Judy Walker, Karen Powell, Karissa Palmer, Kayla Rosen, Keli Houston, Leslie Doyle, Lillie Moffett, Lisa Brochard, Lisa Hildebrand, Lisa Howard, Marina Merrill, Martha Stickland, Michael Bock, Michelle Levy, Morgan Orr, Nicole Norvell, Olivia DeMarais, Pamela Truelove-Walker, Pat Sargent, Richard Lower, Sarah Nardolillo, Shelly Jackson, Sophia Hubbell, Steven Hicks, Susan Adams, Tiffany Wynn, Tonya Coston, Tonya Williams, and Wendy Uptain for sharing their expertise. Any errors are the authors' alone. Thank you to Sabrina Detlef for editorial insight. Thank you to Julie Brosnan, Fabio Murgia, and Riker Pasterkiewicz for their help in the production of this brief and to Aaron Loewenberg and Cara Sklar for managing this project.

This brief is based on research funded in part by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The findings and conclusions contained within are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect positions or policies of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A State Scan of Early Learning Assessments and Data Systems

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Introduction Early learning assessments are a critical source of information. Educators can use assessment data to tailor instruction, families to better understand their children's development, and state and local leaders to make policy and resource allocation decisions. We interviewed 53 state partners to gather information about their assessment and data practices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This site displays a prototype of a "Web 2.0" version of the daily Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official electronic version on GPO's govinfo.gov.

The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status. For complete information about, and access to, our official publications and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.

The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for legal research should verify their results against an official edition of the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
government federal register executive rulings notices

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Search, browse and learn about the Federal Register. Federal Register 2.0 is the unofficial daily publication for rules, proposed rules, and notices of Federal agencies and organizations, as well as executive orders and other presidential documents.

# data[].attributes.body
Racial equity tools--accountability

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Accountability is a keystone of racial equity work. Accountability, as used in this website, refers to creating processes and systems that are designed to help individuals and groups to be held in check for their decisions and actions and for whether the work being done reflects and embodies racial justice principles. Accountability in racial equity work is about constantly checking the work against a set of questions: How is the issue being defined? Who is defining it? Who is this work going to benefit if it succeeds? Who will benefit if the work does not succeed? How are risks distributed among the stakeholders? How will a group know if its plan has accounted for risks and unintended consequences for different racial and ethnic groups? What happens if people pull out before the goals are met? Who anointed the people and groups being relied on for the answers to these questions? Who else can answer these questions to guide the work?

"If you are doing your work without people with the lived experience, then my question to you is how are you accountable and how are you effective of being part of the movement?"

~ Mama Lila Cabbil, Activist, Author, and Water Warrior

We Will Not Cancel Us, Book Release Event with adrienne maree brown - Source Booksellers

This video has been disabled to play on other websites - but don't miss it - after clicking to start the video, click "Watch on YouTube" to be redirected.

A political movement to address systemic and state violence against African Americans. Per the Black Lives Matter organizers: "In 2013, three radical Black organizers-Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi-created a Black-centered political will and movement building project called #BlackLivesMatter. It was in response to the acquittal of Trayvon Martin's murderer, George Zimmerman. The project is now a member-led global network of more than 40 chapters. [Black Lives Matter] members organize and build local power to intervene in violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes. Black Lives Matter is an ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise. It is an affirmation of Black folks' humanity, our contributions to this society, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression."

Institutional racism refers specifically to the ways in which institutional policies and practices create different outcomes for different racial groups. The institutional policies may never mention any racial group, but their effect is to create advantages for whites and oppression and disadvantage for people from groups classified as people of color.

Examples:

Government policies that explicitly restricted the ability of people to get loans to buy or improve their homes in neighborhoods with high concentrations of African Americans (also known as "red-lining").

City sanitation department policies that concentrate trash transfer stations and other environmental hazards disproportionately in communities of color.

SOURCE: Flipping the Script: White Privilege and Community Buildingby Maggie Potapchuk, Sally Leiderman, Donna Bivens, and Barbara Major (2005).

Related Resources: (scroll down alphabetically to the box for " Institutional Racism ")

Location: FUNDAMENTALS / Core Concepts

Movement building is the effort of social change agents to engage power holders and the broader society in addressing a systemic problem or injustice while promoting an alternative vision or solution. Movement building requires a range of intersecting approaches through a set of distinct stages over a long-term period of time. Through movement building, organizers can:

Propose solutions to the root causes of social problems.

Enable people to exercise their collective power.

