Back to List

Compare
Print Share

TA Consultation and Coaching: Go NAPSACC

Category

Early Care and Education

Child's Age

0-1 years, 1-2 years, 2-3 years, 3-4 years, 4-5 years

Participant

ECE Teachers

Languages

English, Spanish

Brief Description

Go NAPSACC Consultants work with child care providers to improve the health of young children through practices, policies, and environments that instill habits supporting lifelong health and well-being in the following areas: child nutrition, breastfeeding & infant feeding, farm to ECE, oral health, infant & child physical activity, outdoor play & learning and screen time. Technical Assistance is the provision of targeted and customized supports by a professional(s) with subject matter and adult learning knowledge and skills to develop or strengthen processes, knowledge application, or implementation of services by recipients. Consultation is a collaborative, problem-solving process between an external consultant with specific expertise and adult learning knowledge and skills and an individual or group from one program or organization. Consultation facilitates the assessment and resolution of an issue-specific concern—a program-/organizational-, staff-, or child-/family-related issue—or addresses a specific topic. Coaching is a relationship-based process led by an expert with specialized and adult learning knowledge and skills, who often serves in a different professional role than the recipient(s). Coaching is designed to build capacity for specific professional dispositions, skills, and behaviors and is focused on goal-setting and achievement for an individual or group.

Expected Impact

  • Improved child health as a result of increased healthy habits around food, physical activity, and other health behaviors

Core Components for Model Fidelity

  • Technical Assistants (TAs): Go NAPSACC TAs engage in a process to build knowledge and skill of teachers using the Go NAPSACC Implementation models. TAs individually supports child care programs through completing the 5-step Improvement cycle - Go NAPSACC's provider tools guide child care providers through the 5-step improvement process to make healthy changes to their programs as they engage in a specific module(s).
  • Services: The 5-step improvement process is as follows: 
    • Assess: Child care providers use the self-assessment tools to compare their practices to Go NAPSACC best-practice standards for the given module(s). 
    • Plan - Create an Action Plan: Providers discuss potential goals with their consultant so they can set goals and create plans for improvement. In the online tool, the provider will select a goal and the tool creates a customizable action plan.  
    • Take Action: Providers have access to a tips and materials library that has resources to help providers reach their goals, which includes how-to guides, education materials for staff, ideas for classroom activities, and communication tools for working with parents. 
    • Learn More - Further Training: Go NAPSACC offers online trainings to dig deeper into the best practices and how to implement the new tools. Providers are shown how the program’s practices improve children’s health and are offered advice for improving their own practices.  
    • Keep It Up – Reassess: Once goals have been accomplished, the providers complete the self-assessment again. This will show what is working and what can still improve. 
  • Be Active Kids: Training is provided for staff on the importance of physical activity, motor development, and teacher-led activities. New strategies are implemented in the child care program with consultant support.  
  • Learning Collaboratives: Training sessions supported by action periods for implementing Go NAPSACC steps (typically a 4-month process). Current modules available are Breastfeeding & Infant Feeding, Child Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Screen Time. Additionally, the NC State Extension Office offers support for TAs providing coaching and consultation on Go NAPSACC's Farm to ECE module through the NC Farm to ECE Collaborative. Please contact Shironda Brown at sewilli3@ncsu.edu for more information on this learning collaborative.
  • Recognition Program: Consultant supporting a program to receive recognition in any Go NAPSACC module. Can be used with any of the three previous implementation models. REACH (Recognizing ECE’s Advancing Children’s Healthy Habits) - motivate and celebrate ECE programs’ nutrition and physical activity quality improvement. Read more at: https://reach-recognition.org/
  • NC Breastfeeding-Friendly Child Care Designation Program: Consultant supporting a program to receive designation

Languages Materials are Available in

English, Spanish

Delivery Mode

There is a strong preference for in-person consultation and coaching, but hybrid options are a reasonable response to environmental factors.

Dosage

Self-assessment: The child care program completes a minimum of one Go NAPSACC module, completing a full implementation cycle in a 6–12-month time frame. It typically takes a child care program 6 months to complete a single Go NAPSACC cycle, implementing 2-5 goals in 1 of the modules. 

TA Support: The Go NAPSACC Consultant connects with the child care program at least once a month.  Additional Implementation dosage is flexible based upon the needs of the child care program. 

