https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815117708999 Journal of Early Intervention 2017, Vol. 39(3) 253–263 © 2017 SAGE Publications Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1053815117708999 journals.sagepub.com/home/jei Article The Relationship Between State Lead Agency and Enrollment Into Early Intervention Services Erica Twardzik 1 , Megan MacDonald 1 , and Alicia Dixon-Ibarra 1 Abstract Services offered through Part C of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act improve cognitive, behavioral, and physical skills for children less than 3 years old at risk for or with a disability. However, there are low enrollment rates into services. Various Lead Agencies oversee services through Part C, and states determine which agency is in charge of administering these services. The objective of this study was to describe odds of enrollment into early intervention services based on the department administering services (Lead Agency). Each state’s Lead Agency (Education, Health, or Other), state population size, narrowness of eligibility criteria, and state-level screening rates were fit into a negative binomial regression model to predict odds of enrollment into Part C services. Results show that state’s reporting from “Health” and “Other” as a Lead Agency had significantly higher odds for Part C services compared with the state Lead Agency of Education (Health adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [1.557, 1.561]; Other AOR = 2.40, 95% CI = [2.401, 2.405]). Further research should describe unique components of a Lead Agency’s administrative practices that contribute to the variation in enrollment. This study was an important step toward the investigation of low enrollment rates into Part C services. Keywords lead agency, IDEIA, Part C, early intervention, state variation Introduction Improved child outcomes have been strongly associated with effective early intervention services for children who have been identified as developmentally delayed or who are at risk for develop- mental delays (Campbell, Ramey, Pungello, Sparling, & Miller-Johnson, 2002; Hebbeler et al., 2007; Shonkoff et al., 2007; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). Early intervention during the first years of life is critical to healthy development due to rapid growth and unique plasticity of the brain during this time (Shonkoff et al., 2007). In other words, earlier access to appropriate services has the potential to produce better outcomes for the child, and in many cases, children are less likely to require intervention services later on in life. In addition, early interventions, in contrast to interventions initiated later in development, have been indicated as more cost-effective (Barnett, 1 Oregon State University, Corvallis, USA Corresponding Author: Erica Twardzik, 1402 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. Email: ericatwardzik@gmail.com 708999JEI XX X 10.1177/1053815117708999Journal of Early InterventionTwardzik et al. research-article 2017