Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Early Intervention
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Apter, D. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

From Dream to Reality

A Participant's View of the Implementation of Part H of P.L. 99-457

Dianne S. Apter

Syracuse University

Part H of P.L. 99-457 (reauthorized in 1991 as IDEA) established "a new Federal discretionary program to assist states in developing and implementing a comprehensive, coordinated, interdisciplinary system of early intervention services for infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families." Part H made considerable promises concerning the way the system was to be designed and the way services were to conceptualized, funded, and delivered. The challenges to such sweeping changes were predictable and extensive. This paper is a study of systems change and those forces that work for or against realizing visionary intent. It examines the process of moving from federal legislation to implementation in one state (New York). However, it is clear that the challenges that New York faced and continues to deal with are not unique to that state (Gallagher, Harbin, Thomas, Clifford, & Wenger, 1988; Gallagher, Trohanis, & Clifford, 1989; Garwood & Sheehan, 1989; Trohanis, 1991). Through an examination of systems change in one state, it is hoped that planners involved with Part H efforts in other states or those involved in other major systems change gain an understanding of the complexities of change and leadership. This paper looks at a pool of research that offers practical strategies to change agents in order to maximize successful systemic change.

Journal of Early Intervention, Vol. 18, No. 2, 131-140 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/105381519401800202


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?