TEXAS HEAD START STATE COLLABORATION OFFICE HEAD START EARLY

Document Sample
TEXAS HEAD START STATE COLLABORATION OFFICE HEAD START EARLY Powered By Docstoc
					                                   TEXAS 
                             HEAD START STATE 
                          COLLABORATION OFFICE 
                               HEAD START/ 
                             EARLY HEAD START 
                         NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY
                         
                         
                                   2008‐2009 Survey Results 




    The goal of Head Start/Early Head Start is to increase the social 
     competence of children in low‐income families and children 
       with disabilities, and to improve their chances for school 
                                  success. 



                                      1 
 
    2 
 
FOREWORD AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report, entitled Texas Head Start/Early Head Start Needs Assessment 2008-2009 Survey
Results, presents findings from a survey of staff and directors representing 34 of the 86
grantees in Texas for the school year 2008-2009. The purpose of the survey was to gather
information for site-based assessment of Head Start/Early Head Start programs with specific
focus on cooperation, coordination, and collaboration within ten key activity areas:
    1) Health Care
    2) Children Experiencing Homelessness
    3) Family/Child Assistance
    4) Child Care
    5) Family Literacy Services
    6) Children with Disabilities and Their Families
    7) Community Services
    8) Publicly Funded Pre-K Partnership Development (Education)
    9) Head Start Transition and Alignment with K-12 (Education)
    10) Professional Development

This report was prepared and funded by the Texas Head Start State Collaboration Office.




                                           Authors:
                 Mrs. Zynda Patton, Booz Allen Hamilton State T/TA Manager
    Ms. Maia Shelby, Booz Allen Hamilton Grantee Performance Support Specialist/Liaison to
                                           THSSCO
                 Mrs. Catherine Chennisi, Texas Trainer Registry Coordinator
         Dr. Dorothy J. Calhoun, Director Texas Head Start State Collaboration Office




                                              3 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Forward and Acknowledgements                                                                    3

Introduction                                                                                    6
       Overview of Head Start Program                                                           6
       Summary of Texas Head Start Programs                                                     7
       Map: Texas Head Start/Early Head Start Programs                                          9

Study Design                                                                                    10
       Study Objectives                                                                         10
       Study Planning Process                                                                   10
       Survey Instrument                                                                        10
       Methodology                                                                              11
       Presentation of Findings                                                                 11

Survey Results                                                                                  12

Key Activity Area 1: Health Care                                                                12
       Involvement with health care                                                             12
       Issues regarding health care                                                             13
       Efforts to address health care needs that are working well                               13
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       14

Key Activity Area 2: Children Experiencing Homelessness                                         14
       Involvement with homelessness                                                            14
       Issues regarding homelessness                                                            16
       Efforts to address homelessness needs that are working well                              16
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       17

Key Activity Area 3: Family/Child Assistance                                                    18
       Involvement with family/child assistance                                                 18
       Issues regarding family/child assistance                                                 18
       Efforts to address family/child assistance that are working well                         19
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       19

Key Activity Area 4: Child Care                                                                 20
       Involvement with child care                                                              20
       Issues regarding child care                                                              20
       Efforts to address child care needs that are working well                                21
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       21
       Involvement with the Texas Early Education Model (TEEM)                                  22

Key Activity Area 5: Family Literacy Services                                                   23
       Involvement with family literacy services                                                23
       Issues regarding family literacy services                                                24
       Efforts to address family literacy needs that are working well                           24
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       25

Key Activity Area 6: Children with Disabilities and Their Families                              26
       Involvement with children with disabilities and their families                           26
       Issues regarding children with disabilities and their families                           27
       Efforts to address children with disabilities and their families that are working well   27
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       28
       Experiences dealing with Response to Intervention (RTI)                                  28


                                                     4 
 
Key Activity Area 7: Community Services                                                         30
       Involvement with community services                                                      30
       Issues regarding community services                                                      31
       Efforts to address community services needs that are working well                        31
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       31

Key Activity Area 8: Publicly Funded Pre-K Partnership Development (Education)                  32
       Involvement with publicly funded Pre-K partnership development                           32
       Issues regarding publicly funded Pre-K partnership development                           33
       Efforts to address publicly funded Pre-K partnership development needs that are
       working well                                                                             33
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       34
       Experience with the Texas Early Education Model (TEEM)                                   34

Key Activity Area 9: Head Start Transition and Alignment with K-12 (Education)                  36
       Involvement with Head Start transition and alignment with K-12                           36
       Issues regarding Head Start transition and alignment with K-12                           37
       Efforts to address Head Start transition and alignment with K-12 needs that are
       working well                                                                             37
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       38
       Experience with Texas School Readiness Certification System (SRCS)                       38

Key Activity Area 10: Professional Development                                                  40
       Involvement with professional development                                                40
       Issues regarding professional development                                                41
       Efforts to address professional development needs that are working well                  41
       Identified training and technical assistance needs                                       41
       Succession plan for Head Start staff                                                     42

Trends and Implications (include data analysis)                                                 43
       Trends of extent of involvement with providers/organizations                             43
       Trends of levels of success with efforts in Key Activity Areas (KAA)                     44
       Trends regarding other issues with the Key Activity Areas (KAA)                          46
       Trends regarding efforts to address the needs relating to the Key Activity Areas (KAA)
       that are working well                                                                    46
       Recommendations                                                                          47

Resources and References                                                                        48

Appendices                                                                                      49




                                                  5 
 
INTRODUCTION

Overview of Head Start Program

Head Start is a “national program that promotes school readiness by enhancing the social and
cognitive development of children through the provision of educational, health, nutritional,
social and other services to enrolled children and families”. This program provides grants to
local public and private non-profit and for-profit agencies to provide comprehensive child
development services to economically-disadvantaged children from birth to 5, expectant
mothers, and families (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs/about/).

Texas has had Head Start programs since 1965, when the national program began. The Early
Head Start Program, which began in 1995, focuses on expectant mothers and children from
birth to age 3. The Texas Head Start State Collaboration Office (THSSCO), under the
administration of Dr. Dorothy J. Calhoun, is part of the Texas State Center for Early Childhood
Development within the Children’s Learning Institute at The University of Texas Health
Science Center at Houston. THSSCO is charged with addressing nine priority areas:
    1. Improve the availability and affordability of child care
    2. Increase opportunities for children with disabilities
    3. Expand partnerships with school systems
    4. Strengthen family literacy services
    5. Promote access to timely health care services
    6. Support access for homeless children
    7. Collaborate with existing community services activities
    8. Encourage collaboration with welfare systems
    9. Support career development in early care and education

Head Start programs are free-of-charge to participants. At least 90% of children enrolled in
Head Start programs must meet federal income guidelines. For 2009, the federal poverty level
is $22,050 for a family of four (http://nccp.org/profiles/TX_profile_9.html). Ten percent of
enrollment must be made available to children with disabilities
(http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/Espanol/Policy%20Clarifications%20and%20FAQs_2/k_pc.h
tm). Services are delivered in different ways, including center-based options, home-based
options, and combination models.




                                               6 
 
Summary of Texas Head Start/Early Head Start Programs

According to Program Information Report (PIR) data from 2007-2008, Texas has funded
enrollment for 74,129 children. Table 1 shows the enrollment numbers by program type.

    Table 1. Funded Enrollment by Program Type
    Center Based (5 days/week):                                                        #              %

    Full Day                                                                            55,279         74.57%
    Part Day                                                                            14,340         19.34%
    Center Based (4 days/week):
    Full Day                                                                                 960          1.30%
    Part Day                                                                                 499          0.67%
    Home Based                                                                             1,232          1.66%
    Combination                                                                                0            0%
    Family Child Care                                                                          7          0.01%
    Locally Designed Options                                                               1,812          2.44%
    TOTAL FUNDED ENROLLMENT                                                             74,129


    TOTAL ACTUAL ENROLLMENT (including those non-federally funded)                      87,296

Table 2 indicates the number of Head Start/Early Head Start families involved in Texas programs and receiving
social benefits. Table 3 shows the number of pregnant women enrolled.

    Table 2. Head Start Families
                                                                                       #              %
    Dual Parent Families                                                               35,470         44.98%
    Single Parent Families                                                             43,381         55.02%


    Families Receiving TANF                                                                6,044       7.67%
    Families Receiving WIC                                                             43,981         55.78%
    Families receiving SSI                                                                 3,450       4.38%

    Table 3. Number and Percent of Pregnant Women Served
                                                                                       #              %
    Pregnant women                                                                          691        0.79%




                                                         7 
 
The following tables show the breakdown of Head Start/Early Head Start enrollment by
ethnicity (Table 4) and race (Table 5) in the state of Texas.

    Table 4. Enrollment and Percentage by Ethnicity
                                                                      #           %
    Hispanic or Latino Origin                                         60,510      69.32%
    Non Hispanic                                                      26,786      30.68%



    Table 5. Enrollment and Percentage by Race
                                                                      #           %
    American Indian or Alaskan                                            337      0.39%
    Asian                                                                 448      0.51%
    Black or African American                                         15,704      17.99%
    Hawaiian or Pacific Islander                                          65       0.07%
    White                                                             51,198      58.65%
    Bi-Racial or Multi-Racial                                          2,239       2.56%
    Other Races                                                             0      0.00%
    Unspecified Races                                                 17,305      19.82%




                                                      8 
 
Texas has 124 Head Start/Early Head Start programs in all but 24 of its 254 counties. The
following map represents the counties which have Head Start/Early Head Start programs. The
counties in white are not covered. Of counties with Head Start/Early Head Start programs, the
10 counties with the largest enrollment numbers range between 1,136 and 6,789 children and
families. At this time only 58 of the shaded counties serve Early Head Start children and
families.
The counties serving the most children and families are as follows, in order of enrollments:
     1. Bexar
     2. Harris
     3. Dallas
     4. El Paso
     5. Hidalgo
     6. Tarrant
     7. Cameron
     8. Travis
     9. Webb
     10. Nueces



Map 1. Counties covered by Head Start/Early Head Start programs (http://cli.uth.tmc.edu/thssco/)


 
 
 


 




                                                      9 
 
STUDY DESIGN


Study Objectives

The purpose of this survey project was to collect data from staff for a needs assessment of
Head Start/Early Head Start programs in Texas. The project is in response to the changes in
Federal statute P.L. 100-134 entitled “Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of
2007”, and aligns with collaborative efforts of the National Office of Head Start. The goal of the
project was to conduct a site-based assessment of Head Start/Early Head Start programs with
specific focus on cooperation, coordination, and collaboration within ten key activity areas.
These ten activity areas are: 1) health care, 2) children experiencing homelessness, 3)
family/child assistance, 4) child care, 5) family literacy services, 6) children with disabilities
and their families, 7) community services, 8) publicly funded Pre-K partnership development
(education), 9) Head Start transition and alignment with K-12 (education), and 10)
professional development.

The purpose of gathering this program information is to support the direction and inform the
activities of the annually revised strategic plan for the Texas Head Start State Collaboration
Office as well as identifying the T/TA needs for the state. The cumulative findings from this
needs assessment survey will assist the collaboration director, State, and Regional T/TA
Networks in supporting program needs in the collaboration and systems development work of
Texas Head Start/Early Start programs. Our shared goal is to support and promote the
success in serving Texas children and families.

Study Planning Process

A survey was developed representing the ten activity areas noted above. This was designed
to include the collaboration with representatives from Texas Head Start Association,
Children’s Learning Institute, South by Southwest Conference Group, State and Regional
T/TA Specialists, and the Texas Head Start State Collaboration Office staff. The survey was
pre-tested by selected grantees and stakeholders to give feedback on the content of the
survey. Feedback from the pre-test was used to modify and finalize the survey content. It was
then field tested with another group of grantees in order to complete the online survey and
provide feedback regarding the mechanical operations.

Survey Instrument

The finished product was uploaded to the survey website Survey Monkey
(www.surveymonkey.com) which produced a link
(http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=4m33_2bMo5TBwLfLxOKz5VGA_3d_3d) by
which to access the survey. This allowed recipients to access the survey online.

There were three main parts to the survey. The first part asks respondents to rate the extent
of their involvement with various service providers/organizations related to the content area.
This part uses the following 4-point Likert scale and definitions to reflect their progress in
relationship-building:

1. Collaboration (share resources/agreements): represents the greatest level of involvement,
in which the Head Start/Early Head Start agency shares resources and/or has formal, written
agreements with the various providers or organizations.

