Part H of PL 99-457 requires that each state develop a definition of “developmentally delayed infants and toddlers." This article describes the results of a Carolina Policy Studies Program content analysis of 39 state definitions. The content analysis addressed: (a) types of children to be included; (b) those conditions listed as established conditions; (c) criteria used to determine delay; and (d) criteria delineated for “at risk.” The content analysis revealed several problem areas and issues related to the various components of the states' definitions. A framework to be used in developing an adequate eligibility policy is included.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brazelton, T.B. (1989). Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale. (Clinics in Developmental Medicine No. 88). Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott.
2.
Harbin, G., Gallagher, J., & Lillie, T. (in press). States' progress in implementing Part H of P.L. 99–457. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Carolina Institute for Child and Family Policy, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center.
3.
Harbin, G.L., & McNulty, B. (1990). Policy implementation perspectives in service coordination and interagency cooperation. In S. Meisels & J. Shonkoff (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood interventions (pp. 700–722). New York: Cambridge University Press.
4.
Harbin, G., Terry, D., & Dagvio, C. (1989). Status of the states' progress toward developing a definition for developmentally delayed as required by PL. 99–457, Part H. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Carolina Institute for Child and Family Policy, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center.
5.
Kochanek, T. T., Kabacoff, R.I., & Lipsitt, L.P. (1987). Early detection of handicapping conditions in infancy and early childhood: Toward a multivariate mode. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 8, 411–420.
6.
Meisels, S.J. (1988). Developmental screening in early childhood. The interaction of research and sound policy. In L. Breslow, J.E. Fielding, & L.B. Lave (Eds.), Annual review of public health (Vol. 9, pp. 527–550). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
7.
Meisels, S.J., & Wasik, B.A. (1990). Who should be served? Identifying children in need of early intervention. In S.J. Meisels & J.P. Shonkoff (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (pp. 605–632). New York: Cambridge University Press.
8.
O'Donnell, K. (1989). Neurobehavioral assessment of the newborn infant. In D. Bailey & M. Wolery (Eds.), Assessment of preschool handicapped children (pp. 166–201). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
9.
Sameroff, A.J., & Chandler, M.J. (1975). Perinatal risk and the continuum of caretaking causality. In F. Horowitz, M. Hetherington, S. Scarr-Salapatek, & G. Siegel (Eds.), Review of child development research (Vol. 4, pp. 187–244). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10.
Sameroff, A.J., Seifer, R., Barocas, R., Zax, M., & Greenspan, S. (1987). Intelligence quotient scores of 4 year old children: Socialemotional risk factors. Pediatrics, 79, 343–350.
11.
Simeonsson, R.J., & Bailey, D.B. (1989). Essential elements of the assessment process. In D. Bailey & M. Wolery (Eds.), Assessment of preschool handicapped children (pp. 25–41). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
12.
Simeonsson, R.J., Huntington, G.S., Short, R.J., & Ware, W. (1982). The Carolina Record of Individual Behavior: Characteristics of handicapped infants and children. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 2(2), 43–55.
13.
Smith, B., & Strain, P.S. (1988). Early childhood special education in the next decade: Implementing and expanding P.L. 99–457. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 8(1), 37–47.
14.
Werner, E.E. (1986). A longitudinal study of perinatal risk. In D.C. Farran & J.D. McKenney (Eds.), Risk in intellectual and psychological development (pp. 3–28). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
