The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of six state-wide policies and procedures used in the family assessment process within early intervention services. This qualitative study examined the administrative understanding of the family assessment federal regulations, state policies and procedures, and local implementation from the perspective of the Part C coordinator in the state, using in-depth interviews that included six state Part C coordinators. Based on the findings of this study, two broad conclusions are offered, and recommendations are made for early interventionists in rural settings, Part C coordinators, and researchers in the area of family assessment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaileyD. B.Jr., (1991a). Building positive relationships between professionals and families. In McGonigelM., KaufmannR. K., & JohnsonB. H. (Eds.), Guidelines and recommended practices for the Individualized Family Service Plan (pp. 29-38). Bethesda, MD: Association for the Care of Children's Health.
2.
BaileyD. B.Jr., (1991b). Issues and perspectives on family assessment.Infants & Young Children, 4(1), 26-34.
3.
BaileyD. B.Jr., SimeonssonR. J., WintonP. J., HuntingtonG. S., ComfortM., IsbellP., & HelmJ. M. (1986). Family-focused intervention: A functional model for planning, implementing, and evaluating individualized family services in early intervention.Journal of the Division for Early Childhood, 10(2), 156-171.
4.
CampbellP. H. (2011). Using the assessment of family activities and routines to develop embedded programming. In McLeanM. E. & SnyderP. A. (Eds.), Gathering information to make informed decisions: Contemporary perspectives about assessment in early intervention and early childhood special education (pp. 64-78). Missoula, MT: The Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children.
5.
CharmazK. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6.
CreswellJ. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
DunstC. J. (1985). Rethinking early intervention.Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 5(1-2), 165-201.
8.
DunstC. J., TrivetteC. M., & JodryW. (1997). Influences of social support on children with disabilities and their families. In GuralnickM. (Ed.), The effectiveness of early intervention (pp. 499-522). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
FixsenD., BlaseK., MetzA., & Van DykeM. (2013). Statewide implementation of evidence-based programs.Exceptional Children, 79(2), 213-230.
11.
FixsenD. L., NaoomS. F., BlaseK. A., FriedmanR. M., & WallaceF. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature (FMHI Publication #231). Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network.
12.
GallagherJ., & DesimoneL. (1995). Lessons learned from implementation of the IEP: Applications to the IFSP.Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 15(3), 353-378.
13.
GlaserB., & StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
14.
HebbelerK., SpikerD., & KahnL. (2012). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act's early childhood programs: Powerful vision and pesky details.Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 31(4), 199-207.
15.
HowardV.F., WilliamsB.F., MillerE.A., & AikenE. (2014). Very young children with special needs: A foundation for educators, families, and service providers. Boston, MA: Pearson.
16.
McWilliamR. A. (2003). RBI Report Form. Center for Child Development, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN.
17.
McWilliamR. A. (2012). Implementing and preparing for home visits.Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 31(4), 224-231.
18.
McWilliamR. A., CaseyA. M., AshleyD., DeJongK., FielderJ., JenkinsA., MickelJ., RowleyP., StricklinS. & VotavaK. (2011). Assessement of family-identified needs through the routines-based interview. In McLeanM. & SnyderP. (Eds.), Gathering information to make informed decisions: Contemporary perspectives about assessment in early intervention and early childhood special education (pp. 43-63). Missoula, MT: The Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
McWilliamR. A., CaseyA. M., & SimsJ. L. (2009). The routines-based interview: A method for gathering information and assessing needs.Infants & Young Children, 22(3), 224-233.
20.
MottS. E., FewellR. R., LewisM., MeiselsS. J., ShonkoffJ. P., & SimeonssonR. J. (1986). Methods for assessing child and family outcomes in early childhood special education programs: Some views from the field.Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 6(2), 1-15.
21.
SextonD., SnyderP., RheamsT., Barron-SharpB., & PerezJ. (1991). Considerations in using written surveys to identify family strengths and needs during the IFSP process.Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 11(3), 81-91.
22.
StraussA., & CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
WintonP. J., & BaileyD. B.Jr., (1990). Early intervention training related to family interviewing.Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 10(1), 50-62.
24.
WoodsJ. J., & LindemanD. P. (2008). Gathering and giving information with families.Infants & Young Children, 21(4), 272-284.
25.
VincentL. J., & SalisburyC. L. (1988). Changing economic and social influences on family involvement.Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 8(1), 48-59