                                               10 
 
2. Coordination (work together): represents the next lower level of involvement, in which the
Head Start/Early Head Start agency works together on projects or activities with the various
providers or organizations.
3. Cooperation (exchange info/referrals): represents the lowest level of involvement, in which
the Head Start/Early Head Start exchanges information with the various providers or
organizations.
4. No Working Relationship (little/no contact): represents no involvement between the Head
Start/Early Head Start agency and the various providers or organizations. They do not make
referrals, do not work together on projects or activities, do not share information, or no service
was available).

The second part asks respondents to indicate the level of involvement their program has had
engaging in each of a variety of activities and partnerships. A 4-point scale was provided,
ranging from “Successful” to “Extremely Difficult”. The purpose of this part was to highlight as
well as assist in identifying challenges in building successful partnerships at the local and
state levels to support the delivery of quality education and comprehensive services to their
children and families.

The third part includes open-ended questions at the end of each section, to include questions
related to the Texas Early Education Model (TEEM), the Texas School Readiness Certification
System (SRCS), and state T/TA needs. Here respondents had the opportunity to document
any remaining concerns that were not covered in the survey and to document what is working
well in their programs and indicate if any of these successful strategies/activities might be
helpful to other programs.


Methodology

The survey link was emailed to the Texas Head Start/Early Head Start Listserve, comprised of
86 grantees. This email was sent on April 7, 2009. Several reminder emails were sent in mid-
April and data collection was completed by April 29, 2009.

A cover letter, including the purpose for the survey, from the Texas Head Start State
Collaboration Office Director Dr. Dorothy J. Calhoun was attached to the email (see
Appendix).

Data was collected, processed, and analyzed by Survey Monkey.


Presentation of Findings

A detailed review of the data responses for each key activity is presented in the Survey
Results section of the report. A summary and discussion of key findings are presented in the
Trends and Implications section. Frequency distributions for each of the nine activity areas as
well as open-ended questions regarding each activity area, to include additional information
on TEEM, SRCS, and the state T/TA needs, will follow. Please note that the shaded cells
represent the highest number of responses from the grantees who completed the survey. A
total of 47 respondents or 55% started the survey, but only 34 respondents or 39% fully
completed it.



                                                11 
 
SURVEY RESULTS

Key Activity Area 1: Health Care

Involvement with health care

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past twelve months
with each of the following health care providers/organizations (Table 6) and to indicate the
level of success with implementing certain efforts with regards to this key activity area (Table
7).

    Table 6. Extent of involvement with each of the following service providers/organizations during the past 12
    months
                                                         Collaboration   Coordination    Cooperation      No Working       Response
                                                                                                          Relationship       Count
    Medical Home Providers                           37.0% (13)          31.4% (11)      25.7% (9)       5.7% (2)         35
    Dental Home Providers                            42.9% (15)          28.6% (10)      25.7% (9)       2.9% (1)         34
    State Agencies providing mental health           25.7% (9)           28.6% (10)      31.4% (11)      14.3% (5)        35
    prevention and treatment services
    Local agencies providing mental health           32.4% (11)          38.2% (13)      23.5% (8)       5.9% (2)         34
    prevention treatment services
    Agencies/programs that conduct mental            31.4% (11)          34.3% (12)      17.1% (6)       17.1% (6)        35
    health screenings
    WIC                                              23.5% (8)           32.4% (11)      35.3% (12)      8.8% (3)         34
    Local agencies providing services to pregnant    17.1% (6)           25.7% (9)       40.0% (14)      17.1% (6)        35
    women
    Other nutrition services                         31.4% (11)          34.3% (12)      20.0% (7)       14.3% (5)        35
    Children health education providers              17.1% (6)           40.0% (14)      28.6% (10)      14.3% (5)        35
    Parent health education providers                20.6% (7)           44.1% (15)      26.5% (9)       8.8% (3)         34
    Home visiting providers                          17.6% (6)           23.5% (8)       32.4% (11)      26.5% (9)        34
    Community health centers                         29.4% (10)          41.2% (14)      20.6% (7)       8.8% (3)         34
    Public health services                           33.3% (11)          51.5% (17)      9.1% (3)        6.1% (2)         33
    Programs/services related to physical            11.4% (4)           42.9% (15)      28.6% (10)      17.1% (6)        35
    fitness/and obesity prevention of children
                                                                                                 Answered Questions       35
                                                                                                  Skipped Questions       12

    Table 7. Level of success with each of the following items during the past 12 months
                                                  Successful Neutral       Difficult   Extremely                     Response
                                                                                       Difficult                     Count
    Linking children to medical homes                       75.0% (27)      19.4% (7)    5.6% (2)      0.0% (0)      36
    Partnering with medical professionals on health-        74.3% (26)      14.3% (5)    11.4% (4)     0.0% (0)      35
    related issues
    Linking children to dental homes that serve young       52.8% (19)      22.2% (8)    22.2% (8)     2.8% (1)      36
    children
    Partnering with oral health professionals on oral-      50.0% (18)      30.6% (11)   19.4% (7)     0.0% (0)      36
    health related issues
    Getting children enrolled in CHIP or Medicaid           52.8% (19)      25.0% (9)    22.2% (8)     0.0% (0)      36
    Arranging coordinated services for children with        55.6% (20)      36.1% (13)   8.3% (3)      0.0% (0)      36
    special health care needs
    Assisting parents to communicate effectively with       61.1% (22)      19.4% (7)    19.4% (7)     0.0% (0)      36
    medical/dental providers
    Assisting families to get transportation to             55.6% (20)      38.9% (14)   5.6% (2)      0.0% (0)      36
    appointments
    Getting full representation and active commitment       61.1% (22)      30.6% (11)   8.3% (3)      0.0% (0)      36
    on your Health Advisory Committee
    Sharing data/information on children/families           68.6% (24)      25.7% (9)    2.9% (1)      2.9% (1)      35
    served jointly by Head Start/Early Head Start and
    other agencies re: health care
    Exchanging information on roles and resources           66.7% (24)      22.2% (8)    8.3% (3)      2.8% (1)      36
    with medical, dental and other providers
    /organizations regarding health care
                                                                                             Answered Questions      36
                                                                                              Skipped Questions      11

                                                                   12 
 
Issues regarding health care

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced relating to
health care for children and families in Head Start/Early Head Start programs. Detailed
responses are found below.
    Table 8. Issues regarding health care for the children and families
                                                                                 Response     Response
                                                                                 Percent      Count
    Obesity or Weight Management                                                 89.7%        26
    Medically Underserved                                                        41.4%        12
    Dental Underserved                                                           55.2%        16
    Teen Pregnancy                                                               31.0%        9
    Other                                                                        24.1%        7
                                                                          Answered Question   29
                                                                           Skipped Question   18

Some additional issues mentioned in the “Other” category, were:
           ‐   Lack of insurance
           ‐   Drug prevention
           ‐   Smoking cessation
           ‐   Healthy life style choices
           ‐   Lack of providers accepting Medicaid and transportation because of rural geographic area
           ‐   Difficulty obtaining lab results from healthcare professional
           ‐   Difficulty obtaining screening results
           ‐   Parents forgetting to renew Medicaid every 6 months
           ‐   Lead screening


Efforts to address health care needs that are working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about efforts they are doing to address needs
relating to health care for children and families in Head Start/Early Head Start programs that
are working well and that might be helpful to other programs in the state. A summary of
detailed responses are below:

           ‐   Collaboration with Texas Tech Health Services
           ‐   Having representatives from Medicaid available at enrollment
           ‐   Assigning a Medicaid liaison to help families needing resource assistance
           ‐   Helping families to maintain Medicaid coverage & working with transportation issues
           ‐   Well established long standing partnerships with Health and Dental providers
           ‐   Sponsoring a quarterly Community Service Provider meeting at our facility to share
               resources and information
           ‐   Partnership with local agencies to inform them of the children’s needs that we serve
           ‐   Negotiation with providers regarding costs of services for special procedures such as
               surgery, etc.
           ‐   Tracking system for health services
           ‐   Continuous education for parents
           ‐   Addressing transportation needs if from a rural area
           ‐   Forming an interagency group, where organizations from surrounding areas meet on a
               quarterly basis to share new updates
           ‐   Partnering with local Federal Qualified Health Clinics (FQHC)
           ‐   Communication is very important - having a liaison that is directly involved and sharing
               resources and information
           ‐   Introducing myself to all persons I will be working closely with; i.e. health and dental
               providers; take them to a "working lunch". Make appointments to meet each person you will
                                                        13 
 
               contact in all agencies; know personally those who you are collaborating. It works in our
               small community.
           ‐   Positive relationships with community resources
           ‐   Networking in the community, staying abreast of what is available, and open lines of
               communication and negotiations is vital
           ‐   Our Coordinator of Health Services works to find information for Doctors and programs that
               will benefit our parents and students
           ‐   Persistence resulting in written agreements with a myriad of service providers
           ‐   Extremely active Health Advisory committee
           ‐   Making sure the community understands the benefits of supporting Head Start programs
           ‐   Active and knowledgeable Board of Directors
           ‐   We have formed good working relationships with these providers and in turn they have a
               relationship with our families
           ‐   Working with State Agencies in addressing Health and Dental needs
           ‐   Getting State Official involved
           ‐   Having active relationships with parents, agencies and multiple avenues
           ‐   Have providers come to do presentations for parents and staff
           ‐   Have staff become members of local health committees and maintain active membership in
               these committees
           ‐   We are looking at having a mobile unit come to the center to help the children with
               screenings

Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs were collected, along with the preferred training venue for these
needs. Detailed responses are shown in the table below:
    Table 9. Identified Training and Technical Assistance (T/TA) needs in this area
                                                                                         Response     Response
                                                                                         Percent      Count
    Collaboration                                                                        29.0%        9
    Coordination                                                                         16.1%        5
    Planning                                                                             25.8%        8
    Grant Writing                                                                        29.0%        9
    Parent Education                                                                     58.1%        18
    Teacher Education                                                                    35.5%        11
    Identification of Resources                                                          32.3%        10
    Technology                                                                           35.5%        11
    Record Keeping and Reporting                                                         29.0%        9
    Strategic Planning                                                                   45.2%        14
    Other : “In kind/Transportation” was the answer provided by the one respondent       3.2%         1
                                                                                 Answered question    31
                                                                                   Skipped question   16

Preferred training method: Cluster Events (80%)



Key Activity Area 2: Children Experiencing Homelessness

Involvement with homelessness

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past 12 months
with each of the following providers/organizations serving children experiencing homelessness

                                                        14 
 
(Table 10), and to indicate the level of success with implementing certain efforts with regards
to this key activity area (Table 11). Details are as follow:
    Table 10. Extent of involvement with each of the following service providers/organizations during the past
    12 months
                                             Collaboration         Coordination   Cooperation      No Working      Response
                                                                                                  Relationship     Count
    McKinney-Vento liaison with the Texas    16.7% (6)             13.9% (5)      19.4% (7)       50.0% (18)       36
    Homeless Network
    Local agencies serving families and/or   25.7% (9)               25.7% (9)     25.7% (9)      22.9% (8)        35
    individuals experiencing homelessness
    Local housing agencies and planning      17.1% (6)              28.6% (10)     31.4% (11)       22.9% (8)      35
    groups
    Title I Director                         29.4% (10)            14.7% (5)      5.9% (2)         50.0% (17)      34
                                                                                              Answered question    36
                                                                                               Skipped question    11


    Table 11. Level of success with each of the following items during the past 12 months
                                                     Successful    Neutral   Difficult Extremely                  Response
                                                                                         Difficult                  Count
    Aligning Head Start/Early Head Start program     55.9% (19)   32.4%      2.9% (1) 8.8% (3)                    34
    definition of homelessness with McKinney-Vento                (11)
    Homeless Assistance Act
    Developing and implementing policies and         58.8% (20)   38.2%      2.9% (1) 0.0% (0)                    34
    procedures to ensure that children experiencing               (13)
    homelessness are identified and prioritized for
    enrollment
    Allowing families of children experiencing       76.5% (26)   17.6%      5.9% (2) 0.0% (0)                    34
    homelessness to apply to, enroll in and attend                (6)
    Head Start/Early Head Start while required
    documents are obtained within a reasonable
    time frame
    Obtaining sufficient data on the needs of the    44.1% (15)   41.2%      11.8%     2.9% (1)                   34
    homeless to inform the program’s annual                       (14)       (4)
    community assessment
    Engaging community partners, including the       21.2% (7)    51.5%      9.1% (3) 18.2% (6)                   33
    McKinney-Vento Liaison, in conducting staff                   (17)
    cross training and planning activities
    Entering into an MOU with the appropriate local  64.7% (22)   26.5%      5.9% (2) 2.9% (1)                    34
    entity responsible for managing publicly funded               (9)
    preschool (LEA) that includes a plan to
    coordinate selection priorities for eligible
    children, including children experiencing
    homelessness
    In coordination with LEA, developing and         32.4% (11)   52.9%      11.8%     2.9% (1)                   34
    implementing family outreach and support                      (18)       (4)
    efforts under McKinney-Vento and transition
    planning for children experiencing
    homelessness
                                                                              Answered question                   34
                                                                                 Skipped question                 13




