2015 Annual Evaluation · 2017-03-28 · 2015 Annual Evaluation Report 1 2015 Annual Evaluation...

Help Me Grow Utah 2015 Annual Evaluation Report

1

2015 Annual Evaluation

Prepared By

Greater Ventures, LLC

May 31, 2016

In cooperation with Barbara Leavitt, M.P.A., Early Childhood Initiative Director, United Way of Utah County


2

Table of Contents

Table Of Tables ........................................................................................................... 4

Executive Summary..................................................................................................... 6 Background ...................................................................................................................... 6 Mission ............................................................................................................................ 6 Data Analyses .................................................................................................................. 6 Summary of Findings ....................................................................................................... 7

Section 1: How much did Help Me Grow Utah do? .................................................... 7 Section 2: How Well Is Help Me Grow Doing? ........................................................... 7 Section 3: Is Anyone Better Off Because of Help Me Grow? ..................................... 9

Insights .......................................................................................................................... 10 Actionable Findings ....................................................................................................... 11

Help Me Grow Utah 2015 Facts at a Glance ............................................................... 13

Section 1: How Much Is Help Me Grow Doing? ......................................................... 14 Total Number of Families .............................................................................................. 14 Total Number of Unique Children Served ..................................................................... 15 Number of New and Continuing Families Enrolled in Help Me Grow .......................... 16 Total Number of Families by Region ............................................................................. 16 Top 3 Counties in Each Region for Family Enrollment .................................................. 17 Counties with Highest Family Enrollment ..................................................................... 18 Number of Continuing and New Families by Region .................................................... 19 Family School Districts by Year, Salt Lake County ......................................................... 19 Calls to HMG by Year ..................................................................................................... 20 Who Calls HMG: Ethnic/Racial Groups ......................................................................... 22 Who Calls HMG: Languages ......................................................................................... 22 Initial Reason for Calling HMG ...................................................................................... 22 Initial Reasons for Calling HMG Excluding Development and Screening ...................... 23 How Families Heard About Help Me Grow ................................................................... 24 How Families Heard About HMG by Region ................................................................. 25 Number of Outreach Events, 2015 and 2014 ............................................................... 25 Recruitment Events ....................................................................................................... 26 Training Events .............................................................................................................. 26 How Clients Were Insured ............................................................................................ 26

Section 2: How Well Is Help Me Grow Doing? ........................................................... 28 Total Number of 2015 Informational and Referral Services ......................................... 28 Number of Services for Families and Children by Year ................................................. 28 Number of Child Services by Year ................................................................................. 29 Type of Child Services .................................................................................................... 29 Child Referral Issues ...................................................................................................... 29 Child Referral Issue Categories Omitting General Development/Screening ................ 30


3

Types of Child Services by Specific Issues ..................................................................... 30 Number of Scored ASQs by Year ................................................................................... 31 Child Referrals to Community Resources Based on a Screening .................................. 31 ASQ Scores by Age of Child in Years .............................................................................. 32 Multiple Scored ASQs .................................................................................................... 32 Number of ASQs in Monitoring or Below Scores .......................................................... 33 ASQ Method Preference ............................................................................................... 33 Percentage of ASQs Faxed to a Pediatrician ................................................................. 34 Number of Family Services by Year ............................................................................... 34 Family Services Types .................................................................................................... 34 Family Presenting Issues ............................................................................................... 35 Family File Status, End of 2015 ..................................................................................... 35 Enrolled Family File Status, End of 2015 ....................................................................... 35 Reasons for Inactive Family Files .................................................................................. 36 Inquiry File Status, End of 2015..................................................................................... 36 Reasons for Closed Inquiry Family Files ........................................................................ 37

Section 3: Is Anyone Better Off Because of Help Me Grow? ...................................... 38 Outcomes for Children Community Resource Referrals ............................................... 38 Outcomes for Community Resource Referrals for Specific Child Issues ....................... 38 Types of Information Received ..................................................................................... 39 Activities/ASQ3 Activities Requested ............................................................................ 40 Informational Resources Details ................................................................................... 41 Services for Specific Family Referral Issues ................................................................... 42 Outcomes for Family Community Resource Referrals .................................................. 42 Development of Protective Factors .............................................................................. 42

Appendix .................................................................................................................. 45


4

Table Of Tables

Table 1: Number Of Continuing And New Families By Region ..................................................... 19

Table 2: Family School Districts By Year, Salt Lake County .......................................................... 20

Table 3: Who Calls HMG: Languages ........................................................................................... 22

Table 4: How Families Heard About Help Me Grow ..................................................................... 24

Table 5: How Families Heard About HMG By Region ................................................................... 25

Table 6: Number Of Outreach Events, 2015 And 2014 ................................................................ 25

Table 7: Recruitment Events ........................................................................................................ 26

Table 8: Training Events................................................................................................................ 26

Table 9: How Clients Were Insured .............................................................................................. 27

Table 10: Total Number Of 2015 Informational And Referral Services ........................................ 28

Table 11: Type Of Child Services ................................................................................................... 29

Table 12: Child Referral Issues ...................................................................................................... 30

Table 13: Child Referral Issue Categories Omitting General Development/ Screening ............... 30

Table 14: Types Of Child Services By Specific Issues .................................................................... 31

Table 15: Asq Scores By Age Of Child In Years ............................................................................. 32

Table 16: Multiple Scored Asqs .................................................................................................... 33

Table 17: Number Of Asqs In Monitoring Or Below Scores ......................................................... 33

Table 18: Asq Method Preference ................................................................................................ 33

Table 19: Percentage Of Asqs Faxed To A Pediatrician ................................................................ 34

Table 20: Family Services Types ................................................................................................... 34

Table 21: Family Presenting Issues ............................................................................................... 35

Table 22: Family File Status, End Of 2015 .................................................................................... 35

Table 23: Enrolled Family File Status, End Of 2015 ...................................................................... 36

Table 24: Reasons For Inactive Family Files ................................................................................. 36

Table 25: Inquiry File Status, End Of 2015 .................................................................................... 37

Table 26: Reasons For Closed Inquiry Family Files ....................................................................... 37

Table 27: Outcomes For Children Community Resource Referrals .............................................. 38

Table 28: Outcomes For Community Resource Referrals For Specific Child Issues ..................... 39

Table 29: Types Of Information Received .................................................................................... 39

