The use of telepractice in early intervention (EI) has grown since the COVID-19 pandemic. Current research reveals several benefits and challenges when using telepractice. One benefit is that telepractice facilitates the use of caregiver coaching practices, which are recommended in the field. We qualitatively analyzed open-ended survey responses and interview data to understand providers’ perspectives about coaching via two models, telepractice versus in-person. We developed eight themes that answer our research questions: participants’ preferences and decisions between the two models (preference for a hybrid model, balancing multiple priorities when making decisions about service delivery), benefits of telepractice (flexibility in scheduling and location, increased routines-based intervention, enhanced family engagement, health and safety), and challenges of telepractice (families who desire or need in-person sessions, logistical issues). We discuss the promise of a hybrid model and decisions/misconceptions about service delivery format, including practical and systemic implications to address these issues.
BehlD. D.BlaiserK.CookG.BarrettT.Callow-HeusserC.BrooksB. M.DawsonP.QuigleyS.WhiteK. R. (2017). A multisite study evaluating the benefits of early intervention via telepractice. Infants and Young Children, 30(2), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1097/IYC.0000000000000090
2.
BrantlingerE.JimenezR.KlingnerJ.PugachM.RichardsonV. (2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100205
3.
BravoA.IbañezL. V.ScottS.DickC.CarpentierP.StoneW. L. (2023). Telehealth delivery in Part C early intervention: Provider and caregiver perspectives. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 53, 4545–4559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-022-05734-5
4.
BrownJ. A.WoodsJ. J. (2016). Parent-implemented communication intervention: Sequential analysis of triadic relationships. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 36(2), 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121416628200
5.
CampbellD. R.GoldsteinH. (2021). Gensis of a new generation of telepractitioners: The COVID-19 pandemic and pediatric speech-language pathology services. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 30, 2143–2154. https://doi.org/10.1044/2021_AJSLP-21-00013
6.
CampbellP. H.SawyerL. B. (2009). Changing early intervention providers’ home visiting skills through participation in professional development. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 28, 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121408328481
7.
ChildressD.Schumaker-MurphyM. (2024). Tele-intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned from early intervention practitioners. Journal of Early Intervention, 47(2), 165–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/10538151241238007
8.
CiupeA.SalisburyC. (2020). Examining caregivers’ independence in early intervention home visit sessions. Journal of Early Intervention, 42(4), 338–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815120902727
9.
DeckerK. D.MeldrumJ.VaterlausJ. M.FosterT. D. (2021). Parents’ Part C experiences in rural areas: Alignment with recommended practices. Journal of Early Intervention, 43(2), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815120953484
10.
DouglasS. N.MeadanH.KammesR. (2020). Early interventionists’ caregiver coaching: A mixed methods approach exploring experiences and practices. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 40(2), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121419829899
11.
FlemingJ. L.SawyerL. B.CampbellP. H. (2011). Early intervention providers’ perspectives about implementing participation-based practices. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 30(4), 233–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121410371986
12.
FriedmanM.WoodsJ.SalisburyC. L. (2012). Caregiver coaching strategies for early intervention providers: Moving toward operational definitions. Infants & Young Children, 25(1), 62–82. https://doi.org/10.1097/IYC.0b013e31823d8f12
13.
IDEA. (2004). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004. 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq.
14.
Mahurin-SmithJ.LorioC. M. (2025). Early intervention providers’ perspectives on the use of telepractice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 10(2), 640–650. https://doi.org/10.1044/2024_PERSP-24-0010
15.
McCarthyM.LeighG.Arthur-KellyM. (2022). Comparison of participants’ behaviors during telepractice and in-person family-centered early intervention: An exploratory study. Infants & Young Children, 35(3), 222–247. https://doi.org/10.1097/IYC.0000000000000218
16.
MeadanH.ChungM. Y.SandsM. M.SnodgrassM. R. (2020). The cascading coaching model for supporting service providers, caregivers, and children. Journal of Special Education, 54(2), 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466919884070
17.
MeadanH.DouglasS. N.KammesR.Schraml-BlockK. (2018). “I’m a different coach with every family”: Early interventionists’ beliefs and practices. Infants and Young Children, 31(3), 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1097/IYC.0000000000000118
18.
PletcherL. C.YounggrenN. O. (2013). The early intervention workbook: Essential practices for quality services. Brookes Publishing.
19.
Retamal-WalterF.WaiteM.ScarinciN. (2023). Families’ and professionals’ perspectives of building and maintaining engagement in telepractice early intervention for young children with communication disability. Disabilities Rehabilitation, 45(7), 1165–1177. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2022.2055161
20.
RushD.SheldenM. (2020). The early childhood coaching handbook (2nd ed). Brookes Publishing.
21.
SaldañaJ. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE.
22.
SalisburyC.WoodsJ.SnyderP.ModdelmogK.MawdsleyH.RomanoM.WindsorK. (2018). Caregiver and provider experiences with coaching and embedded intervention. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 38(1), 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121417708036
23.
ShinY.ParkE. J.LeeA. (2025). Early intervention for children with developmental disabilities and their families via telehealth: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 27, 66442. https://doi.org/10.2196/66442
24.
StewartS. L.ApplequistK. (2019). Diverse families in early intervention: Professionals’ views of coaching. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 33(2), 242–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2019.1577777
25.
TomczukL.StewartR. E.BeidasR. S.MandellD. S.PellecchiaM. (2022). Who gets coached? A qualitative inquiry into community clinicians’ decisions to use caregiver coaching. Autism, 26(3), 575–585. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211059499
26.
WilliamsC. S.HardyJ. K.SawyerG. E.Light-ShrinerC. (2024). What supports and barriers influence early intervention providers’ practices? A qualitative study. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/02711214241296372
27.
WilliamsC. S.OstroskyM. M. (2023a). Early interventionists’ perspectives about changes in caregiver coaching during COVID-19: A mixed methods study. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 43(3), 227–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/02711214231199547
28.
WilliamsC. S.OstroskyM. M. (2023b). Factors that contributed to early intervention providers’ use of caregiver coaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 44(2), 726–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/02711214231210458
29.
WindsorK. S.WoodsJ.KaiserA. P.SnyderP.SalisburyC. (2019). Caregiver-implemented intervention for communication and motor outcomes for infants and toddlers. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 39(2), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0271121418815250
30.
YangH. W.BurkeM.IsaacsS.RiosK.Schraml-BlockK.Aleman-TovarJ.TompkinsJ.SwartzR. (2021). Family perspectives toward using telepractice in early intervention. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 33(2), 197–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-020-09744-y