                                                             15 
 
Issues regarding homelessness

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced relating to
homelessness for children and families in Head Start/Early Head Start programs. Detailed
responses can be found in the following table.
    Table 12. Issues regarding services for children and families experiencing homelessness
                                                                                        Response    Response
                                                                                        Percent     Count
    Identification                                                                      56.5%       13
    Enrollment                                                                          21.7%       5
    Tracking                                                                            26.1%       6
    Recruitment                                                                         65.2%       15
    Other                                                                               30.4%       7
                                                                               Answered question    23
                                                                                 Skipped question   24

Some additional issues included in the “other” option are:
           ‐   Pre-school program for homeless in Amarillo
           ‐   Establishing MOU's with agencies serving homeless families
           ‐   Over enrollment of children
           ‐   Clarification about enrollment, especially that the homeless children are eligible but not
               automatically placed in a class when classes are already filled
           ‐   Few homeless shelters in rural service area
           ‐   Getting the required paperwork after students are enrolled because of homelessness


Efforts to address homelessness needs that are working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about efforts they are doing to address need
relating to homelessness for children and families in Head Start/Early Head Start programs
that are working well and that might be helpful to other programs in the state. A summary of
detailed responses are as follows:

           ‐   We operate a program for the homeless in the downtown Tyler Street Resource Center
           ‐   Collaboration with school district
           ‐   Periodic meetings with agencies that work with the homeless population
           ‐   Connecting parents to social services when needs are expressed
           ‐   Having presentations from the Education Service Center homeless liaison and the State
               Center for Homelessness provide information
           ‐   Held a meeting in which we invited all of our district partners' homeless liaisons to gain
               input on our enrollment criteria and the questions on our application that addressed
               homelessness. The representative from the State Center for Homelessness also reviewed
               our application questions and gave guidance.
           ‐   We coordinate with SAAFE House and our local Housing Authority when we have
               homeless families
           ‐   We try to assist homeless families in locating shelter and receiving care
           ‐   Knowledge of resources and other agencies that serves homeless individuals in the area
           ‐   Collaborate with agencies that are serving homeless families
           ‐   Conducting an extensive community needs assessment involving agencies that deal with
               homeless families
           ‐   Work with the local education agency to address homelessness
           ‐   Coordination & collaboration with local LEA has been very successful due to monthly
               meetings to stay informed, updated and address issues, if any, as they arise
           ‐   Particular agreements with shelters and other local programs that serve homeless
               population

                                                      16 
 
           ‐    Collaboration with public schools and the local Youth Services Bureau helps identify some
                homeless youth with children
           ‐    Working with the County's Community Resource Coordination Group helps agencies share
                resources and information
           ‐    Make sure that the doors are open for these students without asking for so much
                paperwork up front


Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs regarding children experiencing homelessness were collected, along
with the preferred training venue for these needs. Detailed responses are as follows:
    Table 12. Identified T/TA needs in this area
                                                                                   Response     Response
                                                                                   Percent      Count
    Definition of the Act                                                          33.3%        10
    Recruitment                                                                    43.3%        13
    Enrollment                                                                     13.3%        4
    Tracking                                                                       36.7%        11
    Indentifying available resources                                               60.0%        18
    Other                                                                          3.3%         1
                                                                           Answered question    30
                                                                            Skipped question    17

Preferred Training Venue: Cluster Events (72.7%)




                                                     17 
 
Key Activity Area 3: Family/Child Assistance
Involvement with family/child assistance

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past 12 months
with each of the following family/child assistance providers/organizations (Table 13) and to
indicate the level of success with implementing certain efforts with regards to this key activity
area (Table 14). Details are provider in the following tables:
    Table 13. Extent of involvement with each of the following service providers/organizations during the past
    12 months
                                                      Collaboration      Coordination      Cooperation      No Working      Response
                                                                                                            Relationship      Count
    TX Health & Human Services                        21.2% (7)          33.3% (11)        33.3% (11)       12.1% (4)       33
    Employment & Training and Labor services          15.2% (5)          27.3% (9)         45.5% (15)       12.1% (4)       33
    agencies
    Economic and Community Development                9.1% (3)           24.2% (8)         33.3% (11)       33.3% (11)      33
    Councils
    TX Dept. of Family and Protective Services        12.1% (4)          48.5% (16)        36.4% (12)       3.0% (1)        33
    Services and networks supporting foster and       12.1% (4)          21.2% (7)         48.5% (16)       18.2% (6)       33
    adoptive families, faith based organizations,
    grandparents raising grandchildren
                                                                                                    Answered question       33
                                                                                                     Skipped question       14


    Table 14. Level of success with the following items during the past 12 months
                                                              Successful         Neutral       Difficult       Extremely    Response
                                                                                                               Difficult    Count
    Obtaining information and data for community              57.6% (19)      27.3% (9)        12.1% (4)       3.0% (1)     33
    assessment and planning
    Working together to target recruitment to families        54.5% (18)      45.5% (15)       0.0% (0)        0.0% (0)     33
    receiving TANF, Employment and Training, and
    related support services
    Developing and implementing policies and                  60.6% (20)      33.3% (11)       6.1% (2)         0.0% (0)    33
    procedures to ensure that children in the child welfare
    system are identified and prioritized for enrollment
    Establishing and implementing local interagency           60.6% (20)      33.3% (11)       6.1% (2)        0.0% (0)     33
    partnerships agreements
    Facilitating shared training and technical assistance     30.3% (10)      54.5% (18)       15.2% (5)       0.0% (0)     33
    opportunities
    Getting involved in state level planning and policy       9.1% (3)        63.6% (21)       15.2% (5)        12.1% (4)   33
    development
    Exchanging information on roles & resources with          51.5% (17)       33.3% (11)       15.2% (5)      0.0% (0)     33
    other service providers regarding family/child
    assistance services
                                                                                                    Answered question       33
                                                                                                     Skipped question       14



Issues regarding family/child assistance

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced relating to
family/child assistance. Detailed responses are as follows:

       ‐    More staff
       ‐    Transition services for children/families leaving Head Start and entering elementary school
       ‐    Respite care for parents with severely disabled children
       ‐    Legal support for minor parents served
       ‐    Education for parents through training about what are available resources for them



                                                                  18 
 
Efforts to address family/child assistance that are working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about efforts they are doing to address needs
relating to family/child assistance for children and families in Head Start/Early Head Start
programs that are working well and that might be helpful to other programs in the state. A
summary of detailed responses are as follows:

       ‐   We initiated quarterly Community Service Provider meetings. This provides an opportunity for
           Social Service Workers, ISD Nurses and Counselors, medical professionals, WIC staff, TANF
           staff, religious community resource persons and many others to network and coordinate
           resources.
       ‐   A computerized tracking program
       ‐   Keeping open communication with agencies that have valuable resources/services that are
           accessible to low-income families. We partner with several child care centers for after-school
           assistance and we also provide child-care services for parents substituting, volunteering,
           attending meetings, etc.
       ‐   Programs should be strongly encouraged from the top to actively seek collaborations and
           coordination with local Head Start program
       ‐   Attending more trainings and networking
       ‐   Partnering with local entities and sharing information has been helpful to our agency and its
           families
       ‐   County wide coordination group of service agencies to include public schools, Head Start,
           Juvenile Justice, MHMRA, Children's special needs network, hospitals, and others.
       ‐   Maintain a parent/teacher center where parents can go to access the internet, write resumes,
           etc.
       ‐   Maintaining active membership in local committees - community involvement is a two way
           street

Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs regarding assistance to families and children were collected, along
with the preferred training venue for these needs. Detailed responses are as follows:

    Table 15. Identified T/TA needs in this area
                                                                                  Response       Response
                                                                                  Percent        Count
    Collaboration                                                                 42.3%          11
    Coordination                                                                  30.8%          8
    Planning                                                                      34.6%          9
    Grant Writing                                                                 11.5%          3
    Parent Education                                                              50.0%          13
    Teacher Education                                                             26.9%          7
    Identification of Resources                                                   42.3%          11
    Information Management Systems                                                50.0%          13
    Other                                                                         0.0%           0
                                                                           Answered question     26
                                                                            Skipped question     21

Preferred training venue: Cluster Events (75%)




                                                     19 
 
Key Activity Area 4: Child Care
Involvement with child care

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past 12 months
with each of the following child care providers/organizations (Table 16), and to indicate the
level of success with implementing certain efforts with regards to this Key Activity Area (Table
17). Details are provided below:

    Table 16. Extent of involvement with each of the following service providers/organizations during the past
    12 months
                                                        Collaboration      Coordination      Cooperation        No Working     Response
                                                                                                                Relationship     Count
    TX Dept. Family and Protective Services             18.2% (6)          48.5% (16)        30.3% (10)         3.0% (1)       33
    Child Care Resource & Referral agencies             15.2% (5)          36.4% (12)        36.4% (12)         12.1% (4)      33
    Local child care programs for full-year, full-day   27.3% (9)          33.3% (11)        27.3% (9)          12.1% (4)      33
    services
    Child Care Management Services                      15.6% (5)          25.0% (8)         31.3% (10)         28.1% (9)      32
    State or regional policy/planning committees        9.1% (3)           33.3% (11)        21.2% (7)          36.4% (12)     33
    that address child care issues
    Higher education                                    36.4% (12)         39.4% (13)        12.1% (4)          12.1% (4)      33
    programs/services/resources related to child
    care
                                                                                                         Answered question     33
                                                                                                          Skipped question     14


    Table 17. Level of success with each following items during the past 12 months
                                                                    Successful          Neutral     Difficult      Extremely   Response
                                                                                                                   Difficult   Count
    Establishing linkages/partnerships with child care              51.5% (17)     33.3% (11)       9.1% (3)       6.1% (2)    33
    providers
    Assisting families to access full-day, full year services       54.5% (18)     36.4% (12)       6.1% (2)       3.0% (1)    33
    Aligning policies and practices with other service              48.5% (16)     42.4% (14)       9.1% (3)       0.0% (0)    33
    providers
    Sharing data/information on children that are jointly           60.6% (20)     33.3% (11)       0.0% (0)       6.1% (2)    33
    served
    Exchanging information on roles and resources with              54.5% (18)     39.4% (13)       3.0% (1)       3.0% (1)    33
    other providers/organizations regarding child care and
    community needs assessment
                                                                                                         Answered question     33
                                                                                                          Skipped question     14



Issues regarding child care

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced relating to
child care. Detailed responses are as follows:

       ‐     Lack of child care resources in rural areas
       ‐     Transportation service for before and after child care
       ‐     Caring for the younger children of volunteers who volunteer in our center
       ‐     Getting the agencies in these areas to attend meetings that are provided by Head Start
       ‐     Need more funding to implement longer hours of service. There are Head Start families who do not qualify
             for extended day care because the mother refuses to pursue child support or the family is not a legal
             immigrant.
       ‐     We work well with our local LEAs, but have more trouble working with Child Care Providers in the area.
             Most of the private local day cares have fee-for-service and do not take CCMS.
       ‐     Maybe one day an after school program can be developed on the Head Start campus for the children



                                                                     20 
 
Efforts to address child care needs that are working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about efforts they are doing to address the child
care needs of children and families in Head Start/Early Head Start programs that are working
well and that might be helpful to other programs in the state. A summary of detailed
responses are as follows:
       ‐   Collaboration with local partners
       ‐   Establish an interagency program to include all agencies that serve high risk families and children
       ‐   Keep reasonable rates for low-income families
       ‐   Visiting their agency in person and informing the agencies of what takes place at the social service
           advisory meeting and how they can benefit from that meeting
       ‐   Monthly meetings to ensure that involved parties are well informed and that direct services are being
           provided
       ‐   TEEM (Texas Early Education Model) brings school, faith-based child care, for-profit child care and Head
           Start together
       ‐   I think that other programs as well as this program will benefit from having an after school program on
           campus
       ‐   We are a partner in the TEEM grant. Extremely helpful!


Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs regarding child care were collected, along with the preferred training
venue for these needs. Detailed responses are offered in the table below:

    Table 18. Identified T/TA needs in this area
                                                                                         Response        Response
                                                                                         Percent         Count
    Collaboration                                                                        29.6%           8
    Coordination                                                                         29.6%           8
    Planning                                                                             37.0%           10
    Parent Education                                                                     33.3%           9
    Teacher Education                                                                    14.8%           4
    Identification of Resources                                                          40.7%           11
    Funding Opportunities                                                                51.9%           14
    Grant Writing                                                                        11.1%           3
    Other (please specify)                                                               0.0%            0
                                                                                  Answered question      27
                                                                                   Skipped question      20

Preferred Training Venue: Cluster Events (65.4%) & Webinars (65.4%)




                                                         21 
 
Involvement with the Texas Early Education Model (TEEM)

In partnership with TEEM the following questions were developed. Here respondents were
asked to describe their experience with TEEM (Table19) and mention ways to make the
partnership more successful (Table 20). Detailed responses are presented in the tables
below:
    Table 19. Involvement with the Texas Early Education Model (TEEM)
                                                                               Response     Response
                                                                               Percent      Count
    Currently involved with TEEM                                               62.5%        20
    Involved in the past with TEEM                                             3.1%         1
    On a waiting list to be involved with TEEM                                 9.4%         3
    Not familiar with TEEM                                                     12.5%        4
    Other                                                                      12.5%        4
                                                                        Answered question   32
                                                                         Skipped question   15

The additional answers included in the “other” option are from respondents who stated that
they are aware of TEEM, but are not involved with them.
    Table 20. Ways to make the TEEM partnerships more successful
                                                                               Response     Response
                                                                               Percent      Count
    Regularly scheduled meetings with mentors                                  32.0%        8
    Clarification of rules/guidelines                                          36.0%        9
    More funding to serve classes                                              60.0%        15
    Less staff turnover                                                        28.0%        7
    Other                                                                      32.0%        8
                                                                        Answered question   25
                                                                         Skipped question   22

The following list represents a summary of the answers provided by those respondents who
selected the option “Other”:
    ‐   Place Region 9 Head Start on email lists
    ‐   Partnerships
    ‐   Ensure that Head Start is treated as an equal partner
    ‐   Stipends for Teacher Assistants as well as Teachers
    ‐   Work with 3-yr old classrooms
    ‐   Provide some of the resources to all Head Start classes




                                                    22 
 
Key Activity Area 5: Family Literacy Services

Involvement with family literacy services

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past 12 months
with each of the following family literacy service providers/organizations (Table 21) and to
indicate the level of success with implementing certain efforts with regards to this Key Activity
Area (Table 22). Details are provided below:

    Table 21. Extent of your involvement with each of the following service providers/organizations during the
    past 12 months
                                                  Collaboration     Coordination     Cooperation       No Working     Response
                                                                                                       Relationship    Count
    Dept. of Ed Title I, Part A Family Literacy   9.4% (3)          21.9% (7)        25.0% (8)         43.8% (14)     32
    Employment and Training programs              9.1% (3)          39.4% (13)       42.4% (14)        9.1% (3)       33
    Adult Education                               18.2% (6)         36.4% (12)       39.4% (13)        6.1% (2)       33
    English Language Learner programs &           27.3% (9)         27.3% (9)        30.3% (10)        15.2% (5)      33
    services
    Services to promote parent/child literacy     36.4% (12)        30.3% (10)       27.3% (9)         6.1% (2)       33
    interactions
    Parent education programs/services            34.4% (11)        37.5% (12)       21.9% (7)         6.3% (2)       32
    Public libraries                              37.5% (12)        46.9% (15)       12.5% (4)         3.1% (1)       32
    School libraries                              41.9% (13)        25.8% (8)        19.4% (6)         12.9% (4)      31
    Public/private sources that provide book      39.4% (13)        21.2% (7)        18.2% (6)         21.2% (7)      33
    donations or funding for books
    Museums                                       15.2% (5)         12.1% (4)        27.3% (9)         45.5% (15)     33
    Reading Readiness programs                    33.3% (11)        30.3% (10)       15.2% (5)         21.2% (7)      33
    Higher education                              30.3% (10)        21.2% (7)        21.2% (7)         27.3% (9)      33
    programs/services/resources related to
    family literacy
    Providers of services for children and        28.1% (9)         25.0% (8)        28.1% (9)         18.8% (6)      32
    families who are English language
    learners
    Even Start                                    15.6% (5)         9.4% (3)         9.4% (3)      65.6% (21)         32
                                                                                           Answered question          33
                                                                                              Skipped question        14


    Table 22. Level of success with each of the following items during the past 12 months
                                                           Successful           Neutral    Difficult      Extremely   Response
                                                                                                          Difficult   Count
    Recruiting families to Family Literacy Services        51.5% (17)      27.3% (9)       18.2%          3.0% (1)    33
                                                                                           (6)
    Educating others (e.g., parents, the community)        60.6% (20)      24.2% (8)       15.2%          0.0% (0)    33
    about the importance of family literacy                                                (5)
    Establishing linkages/partnerships with key            54.5% (18)      36.4% (12)      9.1% (3)       0.0% (0)    33
    literacy providers
    Establishing linkages/partnerships with key local      42.4% (14)      48.5% (16)      9.1% (3)       0.0% (0)    33
    level organizations/programs (other than libraries)
    Incorporating family literacy into your program        75.8% (25)      21.2% (7)       3.0% (1)       0.0% (0)    33
    policies and practices
    Exchanging information with other                      50.0% (16)      43.8% (14)      6.3% (2)       0.0% (0)    32
    providers/organizations regarding roles and
    resources related to family literacy
                                                                                           Answered question          33
                                                                                            Skipped question          14




                                                              23 
 
Issues regarding family literacy services

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced relating to
family literacy services. The following list represents a summary of the answers provided by
those respondents:

    ‐   Lack of incentives for families to attend
    ‐   Additional guidance and funding on meeting these expectations would be helpful
    ‐   Would like to know how some of the other programs are incorporating family literacy into their
        program, other than what we are doing
    ‐   We are very rural and there are not many programs in our service area that handle these
        issues. Families would have to travel outside of their communities to get the services. However,
        we are working with LEAs and other Higher Education Facilities to get ESL and literacy types of
        resources to our families.
    ‐   We need to involve families
    ‐   Due to transportation challenges, unable to getting families/children to the local literacy
        providers

Efforts to address family literacy needs that are working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about efforts they are doing to address the
literacy needs of families in Head Start/Early Head Start programs that are working well and
that might be helpful to other programs in the state. The following list represents a summary of
the answers provided by those respondents:

    ‐   Close collaboration with Adult Basic Education Programs with ESL and GED
    ‐   Implemented our "Read with Me" program approximately five years ago. Initial Parent and
        Mobil Libraries funded by Kiwanis Organization. Every Tuesday parents spend at least an hour
        on campus reading with their children throughout our facility. National Company (TCIM) with a
        local sight partnered with us to provide funding for continued financial and on sight assistance
        with the program. Neighborhood Fire Station provides "Stop Drop and Read" program. Support
        from on campus readers such as Retired Teachers Association, National Honor Society
        Students from local school campuses, High School Athletic teams, Paris Junior College
        Athletes and many others.
    ‐   Promote fathers reading every day to their child & literacy take home activities
    ‐   We have the Reading Is Fundamental/Family of Readers program that assists with family
        literacy needs and provides books for distribution. We have also been the recipient of some
        First Book awards as well as donations from Kohl's Department Stores.
    ‐   We encourage Tribal department employees to take the time to visit our program and be a part
        the regular volunteers in the literacy program. We try to have donation items as an incentive for
        the literacy program. We also have an annual book fair that has been a success.
    ‐   Utilize the Fatherhood Initiative program and be creative.
    ‐   Network with the elementary schools and other child development services to find available
        resources.
    ‐   We refer parents to the community program for literacy at the Public Library. We also refer
        parents to the Terrell ISD ESL program for parents and The WING program at the Public
        Library.




                                                   24 
 
Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs regarding family literacy services were collected, along with the
preferred training venue for these needs. Detailed responses are offered in Table:
    Table 23. identified T/TA needs in this area
                                                                          Response     Response
                                                                          Percent      Count
    Collaboration                                                         26.1%        6
    Coordination                                                          30.4%        7
    Planning                                                              26.1%        6
    Funding Opportunities                                                 26.1%        6
    Grant Writing                                                         13.0%        3
    Parent Education                                                      52.2%        12
    Teacher Education                                                     30.4%        7
    Identification of Resources                                           52.2%        12
    Accessing Resources                                                   30.4%        7
    Technology                                                            17.4%        4
    Record Keeping and Reporting                                          13.0%        3
    Strategic Planning                                                    34.8%        8
    Multiplicity of Language Spoken                                       34.8%        8
    Literacy Level of Staff                                               39.1%        9
    Other                                                                 4.3%         1
                                                                   Answered question   23
                                                                    Skipped question   24

Preferred Training Venue: Cluster Events (76.9%)




                                                   25 
 
Key Activity Area 6: Children with Disabilities and Their Families

Involvement with children with disabilities and their families

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past 12 months
with each of the following providers/organizations servicing children with disabilities and their
families (Table 24), and to indicate the level of success with implementing certain efforts with
regards to this Key Activity Area (Table 25). Details are provided below:
    Table 24. Extent of involvement with each of the following service providers/organizations during the past
    12 months
                                                  Collaboration     Coordination   Cooperation   No Working          Response
                                                                                                 Relationship         Count
    State Lead Agency for Part B/619              45.2% (14)        19.4% (6)      19.4% (6)     16.1% (5)           31
    Preschool Program for Children with           71.0% (22)        19.4% (6)      9.7% (3)      0.0% (0)            31
    Disabilities
    Texas Education Agency—other                  62.5% (20)        18.8% (6)      9.4% (3)      9.4% (3)            31
    programs/services
    State Lead Agency for Part C                  59.4% (19)        15.6% (5)      15.6% (5)     9.4% (3)            32
    Local Part C providers                        68.8% (22)        12.5% (4)      15.6% (5)     3.1% (1)            32
    Federally-funded programs for families of     34.4% (11)        28.1% (9)      21.9% (7)     15.6% (5)           32
    children with disabilities
    State-funded programs for children with       32.3% (10)        32.3% (10)     19.4% (6)     16.1% (5)           31
    disabilities and their families
    Other funded programs for children and        21.9% (7)         15.6% (5)      34.4% (11)    28.1% (9)           32
    their families
    University/community college programs/        12.9% (4)         16.1% (5)      25.8% (8)     45.2% (14)          31
    services related to children with
    disabilities
    Non-Head Start councils, committees or        34.4% (11)        21.9% (7)      31.3% (10)    12.5% (4)           32
    work groups that address policy/program
    issues regarding children with disabilities
    Dual enrollment of children with              63.3% (19)        23.3% (7)      6.7% (2)      6.7% (2)            30
    disabilities
                                                                                         Answered question           32
                                                                                          Skipped question           15


    Table 25. Level of success with each of the following items during the past 12 months
                                                  Successful   Neutral    Difficult   Extremely                 Response
                                                                                      Difficult                 Count
    Obtaining timely evaluations of               56.3% (18)  21.9% (7)   18.8% (6)   3.1% (1)                  32
    children
    Having staff attend IEP or IFSP               93.8% (30)  3.1% (1)    3.1% (1)    0.0% (0)                  32
    meetings
    Coordinating services with Part C providers   76.7% (23)  16.7% (5)   6.7% (2)    0.0% (0)                  30
    Coordinating services with Part               62.5% (20)  25.0% (8)   12.5% (4)   0.0% (0)                  32
    B/619 providers
    Sharing data/information on jointly served    77.4% (24)  22.6% (7)   0.0% (0)    0.0% (0)                  31
    children
    Exchanging information on roles and           71.9% (23)  28.1% (9)   0.0% (0)    0.0% (0)                  32
    resources with other providers/organizations
    regarding services for
    children with disabilities and their families
                                                                             Answered question                  32
                                                                                Skipped question                15