Humanize groups that have been denied basic human rights and improve conditions for the groups affected.

Create structural change by building something larger than a particular organization or campaign.

Promote visions and values for society based on fairness, justice, and democracy.

SOURCE: Julie Quiroz-Martinez, From the Roots: Building the Power of Communities of Color to Challenge Structural Racism (Akonadi Foundation, 2010), citing the Movement Strategy Center, which offers these further definitions.

Location: PLAN / Change Process

The systematic subjugation of one social group by a more powerful social group for the social, economic, and political benefit of the more powerful social group. Rita Hardiman and Bailey Jackson state that oppression exists when the following 4 conditions are found:

the oppressor group has the power to define reality for themselves and others,

the target groups take in and internalize the negative messages about them and end up cooperating with the oppressors (thinking and acting like them),

genocide, harassment, and discrimination are systematic and institutionalized, so that individuals are not necessary to keep it going, and

members of both the oppressor and target groups are socialized to play their roles as normal and correct.

Oppression = Power + Prejudice

SOURCE: "What Is Racism?" − Dismantling Racism Works (dRworks) web workbook.

Racial inequity is when two or more racial groups are not standing on approximately equal footing, such as the percentages of each ethnic group in terms of dropout rates, single family home ownership, access to healthcare, etc.

SOURCE: Ibram X. Kendi, , Random House, 2019.

1. The normalization and legitimization of an array of dynamics - historical, cultural, institutional, and interpersonal - that routinely advantage Whites while producing cumulative and chronic adverse outcomes for people of color. Structural racism encompasses the entire system of White domination, diffused and infused in all aspects of society including its history, culture, politics, economics, and entire social fabric. Structural racism is more difficult to locate in a particular institution because it involves the reinforcing effects of multiple institutions and cultural norms, past and present, continually reproducing old and producing new forms of racism. Structural racism is the most profound and pervasive form of racism - all other forms of racism emerge from structural racism.

2. For example, we can see structural racism in the many institutional, cultural, and structural factors that contribute to lower life expectancy for African American and Native American men, compared to white men. These include higher exposure to environmental toxins, dangerous jobs and unhealthy housing stock, higher exposure to and more lethal consequences for reacting to violence, stress, and racism, lower rates of health care coverage, access, and quality of care, and systematic refusal by the nation to fix these things.

SOURCE:

1. Chronic Disparity: Strong and Pervasive Evidence of Racial Inequalities by Keith Lawrence, Aspen Institute on Community Change, and Terry Keleher, Applied Research Center, for the Race and Public Policy Conference (2004).

2. Flipping the Script: White Privilege and Community Building by Maggie Potapchuk, Sally Leiderman, Donna Bivens, and Barbara Major (2005).

Location: FUNDAMENTALS / Core Concepts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Accountability is a keystone of racial equity work. Accountability, as used in this website, refers to creating processes and systems that are designed to help individuals and groups to be held in check for their decisions and actions and for whether the work being done reflects and embodies racial justice principles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We are working to change the face and future of progressive policy, and to build a more inclusive, equal, and just America.

People

Fostering the next generation of progressive public policy leaders, kickstarting a diverse cohort of policy leaders' careers, and investing in their individual and collective capacity to influence policy today and for years to come.

Ideas

Launching original research and policy recommendations across intersectional policy topics, so that the progressive policy agenda is driven by the perspectives of the next generation and those who are underrepresented at policymaking tables.

Learning

Incubating, piloting, and learning from new approaches to public policy development, engagement, and influence, all in the interest of developing the next-generation policy leaders.

Meet the Policy Entrepreneurs
See Next100 Team and Advisory Board

Powered By

Next100 is powered by The Century Foundation, a progressive public policy think tank that is celebrating its 100th birthday in 2019. To mark its centennial, TCF is launching this one-of-a-kind, independent think tank for the next generation of policy leaders. Next100 represents a continuation of TCF's 100-year commitment to elevating the best ideas and most diverse perspectives, and pursuing policy research with purpose.

The Century Foundation

Get regular updates from next-generation policy leaders on the issues that matter most to you.

Next100 is committed to providing a website that is accessible to the widest possible audience, regardless of ability. Should you experience any difficulty on this site, please let us know at [email protected] so that we can continue to improve accessibility.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We are working to change the face and future of progressive policy, and to build a more inclusive, equal, and just America. Fostering the next generation of progressive public policy leaders, kickstarting a diverse cohort of policy leaders' careers, and investing in their individual and collective capacity to influence policy today and for years to come.

