MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF EARLY EDUCATION AND CARE
THE CAPACITY OF THE
EARLY CARE AND EDUCATION SYSTEM
SEPTEMBER 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ...... 1
Strategic Direction: Quality: Create and implement a system to improve and support quality statewide...... 1
Definition of Quality ...... 1
Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) ...... 1
School readiness assessments and program evaluations ...... 2
Comprehensive services ...... 6
Mental Health Consultation Services ...... 6
Decreasing Expulsion Rates ...... 7
Birth to School-Age Taskforce ...... 8
After-School and Out of School Time IniTIatives ...... 11
Science Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) ...... 11
Quality Rating and Improvement System – AS/OST STANDARDS ...... 11
Youth Worker certifications ...... 11
ARRA Summer Learning Vouchers for School-Age Youth ...... 12
Facilities Inventory ...... 13
Collaboration and coordination of resources ...... 15
Strategic Direction: Increase and promote family support, access and affordability...... 16
Family Access and Affordability ...... 16
EEC provides multiple points of entry and outreach for families including those in hard to reach populations ...... 20
Local and Regional Coordination ...... 18
Re-Procurement of Child Care Resource and Referral Contracts ...... 23
Translation ...... 24
EEC Website to Make Google Translation Service Available ...... 24
Interagency Collaboration with the Head Start State Collaboration Office (HSSCO) and the Office of Refugees and Immigrants (ORI) ...... 24
Trial Court Care ...... 25
Strategic Direction: Create a workforce system that maintains worker diversity and provides resources, supports, expectations, & core competencies that lead to the outcomes we want for children...... 26
EEC Core Competencies ...... 27
Early Childhood Educators’ Scholarship ...... 27
Building Careers in Early Education and Care ...... 28
Building Careers: College Courses in Special Education ...... 28
CDA Scholarship Program ...... 29
Program and Practitioner Support Grants ...... 29
Child Care Resource and Referral Professional Development ...... 30
Professional Development Registry ...... 30
EEC Professional Development Calendar ...... 30
Strategic Direction: Create and implement an external and internal communications strategy that advocates for and conveys the value of early education and care to stakeholders, consumers, and the general public and positions EEC as a national education leader...... 33
Strategic Direction: Build the internal infrastructure to support achieving the vision...... 33
IT System ...... 33
Head Start State Advisory Council ...... 34
Assigning Student Identifiers (SASIDS) to Pre-K children ...... 35
Monitoring and Accountability efforts ...... 35
Future data collection efforts ...... 35
EEC Internal Re-organization ...... 36
Community Profiles ...... 38
Summary of Community Profiles ...... 38
APPENDICES ...... 41
Appendix A: Section 85 of Chapter 215 of the Acts of 2008 ...... 41
Appendix B: Definition of quality ...... 42
Appendix C: Mental Health Consultation Services Grant ...... 47
Appendix D: Demographics of Children Served by EEC Financial Assistance ...... 50
Appendix E: EEC Translated Documents ...... 57
Appendix F: Professional Development Grantee Allocations ...... 60
FY10 CCR&R Allocations ...... 60
FY10 Building Career Grant Allocations ...... 61
FY10 Program and Practioner SUpports (Fund code 395) Final Grant Allocations ...... 62
Appendix G: EEC CERTIFICATIONS ...... 67
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to comply with § 85 of Chapter 215 of the Acts of 2008, which mandates the Board of Early Education and Care, in consultation with the advisory council, as established under G.L. c. 15D, § 3A, to assess and report on the capacity of the existing early education and care system to, among other things, enhance the quality of early education and care programs. The specific reporting language is cited in Appendix A. The report is framed within EEC’s five strategic directions and is submitted by the Board of Early Education and Care.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION: QUALITY: CREATE AND IMPLEMENT A SYSTEM TO IMPROVE AND SUPPORT QUALITY STATEWIDE.
The following section review EEC’s efforts to build and implement a system to improve and support quality across the Commonwealth.
DEFINITION OF QUALITY
The term “quality” is frequently used in relation to ECE programs, but less consistently is time taken to ensure each user means the same definition. A short memo defining quality, according to the research, has been produced by EEC. A copy of this document is included as Appendix B. The EEC Board reviewed this definition and it correlates with the Board’s definition of quality. Instructional leadership is emerging as an area for future quality improvement efforts.
QUALITY RATING AND IMPROVEMENT SYSTEM (QRIS)
In Massachusetts, EEC formally began developing a QRIS during the spring of 2008. Seventeen other states have developed QRIS over the past decade. QRIS are a fast-spreading policy innovation because they align standards, supports to programs, and accountability efforts into one non-duplicative system.