                                                              26 
 
Issues regarding children with disabilities and their families

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced relating to
services for children with disabilities and their families or working with this population. The
following list represents a summary of the answers provided by those respondents:

    ‐   Response To Intervention (RTI) has made it very difficult to identify children with disabilities in
        the public schools
    ‐   Ongoing training of teachers so that they feel comfortable serving children with disabilities if
        they do not have a special education background
    ‐   Working with teachers and parents regarding toilet learning issues. We still have teachers who
        assume that children must be independent in their toileting skills if they are going to be in Head
        Start. The regulations regarding this are continually addressed in our program, and ongoing
        training in helping children become independent in their toileting skills is provided.
    ‐   Response to Intervention - Guidelines more strict
    ‐   Obtaining a timely evaluation of children from LEA
    ‐   Getting the families to feel comfortable and not feel intimidated by the LEA employees
    ‐   Working with local LEAs to get timely services/assessments for Head Start children. Dually
        enrolled children get services faster then Head Start only children. However, I feel that it is
        getting better as we attempt to communicate with our local LEAs on a regular basis concerning
        this issue.
    ‐   RTI process takes too long

Efforts to address children with disabilities and their families that are working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about efforts they are doing to address the
needs of children with disabilities and their families in Head Start/Early Head Start programs
that are working well and that might be helpful to other programs in the state. The following list
represents a summary of the answers provided by those respondents:

    ‐   It is very important to have a certified special education staff member employed as the disability
        coordinator
    ‐   We have a few classes that are co-teach models with a Head Start teacher and a PPCD
        teacher. Approximately one third of the students have identified disabilities, but all children
        qualify for Head Start services. IEP implementation is provided by both teachers. ECI provides
        the initial screening for all of our Early Head Start students. This assists with the ECI child find
        efforts and helps our program be aware of any concerns that ECI has recognized.
    ‐   Dual enrollment
    ‐   Coordinate with attorney that specializes in assisting families/children with disabilities as it
        relates to the legal ramifications
    ‐   Educating the parents in the aspects of ARD meetings and their rights as parents of children
        with special needs
    ‐   We work closely with the Special Education facilitator from the LEA for the referral process, to
        conduct all ARDs, and to forward the child's record to kindergarten
    ‐   Our Disabilities Coordinator is very active with the local agencies in ensuring that necessary
        services are being provided and that we remain in contact and share information
    ‐   Persistence with the LEAs and vocal advocacy at meetings of school boards, committees, and
        departments
    ‐   Having a fabulous working relationship with ECI




                                                    27 
 
Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs regarding services for children with disabilities and their families
were collected, along with the preferred training venue for these needs. Detailed responses
are offered in Table 26.

    Table 26. Identified T/TA needs in this area
                                                                                Response          Response
                                                                                Percent           Count
    Collaboration                                                               18.5%             5
    Coordination                                                                14.8%             4
    Planning                                                                    18.5%             5
    Funding Opportunities                                                       14.8%             4
    Grant Writing                                                               7.4%              2
    Parent Education                                                            25.9%             7
    Training in Specific Disabilities                                           51.9%             14
    MOU Development                                                             25.9%             7
    Writing Goals and Objectives                                                7.4%              2
    Implementing the IEP                                                        14.8%             4
    Writing a Disability Service Plan                                           29.6%             8
    Budget Issues                                                               11.1%             3
    Health Issues                                                               11.1%             3
    Identifying Children for Services                                           33.3%             9
    Acquiring Services from the LEA                                             22.2%             6
    Timely Assessments                                                          33.3%             9
    Identification of Resources                                                 14.8%             4
    Accessing Resources                                                         7.4%              2
    Other                                                                       11.1%             3
                                                                            Answered question     27
                                                                             Skipped question     20

Preferred Training Venue: Cluster Events (78.6%)



Experiences dealing with Response to Intervention (RTI)

Respondents were asked to offer information about their experiences dealing with Response
to Intervention (RTI). The following list represents a summary of the answers provided by
those respondents:

       ‐   RTI is a time to evaluate. Staff must document a child’s progress in the classroom and at home
           -a standard tool must be utilized-Individual plans must be in place for classroom intervention
       ‐   Many districts are still thinking that RTI pertains to Preschool, even if the law states that RTI
           begins at the kindergarten level.
       ‐   Difficult-guidelines are more strict-children w/speech delays from ECI are not qualifying
       ‐   This has been a challenge for our program with the amount of time it takes to complete the
           process.
       ‐   It delays Head Start obtaining their 10% disability enrollment since we can no longer utilize
           Head Start IEP's
       ‐   In our community the employees we deal with are wonderful people and we have a great
           working relationship, and the RTI process is going very well
       ‐   RTI has been receptive
       ‐   RTI provides time and strategies to ensure child success. It should decrease the over-
           identification of low-income children.



                                                      28 
 
    ‐   ISD's are cooperative to share information about their process and incorporate Head Start
        children wherever possible. ISD's have their own special education laws that require them to go
        through many steps prior to a special education referral.
    ‐   I consistently use RTI in my classroom and help other teachers when they request help from
        me for students. It is important to see which interventions and strategies help the student be
        successful and which ones do not help.
    ‐   With two school districts, used properly to make sure of the need for referral. For one school
        district, RTI was used as a means to delay implementation of services.
    ‐   Maintaining the 10% disability standard. The State standard and Head Start standards are
        different and it is difficult to maintain the 10%




                                                  29 
 
Key Activity Area 7: Community Services
Involvement with community services

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past 12 months
with each of the following providers/organizations providing community services (Table 27),
and to indicate the level of success with implementing certain efforts with regards to this Key
Activity Area (Table 28). Details are provided below:
    Table 27. Extent of involvement with each of the following service providers/organizations during the past
    12 months
                                        Collaboration     Coordination      Cooperation      No Working          Response
                                                                                             Relationship         Count
    Law Enforcement                     9.4% (3)          37.5% (12)       28.1% (9)         25.0% (8)       32
    Texas Department of Criminal        3.3% (1)          16.7% (5)        26.7% (8)         53.3% (16)      30
    Justice System
    Providers of substance abuse        12.5% (4)         15.6% (5)        53.1% (17)        18.8% (6)       32
    prevention/treatment services
    Providers of child abuse            22.6% (7)         41.9% (13)       35.5% (11)        0.0% (0)        31
    prevention/
    treatment services
    Providers of domestic violence      25.0% (8)         37.5% (12)       28.1% (9)         9.4% (3)        32
    prevention/ treatment services
    Public and private resources        25.0% (8)         25.0% (8)        40.6% (13)        9.4% (3)        32
    geared toward prevention/
    intervention and support
    Providers of emergency              15.6% (5)         34.4% (11)       34.4% (11)        15.6% (5)       32
    services
                                                                                        Answered question    32
                                                                                         Skipped question    15


    Table 28. Level of success with each of the following items during the past 12 months
                                             Successful          Neutral    Difficult        Extremely      Response
                                                                                             Difficult      Count
    Establishing linkages/ partnerships      28.1% (9)       56.3% (18)     6.3% (2)         9.4% (3)       32
    with law
    enforcement agencies
    Establishing linkages/ partnerships      37.5% (12)      50.0% (16)     9.4% (3)         3.1% (1)       32
    with public resources
    Establishing linkages/ partnerships      31.3% (10)      50.0% (16)     15.6% (5)        3.1% (1)       32
    with private resources
    Partnering with service providers on     40.6% (13)      50.0% (16)     6.3% (2)         3.1% (1)       32
    outreach activities for eligible
    families
    Obtaining in-kind community              58.1% (18)      35.5% (11)     6.5% (2)         0.0% (0)       31
    services for the children /families in
    your program
    Sharing data/information on              45.2% (14)      35.5% (11)     19.4% (6)        0.0% (0)       31
    children/families served jointly by
    Head Start/ Early Head Start and
    other agencies regarding prevention/
    treatment and support services
    Exchanging information on roles and      45.2% (14)      51.6% (16)     3.2% (1)         0.0% (0)       31
    resources with other
    providers/organizations regarding
    community services
                                                                                   Answered question        32
                                                                                    Skipped question        15


                                                           30 
 
Issues regarding community services

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced relating to
community services for Head Start/Early Head Start families. The following list represents a
summary of the answers provided by those respondents:

    ‐   Transportation & developing relationships with pertinent organizations
    ‐   Sharing community resource information - to make sure that all information is current and
        correct - Recruiting and awareness of Head Start
    ‐   Marriage counseling is greatly needed
    ‐   Working on more direct involvement for our military families


Efforts to address community services needs that are working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about efforts they are making to address the
community services needs of the children and families in their program that are working well
and that might be helpful to other programs in the state. The following list represents a
summary of the answers provided by those respondents:

    ‐   Outreach to community organizations via invitations to meetings and trainings; also
        participation on task committees of other organizations
    ‐   Attend interagency meetings and other local meetings to gather information about their
        agencies and inform them of our program
    ‐   Organizing an event with other organizations to promote Head Start
    ‐   Survey of family needs
    ‐   The sheer number of formal community agreements--we have 97--to coordinate and serve
        children and families


Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs regarding community services Head Start/Early Head Start families
were collected, along with the preferred training venue for these needs. Detailed responses
are offered in Table 29.
Table 29. Identified T/TA needs in this area
                                                                                 Response       Response
                                                                                 Percent           Count
Collaboration                                                                    25.0%          6
Coordination                                                                     16.7%          4
Planning                                                                         29.2%          7
Funding Opportunities                                                            25.0%          6
Grant Writing                                                                    8.3%           2
Parent Education                                                                 41.7%          10
Teacher Education                                                                25.0%          6
Identification of Resources                                                      45.8%          11
Counting Services for In-Kind                                                    62.5%          15
Mental Health Services for Children with Incarcerated Parents or Caregivers      50.0%          12
Other                                                                            8.3%           2
                                                                            Answered question   24
                                                                             Skipped question   23

Preferred Training Venue: Cluster Events (68%)

                                                    31 
 
Key Activity Area 8: Publicly Funded Pre-K Partnership Development
(Education)
Involvement with publicly funded Pre-K partnership development

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past 12 months
with each of the following providers/organizations responsible for publicly funded Pre-K
partnership development (Table 30), and to indicate the level of success with implementing
certain efforts with regards to this Key Activity Area (Table 31). Details are provided below:
    Table 30. Extent of involvement with each of the following service providers/organizations during the past
    12 months
                                       Collaboration Coordination     Cooperation   No Working       Response
                                                                                    Relationship       Count
    Memorandum of                      75.0% (24)    9.4% (3)        15.6% (5)      0.0% (0)         32
    Understanding (MOU) with the
    appropriate local
    entity responsible for
    managing publicly funded
    preschool programs
    in the service area of your
    agency which includes plans
    to coordinate
    activities, as described in
    642(e) (5) (A)(i)(ii) (I-X), and a
    review of each of
    the activities
                                                                               Answered question 32
                                                                                 Skipped question 15

    Table 31. Level of success with each of the following items during the past 12 months
                                            Successful       Neutral      Difficult    Extremely     Response
                                                                                         Difficult     Count
    Educational activities, curricular     78.1% (25)     15.6% (5)     3.1% (1)      3.1% (1)       32
    objectives and instruction
    Information, dissemination and         71.9% (23)     25.0% (8)     3.1% (1)      0.0% (0)       32
    access for families contacting Head
    Start or other preschool program
    Selection priorities for eligible      71.9% (23)     25.0% (8)     3.1% (1)      0.0% (0)       32
    children served
    Service areas                          74.2% (23)     22.6% (7)     3.2% (1)      0.0% (0)       31
    Staff training, including              65.6% (21)     25.0% (8)     6.3% (2)      3.1% (1)       32
    opportunities for joint staff training
    Program technical assistance           62.5% (20)     34.4% (11)    0.0% (0)      3.1% (1)       32
    Provision of services to meet          65.6% (21)     28.1% (9)     6.3% (2)      0.0% (0)       32
    needs of working parents, as
    applicable
    Communications and parent              83.9% (26)     16.1% (5)     0.0% (0)      0.0% (0)       31
    outreach for transition to
    kindergarten
    Provision and use of facilities,       71.0% (22)     22.6% (7)     0.0% (0)      6.5% (2)       31
    transportation, etc.
    Other elements mutually agreed to by 75.0% (24)       18.8% (6)     3.1% (1)      3.1% (1)       32
    the parties to the MOU
                                                                               Answered question     32
                                                                                 Skipped question    15