Table 30: Activities/Asq3 Activities Requested ............................................................................ 40

Table 31: Informational Resources Details ................................................................................... 41

Table 32: Services For Specific Family Referral Issues .................................................................. 42

Table 33: Outcomes For Family Community Resource Referrals .................................................. 42

Table 34: Protective Factors Research Findings ........................................................................... 44


5

Table of Figures

Figure 1: Total Number Of Families .............................................................................................. 14

Figure 2: Total Number Of Unique Children Serve ....................................................................... 15

Figure 3: Number Of New And Continuing Families Enrolled In Help Me Grow .......................... 16

Figure 4: Total Number Of Families By Region ............................................................................. 17

Figure 5: Top 3 Counties In Each Region For Family Enrollment .................................................. 18

Figure 6: Counties With Highest Family Enrollment ..................................................................... 19

Figure 7: Calls To HMG By Year .................................................................................................... 20

Figure 8: Calls To HMG 2015 And 6-Year Average ....................................................................... 21

Figure 9: Trends In Calls To HMG By Month ................................................................................. 21

Figure 10: Who Calls Help Me Grow: Ethnic/Racial Groups ......................................................... 22

Figure 11: Initial Reason For Calling HMG .................................................................................... 23

Figure 12: Initial Reasons For Calling HMG Excluding Development And Screening ................... 24

Figure 13: Number Of Referrals For Families And Children By Year ............................................ 28

Figure 14: Number Of Child Services By Year ............................................................................... 29

Figure 15: Number Of Scored Asqs By Year .................................................................................. 31

Figure 16: Child Referrals To Community Resources Based On A Screening ............................... 32

Figure 17: Number Of Family Services By Year ............................................................................ 34


6

Executive Summary

Background Help Me Grow is a free parent help line that supports families by providing information and connecting them with community resources that focus on healthy child development. In addition to the help line, Help Me Grow provides parents and caregivers with a nationally recognized questionnaire used to identify strengths and concerns in child developmental milestones. Help Me Grow resources can answer parenting questions on many topics. Examples include child development, speech/language, mental health and behavioral concerns. Dedicated care coordinators work with interested families to provide information and access to community resources, ongoing emotional support and follow-up with each family. The overarching goal of Help Me Grow Utah is early detection of developmental delays in children and linking families to appropriate services and resources. Their intent is to widen their reach to not only high risk, but also medium and low risk families. Help Me Grow Utah (HMG) was established in March 2010 under the educational strategic planning of United Way of Utah County and continues to be administered through that office. In 2014, Help Me Grow served clients primarily in Utah and Salt Lake Counties with a growing number of other clients throughout the state of Utah. In January of 2015, statewide expansion began with the hiring of 6 staff members for new offices in St George and Ogden. Several months later, directed outreach efforts began in southern and northern parts of the state. Parents and others most often heard about HMG through outreach efforts and accessed Help Me Grow Utah through the United Way 2-1-1 calling system and through the Help Me Grow website. Help Me Grow Utah is an affiliate of Help Me Grow National, which has headquarters in Hartford, Connecticut.

Mission Help Me Grow Utah promotes the optimal development of young children by:

Linking families to information and community resources related to child development and parenting

Providing personalized care coordination for their clients

Creating and facilitating partnerships within the community to improve the availability and quality of services for families.

Help Me Grow Utah’s vision is a vibrant community environment in which families have the desire, resources and confidence to make the best decisions for their child’s developmental future.

Data Analyses Data for the 2015 annual report was collected from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015. Friedman’s (2005) results-based accountability framework was used for the structure of this report and is commonly used for Help Me Grow National reporting. Greater Ventures, LLC, of


7

Orem, Utah, was contracted to prepare the 2015 annual report. SPSS statistical software was used to analyze data. Findings of the 2015 Help Me Grow annual report are discussed according to Friedman’s three performance measures: Section 1: How much did Help Me Grow do?

(Number and location of clients, caller trends, and community outreach efforts) Section 2: How well is Help Me Grow doing?

(Number of children served and their presenting issues, Ages and Stages Questionnaire trends and analyses, and reasons for file closure)

Section 3: Is anyone better off as a result of connecting with Help Me Grow? (Child and family outcome trends, informational resources provided, and protective factor development research)

Summary of Findings Section 1: How much did Help Me Grow Utah do?

Number of enrolled families 2338 Number of unique children enrolled 1869 Number of new families 1650 Number of continuing families 688 Region with highest enrollment Region 2 Number of calls 1650 Most common ethnicity White (77%) Most common reason for call General Development or Screening Most common way family heard Outreach Events Number of outreach events 269

Section 2: How Well Is Help Me Grow Doing?

Number of total services 6471 Number of child services 5954 Number of family services 517 Most common child service Information Most common child issue General Development or Screening Most common child referral Mental Health/Behavioral Number of scored ASQs 3011 % ASQs in Monitoring/Below 28.8% Most common family issue Basic Needs Most common family referral Basic Needs Child community resource referrals 732 (12% of child services) Child information resources provided 5222 (88% of child services) Family community resource referrals 339 (66% of family services) Family information resources provided 178 (34% of family services) Most common reason for closed file Received service (53%)


8


9

Section 3: Is Anyone Better Off Because of Help Me Grow?

% Child referrals connected to

community resources 29% Most requested information Activities (83% of requests) % Family referrals connected

to community resources 30% Protective Factors development See Page 43


10

Insights 1. In 2015 Help Me Grow Utah saw tremendous growth in all aspects of the organization

including number of clients and services, the addition of new staff, and the expansion of services throughout the State of Utah. In order to better capture data, the state was divided into four major regions.

2. The greatest impact Help Me Grow had on Utah families was providing information about

parenting, child development, and other concerns. Over 6400 informational resources were provided to families. Of the 5954 child services provided, 5222 were informational resources to the families and the remaining 732 services included referrals to community resources. Of these referrals, 29% were actually connected to community resources. Overall, 91.3% of services to children can be considered successful.

3. Nearly half (48.4%) of all scored ASQs were sent to a pediatrician, indicating a move to more

universal acceptance of developmental screening. 4. With the statewide expansion of HMG, the number of outreach efforts to families increased

72% from 2015 and impacted the 87% increase in the number of children enrolled from 2014 to 2015. Over 25% of clients said they heard about HMG from an outreach event.