# data[].attributes.body
Great landscape of Part C Infants/Toddlers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We are trauma informed, intersectional, feminist, reflexive, inclusive and committed to healing justice. We strive to operate in an organizational structure that models the mutual liberation that is possible when we practice decolonization and commit ourselves to uplifting one another.

We are a non-competitive, mutually reciprocal organization that strives to restore intergenerational knowledge transmission by uplifting and centering the voices of Indigenous, Black and POC womxn, non-binary, elders and youth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We are trauma informed, intersectional, feminist, reflexive, inclusive and committed to healing justice. We strive to operate in an organizational structure that models the mutual liberation that is possible when we practice decolonization and commit ourselves to uplifting one another.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cookie Consent - EarlyEdU and Cultivate Learning Media Library

# data[].attributes.body
Venue requests: 37% virtual; 48% in-person; 15% planned hybrid

Type of event: 30% series; 53% multi-day single event; 17% 1 day or less

Several requests for series; several launches/jumping points for Regional TTA

# data[].attributes.body
The value of drawing on people who have actually done the work; helps you attach your own ideas; we form connections about our stories; experience makes learning stick--making connections with new and old experiences.

Games----rock, paper, scissor, super stars; pass the puppy---

Choral counting-not a pencil-1-2-3-4-2-2-1

# data[].attributes.headline
Data visualizations as engagement strategies 

# data[].attributes.subject
Data visualizations as engagement strategies 

# data[].attributes.body
-Use visual data to show most salient points
-Easy comparison
-Making it accessible
-Horizontal bar graphs are preferred; avoid pie graphs b/c it's hard to interpret based on interpretation of angles (use of maximum to 1 or 2 known categories; labels on chart)
-Make visuals are clean as possible
-Use hue to show category; use brightness to show scale, consider common associations, avoid "default" colors
-consider culture and community first
-Use text meaningfully (best to put it directly in); keys are bad for accessibility
-does it pass "black and white" test; use hue and brightness to address this

Reach out to data people from DTL (Eboni and Kate)..they do infographics too

# data[].attributes.body
Storytelling for Social Change--free class on how to do this

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How can storytelling promote social change?

This course develops skills for using stories to deliver messages that affect audiences and shape attitudes for social change. Learn how building empathy and developing characters can offer multiple perspectives on complex problems. Social change happens when listeners or viewers identify with messages delivered through a protagonist they identify with. Theatre artists and professional storytellers offer expertise about how to craft a story that develops empathy and delivers impact.

You will watch video interviews with storytelling experts, view performances, and write your own story for social change. See how stories told from diverse perspectives contribute to understanding new perspectives about pertinent world issues. Learn how effective storytelling can be your tool for change.

This course is for anyone who wants to effectively tell an impactful story. This includes (but is not limited to):

Professionals working in not-for-profit or commercial sectors

Entertainment industry development teams

Writers and arts enthusiasts

Community workers and social activists

Marketing and development teams

Educators and public speakers

Customer service representatives

Please check out the course preview video in YouTube!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How can storytelling promote social change? This course develops skills for using stories to deliver messages that affect audiences and shape attitudes for social change. Learn how building empathy and developing characters can offer multiple perspectives on complex problems. Social change happens when listeners or viewers identify with messages delivered through a protagonist they identify with.

# data[].attributes.headline
Queenie's Crew: Abolition Books/Resources for Young Children

# data[].attributes.subject
Queenie's Crew: Abolition Books/Resources for Young Children

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
See You Soon: The Book

Queenie is the main character of See You Soon, a poignant, beautifully illustrated story of a little girl's worries when her Mama goes to jail, and the love that bridges the distance between them. See You Soon is written by New York Times Bestselling Author Mariame Kaba and illustrated by Bianca Diaz.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
See You Soon: The Book Queenie is the main character of See You Soon, a poignant, beautifully illustrated story of a little girl's worries when her Mama goes to jail, and the love that bridges the distance between them. See You Soon is written by New York Times Bestselling Author Mariame Kaba and illustrated by Bianca Diaz.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Social Change Ecosystem Map - Building Movement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Attribution: Deepa Iyer, Building Movement Project. SM, © 2018 Deepa Iyer.All rights reserved. All prior licenses revoked. October 2020 Version. This is a framework that can help individuals, networks, and organizations align and get in right relationship with social change values, individual roles, and the broader ecosystem. Interested in trainings/workshops with Deepa Iyer?