                                                       32 
 
Issues regarding publicly funded Pre-K partnership development

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced regarding
education/pre-k partnership development for the children and families in their program. The
following list represents a summary of the answers provided by those respondents:

       ‐   House Bill 130 – Full day Pre-K
       ‐   Helping parents and the community understand the similarities and the differences in Pre-K
           and Head Start
       ‐   Difficulty recruiting parent volunteers in the classroom or to help with Library Program
       ‐   Head Start not treated as an equal partner ISD filling enrollment slots first and letting Head
           Start have what is left plus all 3 year olds
       ‐   One school district is not willing to collaborate with Head Start, due to some bad history
       ‐   We have been successful in implementing partnerships with our local Pre-K programs
       ‐   Transportation issues related to partnerships with LEAs


Efforts to address publicly funded Pre-K partnership development needs that are
working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about efforts they are making to address the
pre-k partnership development needs of your program that are working well and that might be
helpful to other programs in the state. The following list represents a summary of the answers
provided by those respondents:

       ‐   Proceed with caution and in baby steps
       ‐   Our program is a partnership with the district's pre-K program. It has been a very
           successful partnership, but it takes continuous work.
       ‐   Cooperative understanding of the transition periods and communication between the public
           schools not only at the end of the school year but throughout the year. Active participation
           in the TEEM grant.
       ‐   Educate the public schools about the services Head Start provides for the families and their
           children
       ‐   Location on the same campus is beneficial
       ‐   Constant communication and joint meetings
       ‐   This year we have been fortunate to have a great partnership with our local school district's
           pre-k program to deliver direct services to children and families; monthly meetings and
           communication as been integral in the partnership
       ‐   Persistence!
       ‐   Everyone has to buy into the idea of collaboration, from Superintendent, to Principal, to
           Teachers. If one does not it makes it very difficult to collaborate.




                                                  33 
 
Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs regarding publicly funded Pre-K partnership development for Head
Start/Early Head Start families were collected, along with the preferred training venue for
these needs. Detailed responses are offered in Table 32.
    Table 32. Identified T/TA needs in this area
                                                                              Response        Response
                                                                              Percent         Count
    Collaboration                                                             27.3%           6
    Coordination                                                              31.8%           7
    Planning                                                                  36.4%           8
    Funding Opportunities                                                     13.6%           3
    MOU Development                                                           40.9%           9
    Grant Writing                                                             4.5%            1
    Parent Education                                                          13.6%           3
    Impasse Training                                                          13.6%           3
    Eligibility of Children                                                   13.6%           3
    Wrap Around Services                                                      36.4%           8
    Recruitment                                                               18.2%           4
    Meshing TEA Guidelines and HS Performance Standards                       54.5%           12
    Identification of Resources                                               27.3%           6
    Strategic Planning                                                        40.9%           9
    Other                                                                     13.6%           3
                                                                         Answered question    22
                                                                          Skipped question    25

Preferred Training Venue: Cluster Events (69.2%)

Experience with the Texas Early Education Model (TEEM)

In partnership with TEEM the following questions were developed. Here respondents were
asked to describe their experience with TEEM. The following list represents a summary of the
answers provided by those respondents:

       ‐   We are the Lead Agency for TEEM. Experience has been very successful
       ‐   We began working with the State Center in the early days of the grants when they were the
           Head Start Readiness grants. We then received Ready to Read grants and now have TEEM
           grants. We are currently waiting to hear the results of the Tier grants and are preparing Texas
           School Ready grants.
       ‐   Successful participation by the Head Start education staff
       ‐   There have been some differences between TEEM and Head Start practices, for example, a
           TEEM mentor told a teacher to display children’s assessment results in the classroom--a
           violation of privacy
       ‐   When administered by the State Center for Early Childhood Development, they made sure
           Head Start was treated equal and shared the slots for 4 year olds
       ‐   It has been a great experience; our children (and teachers) have truly benefited from the
           training and resources provided
       ‐   TEEM does not always mesh with the whole-child approach of Head Start
       ‐   It has helped the schools to recognize the excellence of Head Start Program Performance
           Standards and to respect our teachers
       ‐   TEEM has been a very good experience with our teachers, this is our first year to have our 4 yr
           old classes in the ISD. The teachers had a difficult time doing everything that Head Start
           required and then all of the TEEM work, but in the end they have seen the advantages and will
           continue it for next year. Our 3-yr old teachers love it and are completely on board with the
           TEEM effort
                                                     34 
 
    ‐   It has been very successful in our program. Our staff have worked well with the TEEM staff.
    ‐   Excellent. Have been a partner with TEEM since inception.
    ‐   The training for TEEM was outstanding


Respondents were asked to offer information about suggestions on how to make the TEEM
partnership more successful. The following list represents a summary of the answers provided
by those respondents:

    ‐   The assessment tool should meet Head Start and state pre k requirements--staff should not be
        required to use two tools
    ‐   Coordination among all partners is key. In the past, we have often found ourselves in a position
        of hearing one set of instructions from the State Center and a differing set of instructions from
        TEA. Because we want to follow the guidelines as they are intended, this can be frustrating.
        Also, we have from time to time found ourselves trying to meet very tight deadlines for
        information. Helping districts/child care/Head Start programs involved understand the data entry
        requirements for OZ as it relates to TEEM projects and the TPRI data entry as it relates to
        Kindergarten and the School Readiness Certification process has been challenging for our
        staff.
    ‐   Fieldtrips to other Early Childhood centers w/TEEM
    ‐   Expand and make the project available to more children
    ‐   Stop allowing ISD's to serve all the 4 year olds in the community
    ‐   More information on outcome data, shared with the HS programs
    ‐   More local press releases on success stories
    ‐   I have just found out that our 3 yr old classes will not be included in the TEEM grant for next
        year. I am very disappointed in this even though we did not do the tracking on the 3 yr olds.
    ‐   Some Head Start teachers are not contracted and they are considered on over-time when
        attending the professional development classes. Supply funding for over-time for teachers to
        attend mandatory training classes after work hours. Also, taken into consideration that Head
        Start Programs that do not have contracted teachers can lose staff during the school year,
        teacher turn-over can be a problem in some locations.
    ‐   Offer some of the activities and supplies to all head start teachers
    ‐   More funding




                                                   35 
 
Key Activity Area 9: Head Start Transition and Alignment with K-12 (Education)
Involvement with Head Start transition and alignment with K-12

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past 12 months
with each of the following providers/organizations responsible for Head Start transition and
alignment with K-12 (Table 33), and to indicate the level of success with implementing certain
collaborative efforts with regards to this Key Activity Area (Table 34). Details are provided
below:
    Table 33. Extent of involvement with local education agencies (LEAs) during the past 12 months
                                                     Collaboration      Coordination   Cooperation          No Working     Response
                                                                                                           Relationship      Count
    Local Education Agencies (LEAs)                 65.6% (21)         25.0% (8)       6.3% (2)           3.1% (1)        32
    regarding transition from Head Start to
    kindergarten

                                                                                                  Answered question       32
                                                                                                   Skipped question       15


    Table 34. Level of success with each of the following items during the past 12 months
                                                   Successful     Neutral     Difficult Extremely                         Response
                                                                                          Difficult                         Count
    Partnering with LEAs to implement systematic                 81.3% (26)    15.6% (5)      0.0% (0)       3.1% (1)     32
    procedures for transferring Head Start program
    records to school
    Ongoing communication with LEAs to facilitate                68.8% (22)    25.0% (8)      3.1% (1)       3.1% (1)     32
    coordination of programs
    Establishing and implementing comprehensive                  62.5% (20)    31.3% (10)     0.0% (0)       6.3% (2)     32
    transition policies and procedures with LEAs
    Linking LEA and Head Start Services relating to              65.6% (21)    31.3% (10)     0.0% (0)       3.1% (1)     32
    language, numeracy and literacy
    Aligning LEA and Head Start curricula and                    62.5% (20)    31.3% (10)     3.1% (1)       3.1% (1)     32
    assessments with Head Start Outcomes Framework
    Aligning Head Start curricula with Texas Pre-K               68.8% (22)    28.1% (9)      0.0% (0)       3.1% (1)     32
    Guidelines
    Partnering with LEAs and parents to assist individual        74.2% (23)    22.6% (7)      0.0% (0)       3.2% (1)     31
    children/families to transition to school, including
    review of portfolio/records
    Coordinating transportation with LEAs                        58.1% (18)    19.4% (6)      12.9% (4)      9.7% (3)     31
    Coordinating shared use of facilities with LEAs              75.0% (24)    15.6% (5)      6.3% (2)       3.1% (1)     32
    Coordinating with LEAs regarding other support               71.9% (23)    15.6% (5)      9.4% (3)       3.1% (1)     32
    services for children and families
    Conducting joint outreach to parents and LEA to              59.4% (19)    31.3% (10)     3.1% (1)       6.3% (2)     32
    discuss needs of children entering kindergarten
    Establish policies and procedures that support               71.9% (23)    18.8% (6)      3.1% (1)       6.3% (2)     32
    children transition to school that includes
    engagement with LEA
    Helping parents of ELL children understand                   50.0% (16)    37.5% (12)     3.1% (1)       9.4% (3)     32
    instructional and other information and services
    provided by the receiving school, including
    section 3302 ESEA
    Exchanging information with LEAs on roles,                   62.5% (20)    25.0% (8)      6.3% (2)       6.3% (2)     32
    resources and regulations
    Aligning curricula and assessment practices with             59.4% (19)    25.0% (8)      6.3% (2)       9.4% (3)     32
    LEAs
    Organizing and participating in joint training,              62.5% (20)    15.6% (5)      9.4% (3)       12.5% (4)    32
    including transition related training for school staff
    and Head Start staff
                                                                                                  Answered question       32
                                                                                                    Skipped question      15


                                                                      36 
 
Issues regarding Head Start transition and alignment with K-12

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced regarding
education/Head Start transition and alignment with K-12 for the children and families in their
program. The following list represents a summary of the answers provided by those
respondents:

    ‐   Dual language schools are difficult to coordinate
    ‐   Parent Involvement in the classroom is limited
    ‐   Education of superintendants and principals as to the benefit of Head Start and inform them
        that Head Start is a viable program and not a step child to public school
    ‐   Need more cohesive collaboration on recruitment and enrollment


Efforts to address Head Start transition and alignment with K-12 needs that are working
well

Respondents were asked to offer information about the efforts they are making to address
transitioning of the children into Kindergarten that are working well and that might be helpful to
other programs in the state. The following list represents a summary of the answers provided
by those respondents:

    ‐   Having the Head Start program as part of the public school facilitates these processes
        immensely
    ‐   Fieldtrips to prospective schools
    ‐   Keep an on-going dialogue with parents all year long regarding kindergarten expectations (for
        graduating children)
    ‐   Meet with LEA principals to explain the needs of transition activities, parent orientation, etc. and
        coordinate dates for the activities
    ‐   Transition process in place runs very smoothly between HS and the local school districts
    ‐   We transition students effectively, since we are part of the School District. We move student’s
        records directly to the next grade level on our campus. We also hold a Parent Committee
        meeting giving tours and providing information to parents.
    ‐   Get into the public schools. Convince them that having Head Start on campus is a benefit--in
        dollars and in results.
    ‐   We have invited the Kindergarten teachers to visit our classrooms and our teachers to see what
        our children are learning and we invite them to give us suggestions on how we can better
        prepare our children for their classrooms




                                                    37 
 
Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs regarding transition and alignment with K-12 for Head Start/Early
Head Start families were collected, along with the preferred training venue for these needs.
Detailed responses are offered in Table 35.