Infrastructure for Implementation

Materials: Participating child care programs must have access to the Go NAPSACC Web Platform, internet/wi-fi, and a technology device. Additional materials will vary depending upon the tools that child care centers choose to use. 

Space: Go NAPSACC consultants meet with child care providers in the existing space at their program, whether that be an empty classroom, office space, Family Child Care Home provider’s kitchen, or another quiet space for conversation.

Staffing Requirements

TAs must complete the Art and Science of TA training. Please contact Dedee Ephraim at dephraim@childcareresourcesinc.org for information on this training.  

It is strongly recommended that TAs also complete North Carolina TA Level 11, TA Endorsement, and training in Practice Based Coaching.

NCPC is currently developing requirements related to the Framework for the North Carolina Technical Assistance Practitioner Competencies. We encourage TAs to work towards mastery in these, as we determine the minimum requirements for FY 2026 and onward.

Training for Model Fidelity

Free Go NAPSACC Consultant Training required for all consultants. Webinars available for ongoing consultant support. 

NOTE to Technical Assistants: Coaches who received training on Be Active Kids prior to July 1, 2023 will be able to continue implementation for FY 2023-2024 and transition to the new implementation model for FY 2024-2025. All TAs trained after July 1, 2023 will need to complete training on the new implementation model.

Contact Information

https://gonapsacc.org/

Falon Smith: Director of Research Dissemination; 919-843-3863, gonapsacc@unc.edu

Cost Estimates

Participation in Go NAPSACC is free for the local partnerships, consultants, and child care programs. This includes all trainings, resource materials, and access to the web platform.  

Incentives of cash or materials are strongly encouraged to support the strategies implemented and motivation for participation.

Purpose Service Code (PSC)

3104 - NC Child Care Resource and Referral Services

3125 - Quality Child Care

Program Identifier (PID)

TA Consultation and Coaching: Go NAPSACC

Minimal Outputs for NCPC Reporting

FY 24-25:

  • Number of child care facilities receiving TA

Minimal Outcomes for NCPC Reporting

FY 24-25:

  • Increase in the provider practice of healthy behaviors

Minimal Measures for NCPC Reporting

FY 24-25:

  •  Nutrition and Physical Activity Self Assessment for Child Care – Go NAPSACC

NCPC Evidence Categorization

Evidence Based

Research Summary

Technical Assistance (TA) is an array of services (off and on site, varying in duration, products, and processes) to childcare program staff for the purpose of equipping the early childhood workforce with knowledge, skills, and attitudes to provide/improve high quality experiences and environments for young children. TA is offered through services including targeted guidance, training,1 consultation,2 coaching, planning, modeling, and support.3 Assessments and trainings supported by TA include, but are not limited to, ITERS,4 ECERS,5 FCCRS,6 CLASS,7 PAS,8 BAS,9 POEMS,10 the Pyramid Model,11 and those training and supports for Licensure,12 NAEYC Professional Development standards,13 and IECMH,14 among others. Outcomes for TA include improved access to high quality care,15 improved ECE program environment,16 improved provider and/or director knowledge,17 enhanced program quality,18 improved teacher/child interactions,19 and increase in practice of healthy behaviors,20 among others.

  1. ^  See Le et al. (2016).
  2. ^ See Denton & Hasbrouck (2009). 
  3. ^ See Scarparolo & Hammond (2018). 
  4. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), & Rentzou (2017).
  5. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Neitzel et al. (2019), & Rentzou (2017).
  6. ^ See Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), & Kelton et al. (2013).
  7. ^ See Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), & Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.).
  8. ^ See Shore et al. (2021).
  9. ^ See De Haan et al. (2020) & Masterson et al. (2019).
  10. ^ See Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), & Muela et al. (2019).
  11. ^ See Fox et al. (2021), Hemmeter et al. (2021), & Hemmeter et al. (2022).
  12. ^ See Boyd-Swan & Herbst (2018), Hegde et al. (2022), Moats (2019), & Piasta et al. (2020).
  13. ^ See National Association for the Education of Young Children, National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (2011).
  14. ^ See Morelan et al.(2022), & Safyer (2019).
  15. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Rentzou (2017), Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), Kelton et al. (2013), Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.), Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), Muela et al. (2019), Masterson et al. (2019).
  16. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Rentzou (2017), Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), Kelton et al. (2013), Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.), Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), Muela et al. (2019), & Masterson et al. (2019).
  17. ^ See Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), & Masterson et al. (2019).
  18. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Rentzou (2017), Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), Kelton et al. (2013), Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.), Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), Muela et al. (2019), Masterson et al. (2019), Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), Masterson et al. (2019), Fox et al.(2021), Hemmeter et al. (2021), Hemmeter et al. (2022), Hegde et al. (2022), Moats (2019), & Piasta et al. (2020). 
  19. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Neitzel et al. (2019), Rentzou (2017), Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), Kelton et al. (2013), Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.), Fox et al. (2021), Hemmeter et al. (2021), & Hemmeter et al. (2022).
  20. ^ See Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), Muela et al. (2019).