11

Actionable Findings

Actionable data is information gleaned from research that can be used to inform the public, stakeholders, funders and others of what Help Me Grow does, how well they do it and if anyone is better off as a result of connecting with Help Me Grow (Friedman, 2005)--in essence, to tell the Help Me Grow story. The 2015 annual report provides this information. Actionable data also provides information to inform organizational direction, quality improvement and growth strategies. The 2015 annual report data suggests the following actions to aid in continuous program improvement: 1. In order to maintain program integrity and effectiveness during this rapid growth pattern,

proper training of new staff, vigilance in capturing valid data, retaining effective customer service, and striving for continuous quality improvement is imperative.

2. While the number of participants and services has grown incrementally, the rate of client

referrals being connected to community resources is disappointing. In 2015, 33% of child community resource referrals were not connected and 38% had an unknown outcome. A detailed examination of follow-up protocol, client contact methods and documentation, partner agency facilitated referral, staff diligence, and other considerations are recommended in order to connect more clients with needed services and to identify outcomes for clients with unknown outcomes.

3. HMG data collection software and methods has provided rich information through the years

and has informed continuous quality improvement. Exploring further how data files can be combined to connect outcomes with new variables may aid in understanding referral connection rates. HMG staff recommendations on other data connections are encouraged in order to foster more insights into program effectiveness rates.

4. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Utah’s population is 13% Hispanic. The largest

metropolitan area, Salt Lake City, is 22% Hispanic. The percentage of HMG clients who are Hispanic dropped from 23% in 2014 to 18% in 2015. HMG attributes their overall increased enrollment in 2015 to better outreach efforts and building community partnerships and networks. HMG had a 72% increase in number of outreach events in 2015 from 2014. No outreach staff, however, spoke Spanish and fewer than 5 outreach events displayed signage in Spanish. HMG employs two Spanish-speaking care coordinators who serve that population. In the coming year, more directed outreach efforts to minority populations are recommended. Recording outreach events by region and city will facilitate better analysis associated with client ethnicity.

5. Around 70% of HMG clients preferred online ASQs but less that 2% of clients heard about

HMG through social media. Considering the high prevalence of internet use, outreach efforts may yield higher rates of enrollment with a targeted social media campaign.


12


13

Help Me Grow Utah 2015 Facts at a Glance

Number of enrolled families 2338 (57% increase from 2014) Number of new families 1650 (64% increase from 2014)

Number of unduplicated children 1869 (87% increase from 2014)

Number of services to children 5954 (117% increase from 2014)

Number of ASQs scored 3011 (62% increase from 2014) Number of phone calls to HMG 1650 (64% increase from 2014)

#1 reason for calling HMG General development/Screening (74% of calls)

Number of total outreach events 269 (132% increase from 2014)


14

Note: Percentages in all tables may not total 100% due to rounding. Totals throughout report may differ due to missing data.

Section 1: How Much Is Help Me Grow Doing?

Section 1 presents data to indicate how many families and children were introduced to and served by Help Me Grow Utah along with their basic demographic information. In general, the following data is presented:

Number and location of enrollments

Caller information

Reasons for calling

Outreach events Total Number of Families A total of 2338 families were clients of Help Me Grow in 2015. From 2014 to 2015, the number of families enrolled in HMG increased 57.2% (1487 to 2338). From 2013 to 2014, the number of families enrolled in HMG increased 17.4% (1229 to 1487). The exponential rate of growth in 2015 was attributed to state expansion of the services. New staff members were hired in January and outreach efforts began in June.

Figure 1: Total Number of Families

229

540

966

1229

1487

2338

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Total Number of Families


15

Total Number of Unique Children Served The total number of unique children served in 2015 was 1869, an 86.9% increase over the previous year. These children received one or more services that included a scored Ages and Stages Questionnaire, a referral to community resources, or other requested information.

Figure 2: Total Number of Unique Children Serve

132

368

630823

1000

1869

2010 2011 2011 2013 2014 2015

Number ofUnique Children Served


16

Number of New and Continuing Families Enrolled in Help Me Grow Of the 2338 families in enrolled in HMG in 2015, 688 continued from previous years and 1650 were new.

Figure 3: Number of New and Continuing Families Enrolled in Help Me Grow Total Number of Families by Region Region 1 (Utah, Wasatch, Uintah, Juab, Duchesne, Carbon, San Juan Counties) and Region 2 (Salt Lake, Summit, Tooele Counties) had the highest numbers of families enrolled in HMG (898, 983). Other regions are defined in the appendix. Out of 29 counties in Utah, Help Me Grow served families in 23 counties.

96 336 415 481688

229444

630814

1006

1650

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Number of New and Continuing Families Enrolled in Help Me Grow

Continuing New

540966

12291487

2338


17

Figure 4: Total Number of Families by Region Top 3 Counties in Each Region for Family Enrollment Utah County had the highest number of families in Region 1 (736). Salt Lake County had the highest number of families in Region 2 (741). Washington County had the highest number of families in Region 3 (111). And Weber County had the highest number of families in Region 4 (62).

898983

182117

�Region 1 �Region 2 �Region 3 �Region 4

Total Number of Families by Region


18

Figure 5: Top 3 Counties in Each Region for Family Enrollment Counties with Highest Family Enrollment Salt Lake County (741) and Utah County (736) were the counties with the highest number of families enrolled in 2015.

736

68 56

Utah Duchesne Uintah

Region 1 Top 3 Counties

741

99 82

Salt Lake Tooele Davis

Region 2Top 3 Counties

111

4215


6238

15

Weber Cache Box Elder



19

Figure 6: Counties with Highest Family Enrollment Number of Continuing and New Families by Region Overall, 69.5% of all HMG families were newly enrolled in 2015. Around half of Region 1 families were continuing with HMG from previous years (49.8%). In Region 2, nearly 80% of families enrolled in 2015. Likewise in Regions 3 and 4, a very large percentage of families enrolled in 2015 (97.3%, 89.7%) for the first time. Table 1: Number of Continuing and New Families by Region

Region Continuing New Total

Region 1 447 (49.8%) 451 (50.2%) 898 (41.2%) Region 2 200 (20.3%) 783 (79.7%) 983 (45.1%) Region 3 5 (2.7%) 177 (97.3%) 182 (8.3%) Region 4 12 (10.3%) 105 (89.7%) 117 (5.4%) Total 664 (30.5%) 1516 (69.5%) 2180 (100%)

Family School Districts by Year, Salt Lake County In 2015, the largest percentage of HMG families in Salt Lake County resided in Jordan School District (40.0%), followed by Canyons School District (21.4%). In 2014, the largest percentage of HMG families resided in Granite School District (45.5%), followed by Jordan School District (21.4%).