    Table 35. Identified T/TA needs in this area
                                                                                     Response       Response
                                                                                       Percent      Count
    Collaboration                                                                    45.0%          9
    Coordination                                                                     40.0%          8
    Planning                                                                         25.0%          5
    Parent Education                                                                 35.0%          7
    Teacher Education                                                                35.0%          7
    Identification of Resources                                                      20.0%          4
    Aligning HS Performance Standards, Child Outcomes and Pre-K Guidelines           70.0%          14
    MOU Development                                                                  40.0%          8
    Transition Activities                                                            55.0%          11
    Preparation of Children and Families for Kindergarten                            45.0%          9
    Other                                                                            10.0%          2
                                                                              Answered question     20
                                                                               Skipped question     27

Preferred training Venue(s) – Cluster Events (63.6%) & Webinars (63.6%)



Experience with Texas School Readiness Certification System (SRCS)

In partnership with TEEM, two questions were developed to assess respondent’s experience
with the Texas School Readiness Certification System (SRCS). In the first question
respondents were asked to describe their experience with SRCS. The following list represents
a summary of the answers provided by those respondents:

       ‐   We have some classrooms that are TSR Certified, and several others in the process of being
           certified
       ‐   None at this time. We will be participating in the TEEMS Project through Region VIII Service
           center in school year 09-10 and will as a part of the collaboration will be working toward
           campus and teacher School Readiness Certifications.
       ‐   Because of our involvement with the TEEM grants and having the ESC SRI person on staff in
           our Preschool Services area, we have had a great deal of experience with SRCS.
       ‐   Good-still in progress
       ‐   There is a challenge getting the center administrators to "buy in" to the system, since it is a very
           time consuming process for center administrators and teachers
       ‐   Currently, we have 2 classrooms that are certified, but most parents unaware or not sure what it
           means
       ‐   Very successful, a great program
       ‐   It has been a good experience
       ‐   Unclear criteria for certification. The process seems secretive and is finally becoming more
           transparent. Long delay in services to children and notification of SRCS status.
       ‐   Positive and beneficial
       ‐   I think it is expanding some horizons for both school teachers and Head Start teachers.
       ‐   It is a good system
       ‐   Excellent experience



                                                       38 
 
The second question asks respondents to provide suggestions on what needs to be in place
to increase the participation of Head Start centers in the SRCS and to mention the specific
technical or other issues that serve as potential barriers. The following list represents a
summary of the answers provided by those respondents:

    ‐   Intensive teacher trainings
    ‐   Typically the data that is entered into SRCS is already being gathered in another way in
        districts or child care, and often the data entry into SRCS is the second time that the data entry
        person has entered the same information. Facilitating ways that the SRCS system can access
        data that are already entered in other existing systems would alleviate much frustration. If that
        cannot be accomplished, providing funding for additional staff to provide the data entry that is
        needed would be helpful. We have also had situations where multiple records existed for a
        single campus but under slightly different names. Often these records were not combined within
        the system, so it appeared that data were incomplete when in actuality, the records existed.
        These types of glitches often are barriers to a program being recognized as School Ready.
    ‐   On-site recruitment on SRCS information
    ‐   Face-t-face training on the implementation as opposed to e-mail alerts and on-line training
    ‐   More advertising, need additional staff for data entry, teachers don't have time
    ‐   Getting the teachers educated on what the school readiness program is all about and how to
        obtain a certification in the school readiness program
    ‐   Maybe setting some kind of monitoring/tracking guidelines (especially for participating
        directors/agencies) to ensure that information is submitted on time and also for us to follow-up
        with teachers
    ‐   More information about SRCS to Head Start programs
    ‐   Once again, I think it is the amount of teacher turnover that can be an obstacle. Also, making
        sure that you have a TEEM Mentor that understands Head Start and the Head Start
        philosophy.
    ‐   More training and education about school readiness




                                                   39 
 
Key Activity Area 10: Professional Development

Involvement with professional development

Respondents were asked to rate the extent of their involvement during the past 12 months
with each of the following providers/organizations responsible for professional development
(Table 36), and to indicate the level of success with implementing certain efforts with regards
to this Key Activity Area (Table 37). Details are provided below:


    Table 36. Extent of involvement with each of the following service providers/organizations during the past
    12 months
                                       Collaboration Coordination Cooperation No Working            Response
                                                                                     Relationship     Count
    Institutions of Higher Education   25.0% (8)       31.3% (10)     34.4% (11)     9.4% (3)       32
    (4 year)
    Institutions of Higher Education - 32.4% (11)      41.2% (14)     23.5% (8)      2.9% (1)       34
    less than 4 year
    On-line courses/programs           29.4% (10)      26.5% (9)      26.5% (9)      17.6% (6)      34
    Child Care Resource & Referral     18.2% (6)       27.3% (9)      24.2% (8)      30.3% (10)     33
    Network
    OHS T/TA Network (e.g.,            26.5% (9)       26.5% (9)      32.4% (11)     14.7% (5)      34
    National
    Resource Center
    Other T/TA networks (regional,     20.6% (7)       38.2% (13)     26.5% (9)      14.7% (5)      34
    state)
    Service providers/organizations    27.3% (9)       36.4% (12)     24.2% (8)      12.1% (4)      33
    offering relevant T/TA cross-
    training opportunities
                                                                              Answered question 34
                                                                                Skipped question 13

    Table 37. Level of success with each of the following items during the past 12 months
                                                Successful      Neutral     Difficult  Extremely     Response
                                                                                         Difficult     Count
    Transferring credits between public         32.4% (11)    58.8% (20) 5.9% (2)      2.9% (1)      34
    institutions of learning
    Accessing early childhood education         61.8% (21)    20.6% (7)    11.8% (4)   5.9% (2)      34
    degree programs in the community
    Accessing other related degree programs     41.2% (14)    41.2% (14) 17.6% (6)     0.0% (0)      34
    in the community
    Accessing T/TA opportunities in the         55.9% (19)    26.5% (9)    17.6% (6)   0.0% (0)      34
    community
    Accessing scholarships and other financial  33.3% (11)    54.5% (18) 6.1% (2)      6.1% (2)      33
    support for professional development
    programs/activities
    Staff release time to attend professional   54.5% (18)    27.3% (9)    15.2% (5)   3.0% (1)      33
    development activities
    Accessing on-line professional              51.5% (17)    36.4% (12) 12.1% (4)     0.0% (0)      33
    development opportunities
    Exchanging information on roles and         41.2% (14)    52.9% (18) 0.0% (0)      5.9% (2)      34
    resources with other
    providers/organizations regarding
    professional development
                                                                               Answered question     34
                                                                                 Skipped question    13




                                                       40 
 
Issues regarding professional development

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced regarding
professional development activities and resources. The following list represents a summary of
the answers provided by those respondents:

       ‐   large rural area, staff has a lot of travel time, more information on online resources
       ‐   Wish they had colleges closer to our area
       ‐   Provide more health information on line; especially related to Head Start requirements
       ‐   Need our technology updated and strategically aligned
       ‐   It is difficult for us to have enough substitutes in all of our locations to afford all of our teachers to attend
           workshops or training at the same time unless it is a teacher work day or summer break.



Efforts to address professional development needs that are working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about the efforts they are making to address the
professional development in their program that are working well and that might be helpful to
other programs in the state. The following list represents a summary of the answers provided
by those respondents:

       ‐   Amarillo College works very closely with us to provide CDA trainings as needed
       ‐   Accessing training through the Education Service Centers
       ‐   Online/Distance education
       ‐   Information shared with local community colleges in our area & On-site visits conducted
       ‐   TTU is a four year university and therefore provides excellent professional development
           opportunities for our staff
       ‐   We cluster trainings throughout our service area. We are working implementing electronic
           trainings.
       ‐   Bringing the trainer to the campus


Identified training and technical assistance needs

In partnership with the T/TA specialist, a summary of the identified Training and Technical
Assistance (T/TA) needs regarding professional development were collected, along with the
preferred training venue for these needs. Detailed responses are offered in Table 38.
    Table 38. Identified T/TA needs in this area
                                                                                                Response           Response
                                                                                                Percent            Count
    Collaboration                                                                               36.4%              8
    Coordination                                                                                31.8%              7
    Planning                                                                                    18.2%              4
    Grant Writing                                                                               13.6%              3
    Teacher Education                                                                           40.9%              9
    Succession Planning                                                                         18.2%              4
    Strategic Planning                                                                          31.8%              7
    Professional Development Plans                                                              50.0%              11
    Identification of Resources                                                                 36.4%              8
    Technology                                                                                  31.8%              7
    Record Keeping and Reporting                                                                9.1%               2
    Other                                                                                       9.1%               2
                                                                                         Answered question         22
                                                                                          Skipped question         25
Preferred training venue: Webinars (75%)

                                                              41 
 
Succession plan for Head Start staff
The following table shows the number of respondents who have created succession plans for the different staff in
their program. Respondents who answered “Other”, mentioned not having formalized plans, and included “Family
Services Associates” as staff members for whom they have succession plans for.

    Table 39. Succession plan for program staff
                                                                                       Response        Response
                                                                                       Percent         Count
    Executive Director                                                                 22.7%           5
    Head Start Director                                                                45.5%           10
    Management Staff                                                                   59.1%           13
    Teaching Staff                                                                     77.3%           17
    Other                                                                              18.2%           4
                                                                               Answered question       22
                                                                                Skipped question       25




                                                       42 
 
TRENDS AND IMPLICATIONS

Trends of extent of involvement with providers/organizations

Respondents were asked to express their extent of involvement with providers and
organizations during the past 12 months across the nine activity areas, and to indicate the
level of success with implementing certain efforts with regards to this Key Activity Areas.
Within these nine Key Activity Areas, respondents were asked to report upon their
experiences with TEEM, SRCS, and their T/TA needs.

    #   Key Activity Area    Collaboration           Coordination           Cooperation         No Working
        (KAA)                                                                                   Relationship
    1   Health Care          Of the 14 agencies      Of the 14 agencies     Of the 14           Of the 14
                             in this KAA, the        in this KAA, the       agencies in this    agencies in this
        (See Table 6, pg.    majority of the         majority of the        KAA, the majority   KAA, there were
        11)                  respondents             respondents            of the              few respondents
                             answered                answered               respondents         who answered
                             “collaboration” for 2   “coordination” for 8   answered            “No Working
                             of them                 of them                “cooperation” for   Relationship”
                                                                            4 of them
    2   Children             Of the 4 agencies       Of the 4 agencies      Of the 4 agencies   Of the 4 agencies
        Experiencing         in this KAA, the        in this KAA, the       in this KAA, the    in this KAA, the
        Homelessness         majority of             majority of the        majority of the     majority of the
        (See Table 10, pg.   respondents             respondents            respondents         respondents
        14)                  answered                answered               answered            answered “No
                             “collaboration” for 1   “coordination” for 1   “cooperation” for   working
                             of them                 of them                2 of them           relationship” for 2
                                                                                                of them
    3   Family/Child         Of the 5 agencies       Of the 5 agencies      Of the 5 agencies   Of the 5 agencies
        Assistance           in this KAA, the        in this KAA, the       in this KAA, the    in this KAA, the
        (See Table 13, pg.   majority of             majority of the        majority of the     majority of the
        17)                  respondents             respondents            respondents         respondents
                             answered                answered               answered            answered “No
                             “collaboration” for 0   “coordination” for 1   “cooperation” for   working
                             of them                 of them                4 of them           relationship” for 1
                                                                                                of them

    4   Child Care           Of the 6 agencies       Of the 6 agencies      Of the 6 agencies   Of the 6 agencies
        (See Table 16, pg.   in this KAA, the        in this KAA, the       in this KAA, the    in this KAA, the
        19)                  majority of             majority of the        majority of the     majority of the
                             respondents             respondents            respondents         respondents
                             answered                answered               answered            answered “No
                             “collaboration” for 0   “coordination” for 4   “cooperation” for   working
                             of them                 of them                2 of them           relationship” for 1
                                                                                                of them
    5   Family Literacy      Of the 14 agencies      Of the 14 agencies     Of the 6 agencies   Of the 6 agencies
        Services             in this KAA, the        in this KAA, the       in this KAA, the    in this KAA, the
        (See Table 21, pg.   majority of             majority of the        majority of the     majority of the
        22)                  respondents             respondents            respondents         respondents
                             answered                answered               answered            answered “No
                             “collaboration” for 6   “coordination” for 2   “cooperation” for   working
                             of them                 of them                4 of them           relationship” for 3
                                                                                                of them
    6   Children with        Of the 11 agencies      Of the 11 agencies     Of the 11           Of the 11
        Disabilities and     in this KAA, the        in this KAA, the       agencies in this    agencies in this
        Their Families       majority of             majority of the        KAA, the majority   KAA, the majority
        (See Table 24, pg.   respondents             respondents            of the              of the
        25)                  answered                answered               respondents         respondents
                             “collaboration” for 9   “coordination” for 1   answered            answered “No
                             of them                 of them                “cooperation” for   working
                                                       43 
 
