Developmental Screening Measures

A Systematic Review of Part C Early Identification Studies

“…Unlike the PELL, which highlights the importance of linking data systems, the NE TIPS program highlights the importance of using developmental screeners to monitor development. The use of reliable and valid screeners is crucial to the Child Find process (AAP et al, 2006; Bricker et al, 2013). Furthermore, recent data from TIPS indicate how this system may be used to assess and address within-state discrepancies.…”

“…The U.S. Department of Education and Congress require data on most of the steps leading to an IFSP receipt (Bricker et al, 2013). This includes data on referrals, timeliness of developmental evaluations, eligibility determinations, timeliness of an IFSP receipt, demographic data, and location of rendered services (Derrington, Spiker, Hebbeler, & Diefendorf, 2013).…”

“…The federal government requires that states monitor the number of children referred and those who receive Part C EI services; however, states are not required to track or report the number of children from the community who are monitored or screened (Bricker et al, 2013). The lack of systematic data collection efforts limits current understanding of Child Find activities, including the use and effectiveness of developmental monitoring and screening as a factor in the process of early identification (Bricker et al, 2013; Derrington et al, 2013). …”

“…For example, under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA; 2003), children suspected of abuse or neglect are supposed to receive developmental screening, as are newborns suspected of hearing problems (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2012; White & Blaiser, 2011). Finally, although technically an education law, Part C is often administered via non-education entities (typically public health agencies; Bricker et al, 2013), potentially affecting specific Child Find practices. Thus, the capacity to understand, assess, and improve Child Find efforts is hindered by a lack of data on practices that likely vary greatly across communities.…”

Merging Policy Initiatives and Developmental Perspectives in Early Intervention

“…Cumulative risk indices are also available, especially for children at risk due to environmental factors (Vernon-Feagans, Cox, & Family Life Project Key Investigators, 2013). Of importance, the development of screening tools can be scaled-up for large populations in a feasible and cost-effective way for all children at risk (Bricker, Macy, Squires, & Marks, 2013). Moreover, our increasing capability to screen for a larger array of genetic disorders as well as the recent emphasis to screen children for autism spectrum disorder at early ages in many contexts (e.g., home, health care, child care) will further increase our capacity to provide early intervention services as soon as possible.…”