Researched Population

  • Early care and education professionals

Boyd-Swan, C., & Herbst, C. M. (2018). The demand for teacher characteristics in the market for child care: evidence from a field experiment. Journal of Public Economics, 159, 183-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.02.006

Buckley, L., Martin, S., & Curtin, M. (2020). A multidisciplinary community level approach to improving quality in early years' settings. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 18(4), 433-447. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X20951239  

Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.) Teachstone.

Cosco, N. G., Moore, R. C., & Smith, W. R. (2014). Childcare outdoor renovation as a built environment health promotion strategy: evaluating the preventing obesity by design intervention. American Journal of Health Promotion, 28(3_suppl), 32. https://doi.org/10.4278/ajhp.130430-QUAN-208

de Haan, E., Molyn, J., & Nilsson, V. O. (2020). New findings on the effectiveness of the coaching relationship: time to think differently about active ingredients? Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 72(3). https://www.doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000175

Denton, C. A., & Hasbrouck, J. (2009). A description of instructional coaching and its relationship to consultation. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 19(2), 150–150. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/10474410802463296

Early Childhood Personnel Center. (2019). Research on Technical Assistance Models & Frameworks. https://ecpcta.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2810/2019/11/Final-Combined-TA.pdf

Eckhardt, A. G., & Egert, F. (2020). Predictors for the quality of family child care: a meta-analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105205  

Ehri, L. C., & Flugman, B. (2018). Mentoring teachers in systematic phonics instruction: effectiveness of an intensive year-long program for kindergarten through 3rd grade teachers and their students. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 31(2), 425–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9792-7

Fox, L., Strain, P. S., & Dunlap, G. (2021). Preventing the use of preschool suspension and expulsion: implementing the pyramid model. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 65(4), 312–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2021.1937026 

Han, M., Buell, M., Hallam, R., & Hooper, A. (2021). An intensive professional development in family child care: a promising approach. International Journal of Early Years Education, 29(2), 167-183. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2021.1914558

Hegde, A. V., Vestal, A. R., Whited, J., Lambert, R. G., Norris, A., & Taylor, H. (2022). A Collaborative Approach Towards Mentoring and Evaluation to Support Beginning NC Pre-K Teachers Within Non-Public School Settings: Early Educator Support (EES) Program – A Model of Support and Professional Development for Teachers. In B. Zugelder & M. L'Esperance (Eds.), Handbook of Research on the Educator Continuum and Development of Teachers (pp. 381-408). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-3848-0.ch019

Hemmeter, M. L., Barton, E., Fox, L., Vatland, C., Henry, G., Pham, L., Horth, K., Taylor, A., Binder, D. P., von der Embse, M., & Veguilla, M. (2022). Program-wide implementation of the pyramid model: supporting fidelity at the program and classroom levels. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 59, 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2021.10.003

Hemmeter, M. L., Fox, L., Snyder, P., Algina, J., Hardy, J. K., Bishop, C., & Veguilla, M. (2021). Corollary child outcomes from the pyramid model professional development intervention efficacy trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 54, 204–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2020.08.004  

Jamison, K. R., Cabell, S. Q., LoCasale-Crouch, J., Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2014). CLASS–Infant: An Observational Measure for Assessing Teacher–Infant Interactions in Center-Based Child Care. Early Education and Development, 25(4), 553-553. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2013.822239

Kelton, R. E., Talan, T. N., & Bloom, P. J. (2013). Alternative pathways in family child care quality rating and improvement systems. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 15(2).  