                                                                                      1 of them                  relationship” for 1
                                                                                                                 of them
    7    Community                Of the 7 agencies        Of the 7 agencies          Of the 7 agencies          Of the 7 agencies
         Services                 in this KAA, the         in this KAA, the           in this KAA, the           in this KAA, the
         (See Table 27, pg.       majority of              majority of the            majority of the            majority of the
         29)                      respondents              respondents                respondents                respondents
                                  answered                 answered                   answered                   answered “No
                                  “collaboration” for 0    “coordination” for 4       “cooperation” for          working
                                  of them                  of them                    3 of them                  relationship” for 1
                                                                                                                 of them
    8    Publicly Funded          Of the 1 agency in       Of the 1 agency in         Of the 1 agency in         Of the 1 agency in
         Pre-K Partnership        this KAA, the            this KAA, the              this KAA, the              this KAA, the
         Development              majority of              majority of the            majority of the            majority of the
         (See Table 30, pg.       respondents              respondents                respondents                respondents
         31)                      answered                 answered                   answered                   answered “No
                                  “collaboration” for 1    “coordination” for 1       “cooperation” for          working
                                  of them                  of them                    1 of them                  relationship” for 1
                                                                                                                 of them
    9    Transition and           Of the 1 agency in       Of the 1 agency in         Of the 1 agency in         Of the 1 agency in
         Alignment with K-        this KAA, the            this KAA, the              this KAA, the              this KAA, the
         12                       majority of              majority of the            majority of the            majority of the
         (See Table 33, pg.       respondents              respondents                respondents                respondents
         35)                      answered                 answered                   answered                   answered “No
                                  “collaboration” for 1    “coordination” for 1       “cooperation” for          working
                                  of them                  of them                    1 of them                  relationship” for 1
                                                                                                                 of them
    10   Professional             Of the 7 agencies        Of the 7 agencies          Of the 7 agencies          Of the 7 agencies
         Development              in this KAA, the         in this KAA, the           in this KAA, the           in this KAA, the
         (See Table 36, pg.       majority of              majority of the            majority of the            majority of the
         39                       respondents              respondents                respondents                respondents
                                  answered                 answered                   answered                   answered “No
                                  “collaboration” for 1    “coordination” for 3       “cooperation” for          working
                                  of them                  of them                    2 of them                  relationship” for 1
                                                                                                                 of them



Trends of levels of success with efforts in Key Activity Areas

Respondents were asked to indicate the level of success with implementing certain efforts
with regards to the nine Key Activity Areas during the past 12 months. The following table
shows the trends for these questions.

    #    Key Activity Area (KKA)          Successful               Neutral                Difficult               Extremely
                                                                                                                  Difficult

    1    Health Care                      Of the 11 efforts in     Of the 11 efforts in   Of the 11 efforts in    Of the 11 efforts in
         (See Table 7, pg. 11)            this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the           this KAA, the
                                          majority of              majority of            majority of             majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents             respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”    answered
                                          “successful” for 11      for 0 of them          for 0 of them           “extremely difficult”
                                          of them                                                                 for 0 of them




    2    Children Experiencing            Of the 7 efforts in      Of the 7 efforts in    Of the 7 efforts in     Of the 7 efforts in
         Homelessness                     this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the           this KAA, the
         (See Table 11, pg. 14)           majority of              majority of            majority of             majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents             respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”    answered
                                          “successful” for 5       for 2 of them          for 0 of them           “extremely difficult”
                                                                 44 
 
                                          of them                                                                for 0 of them
    3    Family/Child Assistance          Of the 7 efforts in      Of the 7 efforts in    Of the 7 efforts in    Of the 7 efforts in
         (See Table 14, pg. 17)           this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the          this KAA, the
                                          majority of              majority of            majority of            majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents            respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”   answered
                                          “successful” for 5       for 2 of them          for 0 of them          “extremely difficult”
                                          of them                                                                for 0 of them




    4    Child Care                       Of the 5 efforts in      Of the 5 efforts in    Of the 5 efforts in    Of the 5 efforts in
         (See Table 17, pg. 19)           this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the          this KAA, the
                                          majority of              majority of            majority of            majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents            respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”   answered
                                          “successful” for 5       for 0 of them          for 0 of them          “extremely difficult”
                                          of them                                                                for 0 of them
    5    Family Literacy Services         Of the 6 efforts in      Of the 6 efforts in    Of the 6 efforts in    Of the 6 efforts in
         (See Table 22, pg. 22)           this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the          this KAA, the
                                          majority of              majority of            majority of            majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents            respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”   answered
                                          “successful” for 5       for 1 of them          for 0 of them          “extremely difficult”
                                          of them                                                                for 0 of them
    6    Children with Disabilities and   Of the 6 efforts in      Of the 6 efforts in    Of the 6 efforts in    Of the 6 efforts in
         Their Families                   this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the          this KAA, the
         (See Table 25, pg. 25)           majority of              majority of            majority of            majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents            respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”   answered
                                          “successful” for 6       for 0 of them          for 0 of them          “extremely difficult”
                                          of them                                                                for 0 of them
    7    Community Services               Of the 7 efforts in      Of the 7 efforts in    Of the 7 efforts in    Of the 7 efforts in
         (See Table 28, pg. 29)           this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the          this KAA, the
                                          majority of              majority of            majority of            majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents            respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”   answered
                                          “successful” for 2       for 5 of them          for 0 of them          “extremely difficult”
                                          of them                                                                for 0 of them
    8    Publicly Funded Pre-K            Of the 10 efforts in     Of the 10 efforts in   Of the 10 efforts in   Of the 10 efforts in
         Partnership Development          this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the          this KAA, the
         (See Table 31, pg. 31)           majority of              majority of            majority of            majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents            respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”   answered
                                          “successful” for 10      for 0 of them          for 0 of them          “extremely difficult”
                                          of them                                                                for 0 of them
    9    Transition and Alignment         Of the 16 efforts in     Of the 16 efforts in   Of the 16 efforts in   Of the 16 efforts in
         with K-12                        this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the          this KAA, the
         (See Table 34, pg. 35)           majority of              majority of            majority of            majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents            respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”   answered
                                          “successful” for 16      for 0 of them          for 0 of them          “extremely difficult”
                                          of them                                                                for 0 of them
    10   Professional Development         Of the 8 efforts in      Of the 8 efforts in    Of the 8 efforts in    Of the 8 efforts in
         (See Table 37, pg. 39            this KAA, the            this KAA, the          this KAA, the          this KAA, the
                                          majority of              majority of            majority of            majority of
                                          respondents              respondents            respondents            respondents
                                          answered                 answered “neutral”     answered “difficult”   answered
                                          “successful” for 5       for 4 of them          for 0 of them          “extremely difficult”
                                          of them                                                                for 0 of them




                                                                 45 
 
Trends regarding other issues with the Key Activity Areas (KAA)

Respondents were asked to offer information about issues they have experienced relating to
each of the KAA. Themes for each activity area and all individual responses can be found in
the Survey Results section. However, certain themes present in several of the key activity
areas are worth noting here:

    ‐   Transportation
    ‐   Obesity and weight management
    ‐   Recruitment and enrollment
    ‐   Understaffed
    ‐   Respite care, legal support, education, and marriage counseling for parents
    ‐   Difficulty in accessing services or lack of services in rural areas
    ‐   Hours and costs of services
    ‐   Guidance and funding for family literacy services
    ‐   Teacher training and difficulties accessing substitutes
    ‐   Difficulties working with local LEAs
    ‐   Parents/Public not understanding the difference between Pre-K and Head Start
    ‐   Lack of Pre-K willingness to collaborate with Head Starts

Trends regarding efforts to address needs relating to the Key Activity Areas
(KAA) that are working well

Respondents were asked to offer information about the efforts they are doing to address
needs related to the KAA that are working well. Themes for each activity area and all
individual responses can be found in the Survey Results section. However, certain themes
present in several of the key activity areas are worth noting here:

    ‐   Networking and maintaining open lines of communication and negotiation
    ‐   Knowledge of resources and other agencies
    ‐   Computerized tracking program
    ‐   Maintaining active membership on local committees
    ‐   Partnering with TEEM
    ‐   Implementing parent, especially fathers, reading to children programs
    ‐   Working with pregnant teens
    ‐   Online/distance learning
    ‐   Good working relationship with community agencies, i.e. health and dental services,
        adult literacy programs, and legal services




                                              46 
 
Recommendations

The following recommendations were derived from the accumulation of suggestions
provided by respondents throughout the survey.

    •   Assist Head Start/Early head Start Agencies in developing/maintaining involvement
        with providers/organizations serving children experiencing homelessness, to include
        recruitment

    •   Assist agencies in expanding relationships regarding health care, focusing on barriers
        to related tasks

    •   Assist agencies in developing parent education models

    •   Assist Head Start/Early Head Start agencies in addressing the needs of children and
        families living in rural areas

    •   Assist agencies in expanding relationships with family literacy services, especially
        regarding Even Start

    •   Assist agencies in developing and expanding relationships with universities and
        community colleges, especially as related to children with disabilities

    •   Provide assistance for Head Start agencies in meshing Head Start standards and
        Texas Education Agency (TEA) guidelines

    •   T/TA provide training in clusters first and webinars second

    •   Align Head Start Performance Standards, Child Outcomes, and Pre-K Guidelines

    •   Assist Head Start/Early Head Start agencies in their working relationship with Child
        Care Resource and Referral Network

    •   Assist Head Start/Early Head Start Executives and Directors in establishing
        succession plans for their positions

    •   Assist Head Start/Early Head Start in developing staff professional training plans


It is recommended that the THSSCO Director, utilize the following
persons/organizations, to develop and carry out the next five year strategic plan,
based on the recommendations stated above. The recommended
persons/organizations are Joyce Hyatt, President of Texas Head Start Association;
John Rodriguez, Representative of South by Southwest Conference Group; Shannon
Hills, Region VI HSSCO Coordinator; Zynda Patton, State T/TA Specialist; Maia
Shelby, Grantee Performance Support T/TA Specialist; John Gasko, Director, State
Initiatives, Children’s Learning Institute; or their representatives.



                                               47 
 
RESOURCES AND REFERENCES


Office of Head Start Website- http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs/about/

Head Start Program Information Report (PIR) for 2007-2008 Program Year.

Texas Head Start State Collaboration Office Website – http://cli.uth.tmc.edu/thssco

National Center for Children in Poverty Website - http://nccp.org/profiles/TX_profile_9.html

Survey Monkey Website – www.surveymonkey.com

The complete survey can be found online by following the link:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=4m33_2bMo5TBwLfLxOKz5VGA_3d_3d

Photos used may be found in the Texas Head Start/Early Head Start photo album -
http://cli.uth.tmc.edu/thssco




                                              48 
 
APPENDICES

                                               Texas Head Start State Collaboration Office 
                                                                      Dorothy J. Calhoun, Ed.D., Director 
                                                                                  7000 Fannin, UCT 2355 
                                                                                       Houston, TX 77030 
                                                                                             713‐500‐3835 
                                                                                       Toll: 866‐282‐7780 
                                                                                        Fax: 713‐500‐0386 
                                                                   Email: dorothy.j.calhoun@uth.tmc.edu
                                                                   Website: http://cli.uth.tmc.edu/thssco
                                                                        http://www.uth.tmc.edu/tececds
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
April 3, 2009 
 
Dear Head Start/Early Head Start Grantee/ Delegate Director: 
 
By April 6, you will be receiving a link to the 2009 Texas Head Start/ Early Head Start Needs 
Assessment Survey to be completed and returned by April 24, 2009.  We strongly encourage you to 
utilize relevant staff in the completion of the different sections as applicable.  The Head Start Act 
requires this office to use the results of the needs assessment to develop a Strategic Plan outlining 
how THSSCO will assist and support Head Start/ Early Head Start Grantees/ Delegate programs in 
meeting the requirements of the Head Start Act for coordination and collaboration, alignment of 
services, alignment of curricula and assessment, and other specified activities.  This office will make 
the results of the needs assessment available to the general public within the state, and also annually 
update the needs assessment and strategic plan. 
 
This office will continue to keep you abreast of information and resources relevant to your program 
operations.  Your cooperation and assistance is greatly appreciated as we seek to better serve you.  
 
 
 
 
Sincerely, 
 
 
 
Dorothy J. Calhoun, Ed.D. 
 
 
 
 


                                                   49