There are many benefits to QRIS including:
• Parents have easily accessible information about the quality of early care and education programs. • Programs and providers use one streamlined set of standards that are connected to supports and fiscal incentives to help them meet and maintain the standards. • Policymakers understand where and how to invest additional resources
QRIS typically have five components:
Standards – The QRIS’ standards build on the various standards already being used in the state, such as licensing, NAEYC, NAFCC, and Head Start Performance Standards, and
1
Page 1
organize them into one body of standards. The standards are usually categorized into a series of levels or steps, such as 1 - 5.
Monitoring and Accountability – The measures the state will use to recognize where programs are in relation to the standards levels.
Program and Practitioner Supports – The infrastructure to help programs meet and maintain the quality standards. The support infrastructure is built from current/existing resources (e.g., grants).
Fiscal Incentives – The incentives to encourage programs and providers/educators to pursue higher levels of quality.
Family and Consumer Engagement – The way that the content of the QRIS is communicated to parents and programs.
Where is Massachusetts in the Process of QRIS Development?
In February 2008, EEC convened internal and external working groups to make recommendations about the overarching structure of the QRIS and to design the QRIS Standards. Workgroup members included stakeholders from across the early care and education field. After substantial collaboration with stakeholders, EEC requested and received public input on the proposed QRIS Standards in March and April 2009. The department received over 350 responses to the public input survey. The QRIS Standards group, the Advisory Council, and the EEC Board reviewed and responded to the feedback.
This summer, EEC has been working on developing a crosswalk of the standards. The crosswalks will demonstrate how the standards align from licensing, to QRIS points criteria, to accreditation standards, to Head Start Performance Standards. By January 2010, levels 1-4 will be available publicly. Further work will be done on developing Level 5. In 2011, EEC will work to align professional development opportunities with these levels. Also in early 2011, EEC will explore the possibility of expanding the role of EEC licensing staff to include using evidence-based environmental assessments. Currently EEC is pursuing using evidence-based tools.
SCHOOL READINESS ASSESSMENTS AND PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
Massachusetts is in the early stages of developing a statewide system to measure developmental progress of its young children. EEC is engaging parents, providers, program administrators, teachers, higher education institutions, and policy makers to build a responsive approach. This initiative is separate from (and would not replace) developmental information that programs gather about children to use for curriculum planning and to individualize instruction.
Why are statewide data needed?
• To inform policy makers about the benefits of and impact of investments in early childhood education and care in Massachusetts
• To better understand school readiness gaps(s) for subgroups of children 2
Page 2
• To inform statewide policy development
• Data will not be used for high stakes “testing” of young children or providers
Statewide Measures of School Readiness vs. Child Assessments and Screenings:
Currently, many providers are already using a developmental assessment or screening tool to inform practice and individualize instruction. Providers are currently using a variety of assessment measures, including UPK grantees are required to use one of four assessment systems. A statewide measurement of school readiness is not intended to be used to replace program-level assessment practices. A state system vs. program level-assessments have: • Different purposes o Statewide system: information about the success of all children in Massachusetts o Program-level assessments: information for parents and caregivers about individual children • Different level of information about child o Statewide system: measure a small number of indicators of school readiness o Program-level assessments: comprehensive look at child progress across all developmental domains • Different usefulness to providers o Statewide system: for broader policy purposes o Program-level assessments: to help provider support each child’s growth and development • Other differences o Statewide system: children will be anonymous when data are reported These are the key issues that Massachusetts’ will consider as it creates design options for statewide measure: • WHAT to measure about child development • WHO to measure • WHEN to measure • HOW will measures/information on children be collected • WHAT ELSE to measure about home environments, program characteristics, and community context Some of this work has been piloted through EEC’s current approach to Universal Pre- Kindergarten.
EEC currently supports programs in undertaking school readiness assessments and program evaluations through Universal Pre-Kindergarten (UPK) Classroom Quality grants. In an effort to promote school readiness and positive outcomes for children, participating grantees are required to use a developmentally appropriate child assessment system to ensure programs are effectively measuring children’s progress across all developmental domains and using this information to inform practice. UPK programs are using one of four EEC-approved child assessment systems: Creative Curriculum Developmental Continuum, Work Sampling System, High Scope Child Observation Record, and Ages & Stages. Additionally, UPK programs/providers are required to be accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) or New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC) for group child care programs OR by National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC) or hold a non-expired Child 3
Page 3
Development Associate (CDA) credential or higher for family child care providers (AA, BA, or Master’s degree).1 Accreditation facilitates program evaluation, resulting in reflection and growth to support high-quality environments for children. Grantees may choose to spend funds in eleven different budget categories, which include assessment (i.e. toolkits, trainings, technology, materials) and accreditation supports (i.e. application fees, consultation, materials, staff time). In FY10, UPK was funded at $8.0 million. There are 293 UPK programs/providers being supported through this grant, representing 481 classrooms/homes and 6,639 UPK children.