741 736

111 99 82

SaltLake

Utah Washington Tooele Davis

Counties with Highest Enrollment


20

Table 2: Family School Districts by Year, Salt Lake County

Salt Lake County School District

2015 2014 2013 2012

Jordan 40.0% 21.4% 13.4% 11%

Canyons 21.4% 11.4% 12.6% 12%

Granite 16.7% 45.5% 30.7% 50%

Murray 11.6% 5.4% 2.2% 6%

Salt Lake 10.3% 16.3% 41.1% 21%

Calls to HMG by Year In 2015, calls to HMG totaled 1650. On average, HMG received 194 more calls each year from the previous year until 2015. The number of calls increased from 1006 in 2014 to 1650 in 2015, an increase of 644 calls or 64%.

Figure 7: Calls to HMG by Year Calls to HMG 2015 and 6-Year Average As compared to a 6-year average, the number of calls to HMG increased in every month except January in 2015. On average, most calls are received in February of each year. However, with the 2015 statewide expansion, caller trends were disrupted with significant differences in March and May.

230

444

629

814

1006

1650

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Calls to HMG by Year


21

Figure 8: Calls to HMG 2015 and 6-Year Average Trends in Calls to HMG by Month Trends in calls to HMG in 2015 generally followed trends from an average from previous years with slight variations in March and May.

Figure 9: Trends in Calls to HMG by Month

50

153

211

87

156

132114 120

191173

152

111

55

115

7050

6373

4960

75 69 64 54

Calls to HMG 2015 and 6-Year Average

2015 6 Year Average

0

50

100

150

200

250

Trends in Calls to HMG by Month

2015 6 Year Average


22

Who Calls HMG: Ethnic/Racial Groups Of the 985 clients who reported ethnicity/race, 77.0% were Caucasian, 18.0.0% were Hispanic and 6.0% reported other ethnicities and races.

Figure 10: Who Calls Help Me Grow: Ethnic/Racial Groups Who Calls HMG: Languages English language speakers comprised 90.3% of callers in 2015. This high percentage is consistent with every other year. Table 3: Who Calls HMG: Languages

Language Year 6 Year 5 Year 4 Year 3

English Only 1993 (90.3%) 1131 (90.2%) 1026 (86.8%) 869 (90.0%)

Spanish Only 120 (5.4%) 133 (9.7%) 155 (13.1%) 96 (9.9%)

English and Spanish

92 (4.2%)

Other 3 (0.1%) 0 1 (0.1%) 1 (0.1%)

Total 2208 (100%) 1364 (100%) 1229 (100%) 966 (100%)

Initial Reason for Calling HMG Nearly 74% (73.7%) of all calls were for general child development questions or for developmental screenings.

77.0%

18.0%6.0%

68.0%

23.0%

9.0%

White Hispanic Other

Who Calls HMG: Ethnic/Racial Groups

2015 2014


23

Figure 11: Initial Reason for Calling HMG Initial Reasons for Calling HMG Excluding Development and Screening Of the 1650 calls to HMG in 2015, 26% were for reasons other than general child development or screening questions. About half of the calls categorized as “other” in the above chart were for speech and language (25%) and Mental Health/behavioral (23%) issues.

General Development or Screening

74%

Other26%

Initial Reason for Calling HMG


24

Figure 12: Initial Reasons for Calling HMG Excluding Development and Screening How Families Heard About Help Me Grow Over 1/3 of reporting families heard about HMG through outreach efforts. Nearly 33% learned of HMG through another community agency and 16% from a health care provider. See Appendix for complete details for each item. Table 4: How Families Heard About Help Me Grow

Source N (%)

HMG Outreach 815 (35%)

Community Agency 765 (32.8%)

Health Care Provider 371 (16.0%)

211 214 (9.2%)

Friends/Family 105 (4.5%)

Media 38 (1.6%)

Unknown 20 (0.9%) Total 2328 (100%)

�Speech and Language

25%

�Mental Health/Behavioral

23%Basic Needs14%

�Education/Learning9%

�Parenting and Family Education

6%

�Other23%

Initial Reasons for Calling HMG Excluding Development and Screening


25

How Families Heard About HMG by Region In Regions 2, 3 and 4, where HMG is relatively new, families most often heard about Help Me Grow through outreach efforts or family events. Help Me Grow has existed in Region 1 since 2010 and reduced the number of outreach events in 2015. Families in that region most often heard about the service through community agencies. Table 5: How Families Heard About HMG by Region

Source Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Total

Help Me Grow 115 (12.9%) 380 (42.3%) 145 (79.7%) 70 (35.2%) 710 (32.7%)

Community Agency

517 (57.9%) 145 (16.1%) 17 (9.2%) 62 (31.1%) 741 (33.9%)

Health Care Provider

160 (17.9%) 155 (17.2%)

14 (7.7%) 31 (15.6%) 360 (16.6%)

211 19 (2.1%) 177 (19.7%) 2 (1.1%) 12 (6.0%) 210 (9.7%)

Friend/Family 59 (6.6%) 22 (2.4%) 3 (1.6%) 13 (6.5%) 97 (4.5%)

Media 14 (1.6%) 15 (1.7%) 1 (0.5%) 7 (3.5%) 37 (1.7%)

Unknown 8 (0.9%) 4 (0.4%) 0 4 (2.0%) 16 (0.7%)

Total 892 (100%) 898 (100%) 182 (100%) 199 (100%) 2171 (100%)

Number of Outreach Events, 2015 and 2014 HMG strives to achieve their program enrollment goals through two types of outreach events: training and recruitment. During training events, HMG staff members share program information and answer questions from families, providers, and physicians. The purpose is to increase understanding about HMG and develop partnerships with the participants. The purpose of recruitment events is to engage families in the planned activities, introduce HMG, and encourage the families to enroll. The number of recruitment events in 2015 increased 264% from 2014 (44 to 160) and the number of training events in 2015 increased 51% from 2014 (72 to 109). Table 6: Number of Outreach Events, 2015 and 2014

Event Type # of Events in 2015 # of Events in 2014

Recruitment 160 44

Training 109 72

Total 269 116


26

Recruitment Events The number of recruitment events in 2015 was 160 with an estimated 37,402 participants. This is approximately 264% more events than in 2014. Table 7: Recruitment Events

Type 2015 2014

Events Participants Events Participants

Fair 20 22,273* 6 15,752

Family Event 124 14,995* 31 2,303

Family In-service

10 81 2 45

HMG Family Event

6 53 3 1,300

Parent/Teach Conference

0 0 2 500

Total 160 37,402 44 20,300

*Not all events recorded number of participants. These are conservative estimates based on calculations using numbers of participants at other similar events.