# data[].attributes.headline
A Comparison of MandatoryComprehensive Coordinated EarlyIntervening Services (CCEIS)and Voluntary Coordinated EarlyIntervening Services (CEIS)

# data[].attributes.subject
A Comparison of MandatoryComprehensive Coordinated EarlyIntervening Services (CCEIS)and Voluntary Coordinated EarlyIntervening Services (CEIS)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary has the authority to make CCDF grants to states. The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), within HHS, is responsible for federal programs that promote the economic and social well-being of families, children, individuals, and communities. ACF is the administrative agency charged with implementation, which is directed by ACF's Office of Child Care (OCC).

To support CCDF services, OCC establishes and oversees the implementation of child care policies and provides guidance and technical assistance to states as they administer CCDF programs.

The ACF website shows where the Office of Child Care fits in relation to other program offices within ACF. The Office of Child Care and Office of Head Start are at the same organizational level under the leadership of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Early Childhood Development. [1]

The map below shows the ACF Regions and highlights the OCC regional offices. States, territories, the District of Columbia, and tribal communities are organized into 10 Regions.

The regional offices oversee the programmatic and financial management of ACF programs in each Region and provide guidance to grantees and various entities responsible for administering the child care program. The regional offices report directly to the Office of the Director (Office of Child Care). Regional offices work directly with state and American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) grantees to review CCDF Plans and amendments, answer programmatic questions, conduct site visits, facilitate coordination between state and AI/AN grantees, and facilitate and approve technical assistance requests.

The 10 OCC Regions are composed of the following:

States: 50, plus the District of Columbia

Territories: 5 (American Samoa, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands)

Tribal Grantees: approximately 260 (receiving CCDF allocations) [2]

ACF Regional Map

Source: Office of Regional Operations. (March 2021). Regional offices. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/oro/regional-offices

[1] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families website: https://www.acf.hhs.gov/about/offices

[2] Office of Child Care. (2016). CCDF final rule tribal fact sheet. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/occ/resource/ccdf-final-rule-tribal-fact-sheet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary has the authority to make CCDF grants to states. The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), within HHS, is responsible for federal programs that promote the economic and social well-being of families, children, individuals, and communities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERIC - EJ1164890 - How the Word Gap Argument Negatively Impacts Young Children of Latinx Immigrants' Conceptualizations of Learning, Harvard Educational Review, 2017

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Early childhood education in grades preK-3 continues to contribute to future school success. Discrimination, however, can still be an obstacle for many children of Latinx immigrants because they often receive less sophisticated and dynamic learning experiences than their white, native-born peers. In this article, Jennifer Keys Adair, Kiyomi Sánchez-Suzuki Colegrove, and Molly E.

# data[].attributes.body
Kuchirko, Y. (2019). On differences and deficits: A critique of the theoretical and methodological underpinnings of the word gap. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 19(4), 533-562.

# data[].attributes.headline
Gorski (2007). Against Ruby Payne's Culture of Poverty nonsense

# data[].attributes.subject
Gorski (2007). Against Ruby Payne's Culture of Poverty nonsense

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Supporting School Readiness for All Children

The National Center on Early Childhood Development, Teaching, and Learning (NCECDTL) uses a house to represent five integral elements of quality teaching and learning for children ages birth to 5 in all program options. The five elements of the House Framework include:

Foundation: Providing nurturing, responsive, and effective interactions and engaging environments

First Pillar: Implementing research-based curriculum and teaching practices

Second Pillar: Using screening and ongoing assessment of children's skills

Roof: Embedding highly individualized teaching and learning

Center: Engaging parents and families

When these elements are connected, they form a single structure that surrounds the family in the center. The family is at the heart of the house because each house element is implemented in partnership with parents and families in their cultural and community context. Staff may use this House Framework to foster children's development and learning.

Nurturing, responsive, and effective interactions and engaging environments are the foundation for all learning in early childhood settings. Children and families benefit from interactions and environments that are culturally and linguistically responsive.

High-quality early learning group settings include:

A well-organized and managed learning environment

Social and emotional support

Intentional teaching practices, interactions, and materials that stimulate children's thinking, development, and skills

In home-based programs, interactions between the home visitor and parent that are nurturing, responsive, and intentional support the parents' role as their child's first and most important teacher. Home visitors also assist parents in using use their home and community as the learning environment.