Le, L. T., Anthony, B. J., Bronheim, S. M., Holland, C. M., & Perry, D. F. (2016). A technical assistance model for guiding service and systems change. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 43(3), 380–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-014-9439-2

LeMasters, A. C., & Vandermaas-Peeler, M. (2021). Exploring outdoor play: a mixed-methods study of the quality of preschool play environments and teacher perceptions of risky play. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 23(4), 1-13. http://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2021.1925564

Masterson, M., Abel, M., Talan, T., & Bella, J. (2019). Building on whole leadership: energizing and strengthening your early childhood program. Gryphon House. Retrieved August 4, 2022.  

Moats, L. (2019). Teaching spelling: an opportunity to unveil the logic of language. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 45(3), 17–20.  

Morelen, D., Najm, J., Wolff, M., & Kelly, D. (2022). Taking care of the caregivers: The moderating role of reflective supervision in the relationship between COVID-19 stress and the mental and professional well-being of the IECMH workforce. Infant Mental Health Journal, 43(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.21956

Muela, A., Larrea, I., Miranda, N., & Barandiaran, A. (2019). Improving the quality of preschool outdoor environments: getting children involved. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 27(3), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2019.1600808

National Association for the Education of Young Children, National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (2011). Early childhood education professional development: Training and technical assistance glossary. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. https://www.naeyc.org/glossarytraining_ta.pdf

Neitzel, J., Early, D., Sideris, J., LaForrett, D., Abel, M. B., Soli, M., Davidson, D. L., Haboush-Deloye, A., Hestenes, L. L., Jenson, D., Johnson, C., Kalas, J., Mamrak, A., Masterson, M. L., Mims, S. U., Oya, P., Philson, B., Showalter, M., Warner-Richter, M., & Kortright Wood, J. (2019). A comparative analysis of the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale–Revised and Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale, Third Edition. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 17(4), 408–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X19873015

Neuman, S. B., & Cunningham, L. (2009). The impact of professional development and coaching on early language and literacy instructional practices. American Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 532–566. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208328088  

Piasta, S. B., Farley, K. S., Mauck, S. A., Ramirez, P. S., Schachter, R. E., O'Connell, A. A., Justice, L. M., Spear, C. F., & Weber-Mayrer, M. (2020). At-scale, state-sponsored language and literacy professional development: impacts on early childhood classroom practices and children's outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(2), 329–329. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000380  

Rentzou, K. (2017). Using rating scales to evaluate quality early childhood education and care: reliability issues. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 25(5), 667-681. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2017.1356599

Safyer, M. (2019). 76.3 Infant/early childhood mental health (IECMH). Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 58(10), 109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2019.07.567

Scarparolo, G. E., & Hammond, L. S. (2018). The effect of a professional development model on early childhood educators’ direct teaching of beginning reading. Professional Development in Education, 44(4), 492–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2017.1372303 

Schachter, R. E., Gerde, H. K., & Hatton-Bowers, H. (2019). Guidelines for selecting professional development for early childhood teachers. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(4), 395–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-019-00942-8

Shore, R. A., Lambert, R. G., & Shue, P. L. (2021). An evaluation of leadership professional development for early childhood directors. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 20(4), 690–703. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2020.1734629  

Telford, R. M., Olive, L. S., & Telford, R. D. (2021). A peer coach intervention in childcare centres enhances early childhood physical activity: The Active Early Learning (AEL) cluster randomised controlled trial. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition & Physical Activity, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-021-01101-2  

Tonge, K. L., Jones, R. A., & Okely, A. D. (2019). Quality interactions in early childhood education and care center outdoor environments. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-018-0913-y

Visnjic Jevtic, A. & Rogulj, E. (2022), “Should we get support or just guidelines?” (self) assessment on mentoring of early childhood education students. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 11(3), 262-273. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-03-2021-0048

Weatherby-Fell, N., Duchesne, S., & Neilsen-Hewett, C. (2019). Preparing and supporting early childhood pre-service teachers in their professional journey. Australian Educational Researcher, 46(4), 621–637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-019-00340-4

For TAs providing coaching and consultation on Go NAPSACC's Farm to ECE module, additional support is available through the NC State Extension Office's NC Farm to ECE Collaborative. Please contact Shironda Brown at sewilli3@ncsu.edu for more information on this learning collaborative.



Local Partnerships Currently Implementing

Local Partnerships in purple have adopted TA Consultation and Coaching: Go NAPSACC. Local Partnership contact information can be found here.