Training Events The number of training events in 2015 was 109. This is a 51% increase from 2014, however the number of participants decreased 29% from the number in 2014. Table 8: Training Events

Type 2015 2014

Events Participants Events Participants

In-service 81 943 34 498

Meeting 10 93 4 309

Networking Breakfast 9 188 4 120

Training 9 39 2 11

Aspire Parent Group 0 0 12 455

Conferences 0 0 3 390

Fairs 0 0 2 175

Other 0 0 12 206

Total 109 1263 72 2164

How Clients Were Insured Of 1508 reporting families in 2015, 56% had insurance through an employer or private coverage, up from 48% in 2014. In 2015, 30% of families had Medicaid as compared with 39% in 2014. And families with no insurance increased from 9% in 2014 to 11.3% in 2015.


27

Table 9: How Clients Were Insured

Insurance Type 2015 2014

Employer/Private 56.0% 48.0%

Medicaid 30.0% 39.0%

None 11.3% 9.0%

Other 2.7% 4.0%

Total 100.0% 100.0%


28

Section 2: How Well Is Help Me Grow Doing?

Section 2 includes services provided to Help Me Grow Utah clients, the issues that callers have when calling HMG. In general this section covers:

Number and type of services to families and children

Child and family Issues

Number of screenings and ASQ scores

Family file status Total Number of 2015 Informational and Referral Services The number of services given for both children and families in 2015 was 6471. A total of 92% of all services were for children. Services included informational resources as well as referrals to community agencies. Table 10: Total Number of 2015 Informational and Referral Services

Service Recipient N (%)

Children 5954 (92.0%)

Families 517 (8.0%)

Total 6471 (100%)

Number of Services for Families and Children by Year The total number of referrals for family and children increased 107% from 2014 (3122) to 2015 (6471).

Figure 13: Number of Referrals for Families and Children by Year

567 6191132

1746

3122

6471

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Total Number of Services for Families and Children by Years


29

Number of Child Services by Year The number of services for children in 2015 was 5954, a 117% increase from 2014.

Figure 14: Number of Child Services by Year Type of Child Services Nearly 88% of the services for children consisted of providing requested information. Just over 12% of the services consisted of giving referrals to community resources. Table 11: Type of Child Services

Type of Child Services N (%)

Information Provided 5222 (87.7%)

Community Resource Referral 732 (12.3%)

Total 5954 (100%)

Child Referral Issues Over half (55.2%) of the child issues were for general development or a developmental screening. Speech and language (17.2%) and mental health/behavioral (14.3%) were the next most common issues. See Appendix for list of all issues in each category.

124 346965

1492

2746

5954

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Number of Child Services by Year


30

Table 12: Child Referral Issues

Child Referral Issue N (%)

General Development/Screening 3287 (55.2%)

Speech and Language 1023 (17.2%)

Mental Health/Behavioral 853 (14.3%)

Education/Learning 569 (9.6%)

Basic Needs 110 (1.8%)

Parenting and Family Education 64 (1.1%)

Other 48 (0.8%)

Total 5954 (100%)

Child Referral Issue Categories Omitting General Development/Screening When omitting general development/screening from the analysis, over 38% of the remaining child issues were speech and language and 32% were for mental health/behavior. Table 13: Child Referral Issue Categories Omitting General Development/ Screening

Child Referral Issue Category N (%)






Other 48 (1.8%)

Total 2667 (100%)

Types of Child Services by Specific Issues The most common child issue receiving services was general development (55.2%). Of the general development issues, 4% were referred to community resources. The issue most often referred to community resources was basic needs. Of the 110 basic needs issues, 63.6% were referred to community resource resources.


31

Table 14: Types of Child Services by Specific Issues

Specific Child Issue Information

Received Community

Resource Referral Total

General Development

3155 (96%) 132 (4.0%) 3287 (55.2%)

Speech and Language

882 (86.2%) 141 (13.8%) 1023 (17.2%)

Mental Health/Behavioral

637 (74.7%) 216 (25.3%) 853 (14.3%)

Basic Needs 40 (36.4%) 70 (63.6%) 110 (1.8%)

Education/Learning 454 (79.8%) 115 (20.2%) 569 (9.6%)

Parenting and Family Education

38 (59.4%) 26 (40.6%) 64 (1.1%)

Other 16 (33.3%) 32 (66.7%) 48 (0.8%)

Total 5222 (87.7%) 732 (12.3%) 5954 (100%)

Number of Scored ASQs by Year The number of Ages and Stages Questionnaires scored in 2015 was 3011, a 62% increase from 2014.

Figure 15: Number of Scored ASQs by Year Child Referrals to Community Resources Based on a Screening The percentage of child referrals that were based on a scored developmental screening was 30%.

179515

8921168

1857

3011

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Number of Scored ASQsby Year


32

Figure 16: Child Referrals to Community Resources Based on a Screening

ASQ Scores by Age of Child in Years Table 16 reflects the total number of scored ASQs (3002) by child age in years and the ASQ scores associated with those ages. One child may be scored on multiple ASQs. If a child scored Below in one or more developmental areas, the total ASQ score was recorded as Below. Overall, 63.2% of scored ASQs were in the Above range, 14.4% were in the Monitoring range, and 14.4% were in the Below range. The largest number of ASQ scores are for one and two year old children, a population which normally receives few opportunities for screening. Table 15: ASQ Scores by Age of Child in Years

ASQ Year Above Monitoring Below Total

1st Year 593 (62.2%) 234 (24.5%) 127 (13.3%) 954 (31.8%)

2nd Year 612 (64.2%) 209 (21.9% 133 (13.9%) 954 (31.8%)

3rd Year 393(62.9%) 140 (22.4%) 92(14.7%) 625 (20.8%)

4th Year 151 (61.9%) 51 (20.9%) 42 (17.2%) 244 (8.1%)

5th Year 147 (65.3% 41 (18.2%) 37 (16.4%) 225 (7.5%)

Total 1896 (63.2%) 675 (22.5%) 431 (14.4%) 3002 (100%)

Multiple Scored ASQs A number of children were scored on multiple screenings. Of the 554 children who were scored on 3-5 screenings, over 46% (45.5%) of the scores were in the Monitoring or Below scoring ranges. Of the 111 children who were scored on 6-10 screenings, just over 50% (50.4%) of the scores were in the Monitoring or Below scoring ranges.