Developmentally appropriate research-based curricula for group care settings, including curriculum enhancements and curricula that have been significantly adapted to meet the needs of specific populations, provide:

Content-rich learning experiences that support children's growth in key areas of development that are aligned with the Head Start Early Learning Outcomes Framework (ELOF)

Content through an organized developmental scope and sequence that includes plans and materials for learning experiences based on developmental progressions and how children learn

Home-based curricula, including curriculum enhancements and curricula that have been significantly adapted to meet the needs of specific populations, also provide content-rich experiences aligned with the ELOF and an organized developmental scope and sequence. Importantly, home-based curricula promote the parents' role as the child's first teacher through experiences that focus on the parent-child relationship.

Whether group care or home-based, curricula and related teaching practices are linguistically and culturally responsive to children and families. Children, parents, and families benefit from a high-quality, research-based curriculum when it is implemented with fidelity.

Screening and ongoing assessment are integral to supporting children's development and learning. Both are conducted in ways that are responsive to children's home languages and cultures. Developmental screening is an initial check to identify children who may need further evaluation to determine if they have a delay or disability. Screenings typically look at developmental, behavioral, motor, language, cognitive, social, and emotional skills.

Ongoing child assessment provides information about children's developmental levels and progress toward individual child goals as well as program school readiness goals. Program school readiness goals are aligned with the Head Start Early Learning Outcomes Framework (ELOF).

Ongoing assessment information, along with input from parents and families, helps staff determine a child's strengths and needs. Staff and families then adjust strategies to better support individualized learning and curriculum implementation.

Ongoing assessment information also helps improve teaching practices in center-based and family child care settings, and home visit strategies in home-based programs.

In Head Start and Early Head Start, child assessment instruments are aligned with the ELOF.

All children benefit from individualized learning opportunities that are linguistically and culturally responsive. However, some children may require more specialized support to access and participate in learning and social experiences and activities. This includes children with identified disabilities as well as children who are at risk for developmental delays. Specialized supports may occur in a variety of ways, such as:

Specific teaching practices and ways of interacting with children

Adaptations to daily schedules and the learning environment

Use of assistive technology

Other strategies that meet individual children's needs

Quality teaching practices recognize parents and families as children's lifelong educators and experts on what is best for their children's and family's well-being. Engaging parents and families in every aspect of the practices depicted in the House Framework means:

Communicating effectively with parents and families

Forming positive, goal-directed relationships with parents and families

Including parents and families in decisions and teaching practices for children's learning, like:

Screening and assessing children

Planning for interactions and learning environments

Implementing curriculum

Ensuring home-school consistency by working with parents and families to reinforce children's learning everywhere that children learn

Ensuring these practices are used in response to individual needs

Ensuring these practices are culturally and linguistically responsive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Framework for Effective Practice | ECLKC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about the five integral elements that build the Framework for Effective Practice, and apply its resources for all birth to five program options.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Educators

Early Care Educators: those working with learners birth - age 5 and/or their families in formal or informal educational settings

Educators Working for Disability Justice: those working for the abolition of carceral logics and spaces as they intersect with ableism

We define " Educator" broadly to include anyone who works in an educational capacity with learners of any age. This designation can include but is not restricted to teachers, paraprofessionals, administrators, mentors, before- and after-school program educators, coaches, and other titles. "Educator" includes those who work with learners on academic subjects as well as social-emotional learning, the arts, physical education, and all other realms of learning.

ATN recognizes that Early Care Educators are underpaid and disproportionately Black and Brown. They are less likely to have funding for professional development from their programs and their work is critically important in ensuring that Black and Brown children retain their joy.

Many educators are familiar with and have experience with multicultural education, antiracist education, and inclusive education. We are primarily interested in abolitionist education. Here's how we are thinking about the differences between the four types of education:

multicultural education: a teaching approach that centers the knowledge, histories, traditions, cultures, and contributions of diverse groups

antiracist education: a teaching approach that centers on acknowledging racism, whiteness, and how racist ideas become policy, creating inequities

inclusive education: a teaching approach that educates children with identified disabilities and children without identified disabilities in the same setting

abolitionist education: a teaching approach that centers on abolishing oppressive educational system, while loving, protecting, remembering, and healing children of color and their communities

We want to be clear that we are looking to fund abolitionist education and work. We understand that these are not discrete categories and there is overlap in the work we do, but proposals that reflect a focus only on multicultural education, antiracist education, or inclusive education are unlikely to be funded.

