QUINCEPFI: Quality Interventions for Early Care and Education, Partnerships for Inclusion Model

1
QUINCE-PFI Quality Interventions for Early
Care and Education, Partnerships for Inclusion
Model
Donna Bryant, PhD University of North
Carolina-Chapel Hill

• Research Project funded by the Child Care Bureau,
  ACF and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for
  Planning and Evaluation (ASPE), US Dept. of
  Health and Human Services

2
Partners and Participants

• QUINCE-PFI Research Teams
• FPG Child Development Institute at UNC-CH
• Donna Bryant, Peg Burchinal, Florence Chang,
  Carla Fenson, Karen Taylor, Pat Wesley
• UCLA
• Brandt Chamberlain, Carollee Howes
• Iowa State University
• Sue Hegland, Kere Hughes
• University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Gallup
• Helen Raikes, Julia Torquati
• Child Trends and U of Minnesota Harris Center
• Amy Sussman-Stillman, Kathryn Tout, Marty
  Zaslow
• Local CCRR Agency Staff 20 agencies in 5
  states

3
Intervention Model

• Partnerships for Inclusion - PFI
• On-site consultation for 6-10 months,
  incorporates use of environment rating scales
  (ECERS-R, FDCRS) to help provider set goals for
  change
• A parallel project is also part of QUINCE and is
  evaluating the Rameys Immersion Training for
  Excellence (RITE) in Mississippi

4
PFI Model Components

• Focus on environment
• Joint needs assessment
• Goals identified by consultee
• On-site visits to support change
• Joint assessment of change
• Evaluation of consultation process

5
Research Questions

• Is child care quality improved when providers
  receive PFI consultation?
• Is PFI consultation better than existing quality
  enhancement services?
• Does quality improvement maintain after PFI
  consultation ends?
• What are the characteristics of consultants,
  providers, children and families who participate
  in the study?

6
Research Questions, cont.

• Do some providers benefit more than others
  (education level, home/center, experience)?
• Will closer adherence to the PFI model result in
  greater quality outcomes?
• Will children in the care of providers who
  receive PFI consultation have better outcomes
  than children in control groups?

7
Year 1 PFI Cohort 1

• Randomization at both consultant and provider
  levels when possible

8
PROJECT TIMELINE
Cohort 1
Baseline Time 1
End of Intervention Time 2
Maintenance of Intervention Time 3
Cohort 2
Baseline Time 1
Maintenance of Intervention Time 3
End of Intervention Time 2
Oct 2004
Jun 2005
Dec 2005
Jun 2006
Dec 2006
Oct 2005
PFI action plan continuously re-assessed by
Consultant and Consultee between Time 1 and 2
9
Documentation of Interventions

• Fidelity to the PFI treatment model Adherence to
  the plan of intervention (Treatment)
• Delivery of existing QE activities (Controls)
• Measured in both Treatments Controls
• frequency and duration of contact
• materials used
• interactions

10
Environmental Change Assessments

• Global quality (FDCRS, ECERS-R)
• Assessment of pre-academic activities, especially
  language (ECERS-E)
• Provider-Child Interactions (CIS)
• Health and safety (FDCRS and ECERS-R subscales)

11
Assessments of Children

• Literacy and language skills (PLS-4)
• School readiness concept skills (Bracken)
• Social-emotional development (DECA, SCBE)
• Physical and health status (Teacher Ratings)

12
Consultants Criteria for Participation

• 1 year commitment to be in the study
• Commitment to implement the intervention as close
  as possible to the model or the existing agency
  intervention
• No educational criteria -- we want the diversity
  that is out there, and the models should be
  useful for all ed. levels

13
Year 1 Consultants Preliminary Descriptive Data
14
Year 1 ConsultantsPreliminary Data on
Race/Ethnicity
15
Year 1 ConsultantsPreliminary Education Data
16
Year 1 ConsultantsPreliminary Data
Schaefer Edgertons (1985) Modernity Scale
Scores range from 1-5 with higher scores
indicating more adult-centered beliefs about
interactions with children
17
Year 1 ConsultantsPreliminary Data
18
Year 1 ConsultantsPreliminary Data
19
Year 1 ConsultantsBaseline Data (Pre-PFI
training)
Adapted from Kontos, Howes, Shinn, Galinsky
(1995)
20
Year 1 ConsultantsBaseline Data (Pre- PFI
training)
Adapted from the Early Childhood Teacher
Inventory, VandeWiele (2001)
21
Policy Implications

• What works best to enhance quality?
• Educational level of the work force
• Turnover among providers
• Targeting of subsidy and QE dollars
• Cost of training to improve quality
• Sustainability infrastructure, dissemination