Based on a screening

30%

Not based on a screening

70%

Child Referrals to Community Resources Based on a Screening


33

Table 16: Multiple Scored ASQs

# ASQs ASQ Score Categories

Totals Above Monitoring Below

3-5 ASQs 296 (53.4%) 172 (31.0%) 86 (15.5%) 554

6-10 ASQs 55 (49.5%) 35 (31.5%) 21 (18.9%) 111

Number of ASQs in Monitoring or Below Scores In 2015, 28.8% of all ASQ scores were in the Monitoring (22.5%) or Below (14.4%) scoring ranges. In 2014, 40.1% of all ASQ scores were in the Monitoring (24.9%) or Below (15.2%) scoring ranges Table 17: Number of ASQs in Monitoring or Below Scores

Year Monitoring Below % of All

ASQ Scores

2015 675 (22.5%) 431 (14.4%) 28.8%

2014 461 (24.9%) 281 (15.2%) 40.1%

ASQ Method Preference Just over 70% of respondents preferred an online version of the Ages & Stages Questionnaire in 2015. Table 18: ASQ Method Preference

ASQ Method Preference 2015 2014

Online 1136 (70.2%) 580 (66.6%)

Paper 433 (26.8%) 256 (29.4%)

Both/Online 27 (1.7%) 27 (3.1%)

Both/Paper 13 (0.8%) -

Completed at Doctor’s Office 9 (0.6%) 8 (0.9%)

Total 1618 (100%) 871 (100%)


34

Percentage of ASQs Faxed to a Pediatrician The percentage of scored ASQs that were faxed to a pediatrician was 48.4%, a significant increase from 2014 (29.7%). Table 19: Percentage of ASQs Faxed to a Pediatrician

Year Percentage Faxed

2015 48.4%

2014 29.7%

Number of Family Services by Year The number of referrals given for families increased 37.5% from Year 5 (376) to Year 6 (517).

Figure 17: Number of Family Services by Year Family Services Types Family services were most often referrals to community resources (65.6%). Table 20: Family Services Types

Family Services Type N (%)

Community Resource Referrals 339 (65.6%)

Information Received 178 (34.4.%)

Total 517 (100%)

443

273

167

254

376

517

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6

Number of Family Services by Year


35

Family Presenting Issues During 2015, the most common family issues that received referrals or information were basic needs (31.3%), parenting and family education (27.5%), and mental health/behavioral (17.8%). Callers had a total of 517 family issues. Table 21: Family Presenting Issues

Family Presenting Issue N (%)





General Development/Developmental Screening 38 (7.4%)

Other 34 (6.6%)


Total 517 (100%)

Family File Status, End of 2015 Some families involved with Help Me Grow were enrolled and received services such as referrals to community agencies, access to ASQs, and assignment to a care coordinator. Families receiving these services were classified as enrolled families. Help Me Grow also responded to questions from callers and attempted to contact those who expressed interest in the services at various events. Families receiving these calls and services were classified as inquiries. Of all families that received any type of service or contact, 71.8% chose to be enrolled in Help Me Grow. Table 22: Family File Status, End of 2015

Family File Status End of 2015

N % of All Families

in Database

Enrolled Families 1680 71.8%

Inquiries 658 28.2%

Enrolled Family File Status, End of 2015 Files of enrolled families were classified as either active or inactive. An active family continued to receive services from HMG. A family was considered inactive due to any of the following reasons:

Child was no longer living


36

Child’s situation changed

Client could not be reached

No follow through by the client

Family solved their own problem

Family received needed services Nearly half (46.4%) of all family files were active and just over a quarter of all files were inactive. Table 23: Enrolled Family File Status, End of 2015

Enrolled Family File Status, End of 2015

N % of All Families

in Database

Active 1085 46.4%

Inactive 595 25.4%

Total 1680 71.8%

Reasons for Inactive Family Files In 2015, 572 files became inactive with a reason recorded. The most common reason for an inactive status was because the family received the services they needed (53.5%). Table 24: Reasons for Inactive Family Files

Reason N (%)

Received services 306 (53.5%)

No follow through by client 197 (34.4%)

Client cannot be reached 29 (5.1%)

Solved own problem 17 (3.0%)

Inquiry - Received Information 8 (1.4%)

Child situation changed 7 (1.2%)

Inquiry - Unable to contact 4 (0.7%)

Inquiry - Not interested 2 (0.3%)

Child deceased 1 (0.2%)

Education through HMG 1 (0.2%)

Total 572 (100%)

Inquiry File Status, End of 2015 Inquiry files included families with questions or families who expressed interest in the services. An inquiry file could be classified as either “Closed” or “Open.” A closed inquiry file was due to any of the following reasons:

Family was not interested in enrolling

Family received the requested information but was not interested in enrolling

HMG staff was unable to reach the family


37

Open inquiry files signified a new family who was considering what level of service they needed. Nearly 28% (27.5%) of all families in the database were closed inquiries. Table 25: Inquiry File Status, End of 2015

Inquiry File Status, End of 2015

N % of All Families

in Database

Closed Inquiries 643 27.5%

Open Inquiries 15 0.6%

Total 658 28.1%

Reasons for Closed Inquiry Family Files The most common reason for Inquiry Family Files to be closed was because HMG staff was unable to reach the client (53.9%). In 24.1% of the closed files, the family received the information they needed. Table 26: Reasons for Closed Inquiry Family Files

Reason N (%)

Inquiry - Unable to contact 344 (53.9%)

Inquiry - Received Information 154 (24.1%)

Inquiry - Not interested 92 (14.4%)

Client cannot be reached 17 (2.7%)

Received service 16 (2.5%)

No follow through by client 9 (1.4%)

Solved own problem 5 (0.1%)

Child situation changed 1 (0.2%)

Total 638 (100%)