Applications closed at 11:59 PM EST on Monday, November 29, 2021.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Educators Early Care Educators: those working with learners birth - age 5 and/or their families in formal or informal educational settings Educators Working for Disability Justice: those working for the abolition of carceral logics and spaces as they intersect with ableism We define " Educator" broadly to include anyone who works in an educational capacity with learners of any age.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
the foundation awards the majority of its grants to u.s. 501(c)(3) organizations and other tax-exempt organizations identified by our staff.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Grant Opportunities | Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The foundation awards the majority of its grants to U.S. 501(c)(3) organizations and other tax-exempt organizations identified by our staff.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Filter grants from 2008 to present by focus area, geographic focus and commitment year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Application Deadlines: Applications Open May 1, 2020 at 12:00pm CT Full Proposal Deadline July 1, 2020 at 12:00pm CT Program contact: Jasmine Janicki smallgrants@spencer.org The Small Research Grants Program supports education research projects that will contribute to the improvement of education, broadly conceived, with budgets up to $50,000 for projects ranging from one to five years.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
2022

Police Curriculum in Early Childhood Classrooms in the Era of Black Lives Matter, Allison Sterling Henward, Ph.D., Pennsylvania State University

Research Planning Grant - Ideal Learning Head Start Expansion, Toscha Blalock, Trust for Learning

Evaluation of an Independent School District Newcomer Program, Brian Holzman, Ph.D., Texas A&M

RAPID-EC - Early Childhood and Child Care Workforce Survey Research, Philip Fisher, Ph.D., Stanford University

Determining Contextual Support for Individual and Collective Agency in Pre-K - 3rd Classrooms, Jennifer Keys Adair, Ph.D. The University of Texas at Austin

2021

Racial Equity in Discipline for Black Students (REIDBS), Dorinda Carter Andrews, Ph.D., Michigan State University

Pre-K through 12 Education and COVID-19: Landscape Analysis of Impact Indicators, Ashley Kazouh; Adam Hollowell, Ph.D.; Lauren Fox, Ph.D.; Keisha Bentley-Edwards, Ph.D. Final report available here. Public School Forum

Teacher Recruitment and Retention Trends across North Carolina and the Impact of COVID-19, Lauren Fox, Ph.D., Ashley Kazouh, MSW/MPA, and Adam Hollowell, Ph.D., Public School Forum

Improving Early Childhood Programs Through the Creation of Field-Building Tools: EC PRISM, Tyson Barker, Ph.D., Institute for Child Success

Creating Conditions for Success: Expanding and Deepening State Leadership on Early Learning 2021, Javaid Siddiqui, PhD, The Hunt Institute

2020

Expansion of ACSES: Evaluation of psychometric properties of the Assessing Classroom Sociocultural Equity Scale (ACSES-Global, ACSES-Snapshot, ACSES-Voice), Stephanie M. Curenton, Ph.D., Boston University

Guidance to K-12 Education on Responding to COVID-19, Natacha Blain, J.D., Ph.D., National Academy of Sciences

Proposal to Design the Data System and Monitoring Process for Assessing Compliance with the Leandro Requirements, Susan Mundry, EdM, Hoke County Schools

Early Career Mentoring and Research Capacity for the Baby's First Years Study, Greg Duncan, Ph.D., The University of California, Irvine

Ripeness for Change: An Analysis of Stat es' Readiness for Equity Policy Reform, Shantel Meek, PhD, Arizona State University

Creating Conditions for Success: Expanding and Deepening State Leadership on Early Learning, Javaid Siddiqi, Ph.D., The Hunt Institute

Ensuring Equitable Access to Childcare Amidst Covid-19, Dan Wuori, Ph.D., The Hunt Institute

Exploring the Opportunit y Gap for Young Children Birth to Age Eight, Natacha Blain, J.D., Ph.D., National Academy of Sciences

North Carolina Strategic Research Capacity and Partnershi p Initiative, Jenni Owen

Trust for Learning Supporting Equitable Educator Development (SEED) Fund, Trust for Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Police Curriculum in Early Childhood Classrooms in the Era of Black Lives Matter , Allison Sterling Henward, Ph.D., Pennsylvania State University Research Planning Grant - Ideal Learning Head Start Expansion , Toscha Blalock, Trust for Learning Evaluation of an Independent School District Newcomer Program , Brian Holzman, Ph.D., Texas A&M RAPID-EC - Early Childhood and Child Care Workforce Survey Research , Philip Fisher, Ph.D., Stanford University Determining Contextual Support for Individual and Collective Agency in Pre-K - 3rd Classrooms , Jennifer Keys Adair, Ph.D.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Please click here if you are not redirected within a few seconds.

What is the best graph to show percentage change?

Which graph shows best in showing change over time?

How do I graph a percentage change in Excel?

Nov 2, 2018 · Learn how to create a column chart that displays the percentage change between each column ...
Duration: 9:52
Posted: Nov 2, 2018

Feb 23, 2009 · Download file in "Excel Magic Trick" section: https://people.highline.edu/mgirvin/e... Learn about ...
Duration: 6:41
Posted: Feb 23, 2009

Washington DC (Hagerstown MD), Virginia

From your IP address - Learn more

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
best way to graph changes in percent over time - Google Search

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Please click here if you are not redirected within a few seconds. What is the best graph to show percentage change? Which graph shows best in showing change over time? How do I graph a percentage change in Excel?

# data[].attributes.body
Audience engagement tool

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Explore

Discover new ways to use Zoom solutions to power your modern workforce.

Learn

Access expert-led tutorials on Zoom products and features.

Connect

Network with other Zoom users, and share your own product and industry insights.

Support

Get documentation on deploying, managing, and using the Zoom platform.

Download Zoom Client

Keep your Zoom client up to date to access the latest features.

Download Center

Zoom Virtual Backgrounds

Download hi-res images and animations to elevate your next Zoom meeting.

Browse Backgrounds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Video Conferencing, Web Conferencing, Webinars, Screen Sharing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Zoom is the leader in modern enterprise video communications, with an easy, reliable cloud platform for video and audio conferencing, chat, and webinars across mobile, desktop, and room systems. Zoom Rooms is the original software-based conference room solution used around the world in board, confer…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Introduction to Making a Qualtrics Survey 2021 Update!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Every year, as required by federal law, OSSE examines data to determine if significant disproportionality, significant discrepancy and disproportionate representation is occurring in the state and its local education agencies (LEAs). These requirements are referred to as Equity Requirements under IDEA.

Below you will find more information about each requirement including definition, methodology and process overview.

Definitions

Equity Requirements: Methodologies

[1] To gradually implement multi-year flexibilities, for the 2020-21 school year review, OSSE will identify LEAs that were identified as having a significant discrepancy and/or disproportionate representation for the 2020-21 school year only. For the 2021-22 school year review, OSSE will identify LEAs that were identified as having significant discrepancy and/or disproportionate representation two consecutive years in the same analysis category. Beginning in the 2022-23 school year, OSSE will only flag LEAs that are identified in the same analysis category for three consecutive years. This will align with OSSE's current year of data used for significant disproportionality.

Process Overview

Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Equity Requirements under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Every year, as required by federal law, OSSE examines data to determine if significant disproportionality, significant discrepancy and disproportionate representation is occurring in the state and its local education agencies (LEAs). These requirements are referred to as Equity Requirements under IDEA. Below you will find more information about each requirement including definition, methodology and process overview.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
disability justice

History of Disability Justice (Source)

The term disability justice was coined out of conversations between disabled queer women of color activists in 2005, including Patty Berne of Sins Invalid (and Mia Mingus & Stacy Milbern, who eventually united with Leroy Moore, Eli Clare, and Sebastian Margaret) seeking to challenge radical and progressive movements to more fully address ableism.
"Disability Justice was built because the Disability Rights Movement and Disability Studies do not inherently centralize the needs and experiences of folks experiencing intersectional oppression, such as disabled people of color, immigrants with disabilities, queers with disabilities, trans and gender non-conforming people with disabilities, people with disabilities who are houseless, people with disabilities who are incarcerated, people with disabilities who have had their ancestral lands stolen, amongst others." (Source)
Disability justice recognizes the intersecting legacies of white supremacy, colonial capitalism, gendered oppression and ableism in understanding how people's' bodies and minds are labelled ' deviant', ' unproductive', ' disposable' and/or ' invalid '.

Introductory Readings
Sick Woman Theory Wherever You Are is Where I Want to Be: Crip Solidarity, Mia Mingus A Babe-Licious Healing Justice Statement, BadAss Visionary Healers (BAVH) Dialogue on Disability Justice Movement Building with Patty Berne Disability Solidarity: Completing the "Vision for Black Lives" Addressing the Criminalization of Disability from a Disability Justice Framework: Centring The Experiences of Disabled Queer Trans Indigenous and People of Colour State Sanctioned: Disability
Introductory Videos
Ableism is The Bane of My Motherfuckin' Existence "Is medicine about quality of life, or is it about social control? And perpetuating this idea that you have a good body?" - Stacey Milbern My Body Doesn't Oppress Me, Society Does: Barnard Center for Research on Women