38

Section 3: Is Anyone Better Off Because of Help Me Grow? Section 3 presents outcomes for Help Me Grow clients. In general, the following is presented:

Outcomes for child referrals to community resources

Type of information and referrals provided to families

Development of protective factors research Outcomes for Children Community Resource Referrals A total of 5954 services were provided for children; 5222 services were providing information. The remaining 732 services were child referrals to community resources. Of these services, 29.1% were connected, 32.9% were not connected and 38% had an unknown outcome. Table 27: Outcomes for Children Community Resource Referrals

Service Connected Not

Connected Unknown Total

Community Resource Referral

213 (29.1%) 241 (32.9%) 278 (38.0%) 732

(100%)

Outcomes for Community Resource Referrals for Specific Child Issues Of the 732 referrals to community resources, clients with speech and language issues (37.6%) and general development issues (37.1%) were most likely to be connected. Clients with parenting and family education and basic needs issues were the least likely to be connected. On average, 38% of all referrals to community resources had unknown outcomes.


39

Table 28: Outcomes for Community Resource Referrals for Specific Child Issues

Outcomes for Community Resource Referral

Specific Child Issue Connected Not

Connected Unknown Total


45 (20.8%) 79 (36.6%) 92 (42.6%) 216 (29.5%)

Speech and Language

53 (37.6%) 43 (30.5%) 45 (31.9%) 141 (19.3%)

General Development

49 (37.1%) 38 (28.8%) 45 (34.1%) 132 (18.0%)

Education/Learning 33 (28.7%) 36 (31.3%) 46 (40.0%) 115 (15.7%)

Basic Needs 18 (25.7%) 27 (38.6%) 25 (35.7%) 70 (9.6%)


4 (15.4%) 11 (42.3%) 11 (42.3%) 26 (3.6%)

Other 11 (34.4%) 7 (21.9%) 14 (43.8%) 32 (4.4%)

Total 213 (29.1%) 241 (32.9%) 278 (38.0%) 732 (100%)

Types of Information Received A total of 83% of all information provided to clients by type of information was activities. Table 29: Types of Information Received

Types of Information Received N (%)

Activities, ASQ3 Activities 4333 (83.0%)

Informational resources 656 (12.6%)

Website 180 (3.4%)

Welcome Baby 22 (0.4%)

Utah Parent Center 5 (0.1%)

Community Resources 4 (0.1%)

Primary Health Care Provider 4 (0.1%)

Other 18 (0.3%)

Total 5222 (100%)


40

Activities/ASQ3 Activities Requested Activities for children ages 24-30 (11.3%), 8-12 months (11.2%), and 12-16 months (11.2%) were most commonly requested.

Table 30: Activities/ASQ3 Activities Requested

Activities/ASQ3 Activities N (%)

0-2 Month 132 (3%)

1-4 Month 189 (4.4%)

2-4 Month 63 (1.5%)

4-8 Month 419 (9.7%)

8-12 Month 487 (11.2%)

12-16 Month 486 (11.2%)

16-20 Month 469 (10.8%)

20-24 Month 381 (8.8%)

24-30 Month 489 (11.3%)

30-36 Month 386 (8.9%)

36-42 Month 119 (2.7%)

36-48 Month 224 (5.2%)

42-48 Month 58 (1.3%)

48-54 Month 71 (1.6%)

48-60 Month 231 (5.3%)

54-60 Month 60 (1.4%)

60-66 Month 75 (1.7%)

Total 4339 (100%)


41

Informational Resources Details Nearly 31% of informational resources were for speech/communication (30.7%), followed by general child development (17.4%) and behavior/tantrums/aggression (16.0%). Table 31: Informational Resources Details

Informational Resources Details N (%)

Speech/Communication 203 (30.7%)

General Child Development 115 (17.4%)

Behavior/Tantrums/Aggression 106 (16.0%)

Temperament 35 (5.3%)

Social/Emotional 34 (5.1%)

Sleep 31 (4.7%)

Nutrition Education 29 (4.4%)

School Readiness 17 (2.6%)

Autism Spectrum Information 15 (2.3%)

Educational/IEP Information 14 (2.1%)

Health/Medical 13 (2.0%)

ADHD/ADD Information 12 (1.8%)

Parenting Education 11 (1.7%)

Family Issues/Situation 9 (1.4%)

Learning Delays/Cognitive Development 7 (1.1%)

Community Activities/Events 5 (0.8%)

Other 6 (0.9%)

Total 662 (100%)


42

Services for Specific Family Referral Issues The most common specific family issue was basic needs and over 40% of basic needs issues were referred to community resources. Nearly 66% of the 517 family issues were referred to community resources. Table 32: Services for Specific Family Referral Issues

Specific Family Issue Informational

Service


Total

Basic Needs 25 (14.0%) 137 (40.4%) 162 (31.3%)

Parenting and Family Education 61 (34.4%) 81 (23.9%)

142 (27.5%)

Mental Health/Behavioral 37 (20.8%) 55 (16.2%) 92 (17.8%)

Education/Learning 16 (9.0%) 27 (8.0%) 43 (8.3%)

General Development/Developmental Screening

21 (11.8%) 17 (5.0%) 38 (7.4%)

Speech and Language 3 (1.7%) 3 (0.9%) 6 (1.2%)

Other 15 (8.4%) 19 (5.6%) 34 (6.6%)

Total 178 (34.4%) 339 (65.6%) 517 (100%)

Outcomes for Family Community Resource Referrals Of the 339 family referrals to community resources, 101 (29.8%) were connected, 55 (16.2%) were not connected and 183 (54%) had unknown outcomes. Table 33: Outcomes for Family Community Resource Referrals

Service Connected Not Connected Unknown Total


101 (29.8%) 55 (16.2%) 183 (54.0%) 339 (100%)

Development of Protective Factors During 2015, Help Me Grow Utah commissioned Greater Ventures to conduct a study on families involved with Help Me Grow and their development of protective factors. Retrospective pre-test and post-test questionnaires were used for both randomly selected HMGU participants and a control group purchased through Qualtrics. The primary research instrument was the FRIENDS Protective Factors Survey (The Institute for Education Research and Public Service at the University of Kansas, 2008).


43

The HMG participants showed statistically significant positive changes from the retrospective pre-test scores to their post-test scores in the areas of family functioning/resiliency (11% change), social support (11.3% change), nurturing and attachment (7.8% change), and in all five of the subset questions for child development/knowledge of parenting. The changes indicated in the subset questions were: don’t know what to do (32.0% change), help children learn (22.8% change), misbehaves to upset me (6.0% change), praise (5.2% change), discipline and lose control (8.1% change). The only area with no statistically significant change from retrospective pre/post scores was concrete support. The control group showed statistically significant positive changes from the retrospective pre-test scores to the post-test scores in the area of family functioning/resiliency (9.0% change) and social support (5.7% change) and in two of the five subset questions for knowledge of parenting and child development, namely helping child learn (6.1% change), and praise (4.6% change). Findings from independent t-tests comparing the change in scores between HMG participants and the control panel showed significant differences (p < .05) in several areas. There were larger changes in protective factor scores for HMG participants in nurturing and attachment, and four of the child development/knowledge of parenting items, namely don’t know what to do, help child learn, misbehaves to upset me, and discipline and lose control. In fact, while scores were worse for misbehaves to upset me and discipline and lose control for the control group, the scores improved significantly for the HMG participants. Participants in HMG increased their protective factor scores on all but one subscale. Every item of the child development/knowledge of parenting area showed marked improvements. These statistically significant changes ranged from 5.2% to 32%. The largest changes came in the areas of knowing what to do as a parent (22.8%) and knowing how to help children learn (32.0%). These are part of HMG’s direct mission and operation and highlight their effectiveness in delivering this knowledge to parents. The improvements in items related to potential abuse (believing a child misbehaves to upset parents and struggling with discipline while losing self-control) are also particularly noteworthy. It is gratifying to see that HMG is impacting protective factors that have direct bearing on child abuse.


44

Table 34: Protective Factors Research Findings

Protective Factor

HMG Delta (Change between

pre and post tests)

HMG % Change

Control Group Delta

(Change between pre and post tests)

Control Group % Change

Family

functioning/

resiliency

0.56* 11.0% 0.46 9.4%

Social support 0.61* 11.3% 0.32 6.1%

Concrete support 0.06 1.3% 0.08 1.5%

Nurturing and

attachment 0.44* 7.8% 0.08** 1.3%

Child

development/

Knowledge of

parenting

Q1 (Don’t know

what to do)

1.12* 32.0% 0.23** 5.4%

Q2 (Help child

learn) 1.10* 22.8% 0.08** 1.5%

Q3 (Misbehaves

to upset me)

0.30* 6.0% -0.28** -5.6%

Q4 (Praise) 0.30* 5.2% 0.35 6.0%

Q5 (Discipline &

lose control) 0.42* 8.1% -0.18** -3.1%

* Represents a statistically significant difference (p<.05) between pre and post tests.

** Represents a statistically significant difference (p<.05) between HMG Delta and

Control Group Delta.


45

Appendix Counties in Each Region In 2015, Help Me Grow Utah recorded data by region. The table below lists the counties in each region.

Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4

Carbon Davis Beaver Box Elder

Daggett Salt Lake Garfield Cache

Duchesne Summit Iron Morgan

Emery Tooele Kane Rich

Grand Millard Weber

Juab Piute

San Juan Sanpete

Uintah Sevier

Utah Washington

Wasatch Wayne

Carbon

Daggett

Duchesne

Emery

Grand

Juab

San Juan


46

Details of How Families Heard About HMG

Source N (%)

HMG Outreach Event 614 (26.4%)

Health Care Provider 295 (12.7%)

Utah County Health Department 287 (12.3%)

Salt Lake 211 189 (8.1%)

Community Agency 154 (6.6%)

HMG Family Event 121 (5.2%)

Welcome Baby (United Way of Utah County) 117 (5.0%)

Word of Mouth 105 (4.5%)

Early Intervention 102 (4.4%)

Hospital 76 (3.3%)

United Way of Utah County 46 (2.0%)

Other 222 (9.5%)

Total 2328 (100%)


47

How Families Heard about HMG by Region

Source Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Total

HMG Outreach Event

37 (8.4%) 344 (35.1%) 134 (73.6%) 15 (12.8%) 530 (24.4%)

Health Care Provider

92 (10.3%) 166 (16.9%) 14 (7.7%) 15 (12.8%) 287 13.2%)

Health Department

179 (20.1%) 90 (9.2%) 2 (1.1%) 10 (8.5%) 281 (12.9%)

Salt Lake 2-1-1

1 (0.1%) 181 (18.5%) 0 4 (3.4%) 186 (8.6%)

Community Agency

75 (8.4%) 43 (4.4%) 12 (6.6%) 18 (15.4%) 148 (6.8%)

HMG Family Event

53 (5.9%) 35 (3.6%) 4 (2.2%) 28 (23.9%) 120 (5.5%)

WB Utah County

112 (12.6%) 1 (0.1%) 1 (0.5%) 0 114 (5.3%)

Early Intervention

78 (8.7%) 22 (2.2%) 0 1 (0.9%) 101 (4.7%)

Word of Mouth

59 (6.6%) 25 (2.6%) 3 (1.6%) 10 (8.5%) 97 (4.5%)

Hospital 68 (7.6%) 4 (0.4%) 0 1 (0.9%) 73 (3.4%)

United Way of Utah County

34 (3.8%) 5 (0.5%) 2 (1.1%) 0 41 (1.9%)

Other 104 (11.7%) 64 (6.5%) 10 (5.5%) 15 12.8%) 193 (8.95)

Total 892 (41.1%) 980 (45.1%) 182 (8.4%) 117 (5.4%)

2171 (100%)


48

Child Referral Issue Categories The child referral issue categories consist of the following specific issues.

Issue Category Issues Included in Category

General Development/Screening

Bonding/attachment

Developmental Screening

Down Syndrome

General Development

Gross Motor

Prenatal

Vision

No concern

Fine Motor

Speech and Language

Communication

Hearing

Receptive Language

Speech/Language


Autism

Behavioral

Mental Health

Personal/social

Social Emotional

Basic Needs

Adaptive

Basic Needs

Childcare

Health Insurance

Health/medical

Living condition

Education/Learning

Cognitive (Learning)

Education

Problem Solving


Family Issues

Follow-up

Interoffice

Other

Parenting Education

Program Information

Seeking Diagnosis

Other Unknown

Date post:	20-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

2015 Annual Evaluation · 2017-03-28 · 2015 Annual Evaluation Report 1 2015 Annual Evaluation...

Documents