Impairment: Physical or neurological manifestation vs. Disability: What society creates as barriers because of the impairment

"If I'm in a place where my access needs are being met, then my impairment isn't so significant." - Stacey Milbern

"It's not easy to live with an impairment. There are time when it's not convenient to have a body. But that's not what oppresses us. What oppresses us is living in a system that disregards us, is violent towards us, essentially wants to subjugate our bodies or kill us -- that's oppressive. My body doesn't oppress me." - Patty Berne

"There are always going to be people in pain. That's just the nature of being in a body. But the social body we can change. And I think it requires a power analysis." - Patty Berne

Disability Justice Curricula (Source)

CONTEXT

ABLEISM AND DISABILITY JUSTICE

ACCESSIBILITY AND INCLUSION

STATE VIOLENCE AND DISABILITY JUSTICE

DESIRABILITY AND SEXUALITY

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Other Resources:

About a third of prison and jail inmates reported a disability in 2011-2012, PR Newswire

'Ban the Box': Good for people with disabilities, U.S. Department of Labor blog

Supporting, not imprisoning, Aboriginal people with disabilities, could save millions, The Conversation,

Why are so many mentally ill people imprisoned in PA? The Pittsburgh Courier

A Psychologist as Warden? Jail and Mental Illness Intersect in Chicago, New York Times

In U.S. Prisons, Psychiatric Illness is Often Met with Brute Force, TruthOut

Breaking the School to Prison Pipeline for Students with Disabilities - National Council on Disability

Brave New Films Releases "Over-Criminalized" - film exploring use of prisons to treat mental illness

Deaf in Prison: Examining Social Exclusion within Systems - from Adler University blog

Mental Health Courts: Challenges, Questions, and Tensions - Center for Court Innovation

Callous and Cruel, Human Rights Watch Report

Mentally Ill Inmates are Routinely Physically Abused, Study Says, Timothy Williams for the New York Times

Solitary Confinement Makes Teenagers Depressed and Suicidal, Ian Kysel for Washington Post

Dealing with Dementia Among Aging Criminals, New York Times

Exploring what it means when police refuse to provide medical attention to their victims, Daily Kos

Jails Are No Substitute for a Mental Health System, The Hill

Cook County Jail a 'mental health provider,' says Sheriff Tom Dart, threatening lawsuit, The Huffington Post

Three bills in Florida on police and disability, David Perry (blog)

Black, Autistic, and Killed by Police, Chicago Reader

Risk of being killed by police is 16 times greater for people with mental illness, The Guardian

Is handcuffing special needs kids acceptable discipline? The Herald Times Online

Distraught People; Deadly Results, The Washington Post

Police Brutality, Mental Illness, and Race in the Age of Mass Incarceration, Austin McCoy for Nursing Clio (blog)

Shocking video of police shooting shows why we need to talk about how cops deal with the mentally ill, Fusion

A Tribute to Tanisha Anderson: African American, Schizophrenic, and Lost on the Streets, Huffington Post (see also Cleveland -> Tanisha Anderson)

Man Tries to Inform Police Son is Autistic - Gets Assaulted, Tasered, Cassandra Fairbanks for The Free Thought Project

Autism and Race (organization/website)

Kim Discusses Disability, Race, and Infrastructural Neglect, The Wesleyan Argus

What Racial, Disability, and LGBT Justice Have in Common, PBS News Hour

Public Schools' Disturbing Conflation of Race and Disability, Al-Jazeera America

Race, Depression, and Sandra Bland, The Cavalier Daily

Disabled Black Lives Matter, Huffington Post

We Must Change the Ableist Language Surrounding Sandra Bland's Death, For Harriet

Mental Illness and Jails: Race is Left Out of the Equation, TruthOut

Police Brutality, Mental Illness, and Race in the Age of Mass Incarceration, Austin McCoy for Nursing Clio (blog)

Shooters of color are called 'terrorists' and 'thugs,' why are white shooters called 'mentally ill'? - Anthea Butler op-ed in the Washington Post

Care Under Conditions of Capitalism and White Supremacy: An Interview with Mia Mingus, Bluestockings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The term disability justice was coined out of conversations between disabled queer women of color activists in 2005, including Patty Berne of Sins Invalid (and Mia Mingus & Stacy Milbern, who eventually united with Leroy Moore, Eli Clare, and Sebastian Margaret) seeking to challenge radical and progressive movements to more fully address ableism.