How EEC will move forward to a statewide measurement of the developmental progress and school readiness of all preschool children:
EEC is considering implementing a statewide measurement of the developmental progress and school readiness of children in all preschool settings. This initiative would be separate from the child assessment systems programs currently use to capture developmental information for the purpose of informing and individualizing instruction. The statewide measurement would instead evaluate a small number of indicators of school readiness to illustrate the success of all children in Massachusetts and inform state policy.
Given the effect a statewide initiative of this magnitude would have on the early childhood field, stakeholders (i.e. providers, parents, and community groups) had the opportunity to voice concerns, feedback, and support at a series of community meetings.
A summary of qualitative data captured from stakeholders relating to EEC’s plan for a statewide measurement and the capacity of the field to participate is below.
• There is a need for clear communication from EEC to stakeholders about 1) the purpose of a statewide measurement system, 2) how the undertaking would be administered, and 3) how it is different from the assessments providers currently use in their programs.
• Buy in from stakeholders is important and necessary for the statewide measurement to be successful and should be aided through a strong public relations campaign.
• It must be decided exactly what will be measured, the “whole child” or a selection of developmental domains, and determined how contextual factors (for example, where children start out) and children’s trajectories will be taken into consideration.
• The potential burden on providers if they are asked to collect state data should be estimated and addressed, along with if/how they will be supported through trainings, professional development, and compensation.
• The degree to which parents will be involved and how they as a unique group will be communicated with about the purpose and results of the measurement must be determined.
1 Programs originally funded in FY07 because they met the FY07 requirement of a teacher/provider with a bachelor’s degree (BA/BS) in each UPK classroom/family child care home instead of national accreditation are not currently required to be accredited. This accounts for 10 programs.
4
Page 4
• When the statewide measure is designed, careful consideration must be given to the method, longitudinal versus a cohort of children, and what the impact on the field and extent of findings would be for each.
The next phase of EEC’s planning process for a statewide evaluation of preschool children’s school readiness will help better determine the capacity of the system to support programs in school readiness assessments and program evaluation.
Another component of this work is coordinating with the K-12 system, and understanding what districts are already doing for Kindergarten readiness assessments. In 2007, Full-Day Kindergarten grantees responded that they use the following developmental screenings at entry to Kindergarten.
Developmental Screening: Which of the following does the district use for screening children entering kindergarten? (n=128)
Early Screening Inventory (ESI) 60% (77)
Other tool (*see below) 26% (33)
DIAL-3 15% (19)
BRIGANCE 12% (15)
Districts own Screening Tool 8% (10)
PPVT 6% (8)
DIAL-R 6% (7)
Ages and Stages Questionnaire 5 % (6)
DIBELS 4% (5)
PALS 4% (5)
DENVER II 1% (1)
* Other Screening Tools mentioned include: PHELPS, DALLAS, Batelle Screen, Daberon, Early Prevention of School Failure, Joilet Screen, McCarthy Screen, Hainsworth Screen, SIB-R, and Fluherty Screen
Source: Full-Day Kindergarten Survey. 2007. Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Recognizing that screening and assessment serve different purposes, EEC supports programs implementing screening practices, and is focused currently on implementing assessment statewide.
5
Page 5
COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES
Comprehensive Services – services and supports that help providers and families meet the developmental needs of the whole child – are embedded throughout EEC’s system. Comprehensive services may include, but are not limited to: physical health, mental health, nutritional, and social services components; and adult and family education. Early education and care and out-of-school time programs’ ability to directly provide or build linkages to these kinds of services are considered an essential element of quality programming.
EEC’s Coordinated Family and Community Engagement (CFCE) grant aims to build on a local infrastructure of supports and services across the Commonwealth to ensure that all families with young children, especially those with the greatest educational need and experiencing multiple risk factors, have access to the resources they need to support optimal development of their children. CFCE Councils, with broad community representation, are expected to be able to identify resources and supports available in the community to support promotion of children’s health, social and emotional well being, family self-sufficiency and economic stability, education, and assistance with meeting basic needs. Grant activities include the coordination of a locally available set of resources to provide comprehensive services at early education and care programs including but not limited to physical and dental health, early childhood mental health consultation, support health care, occupational or speech therapy, etc. [The full range of the CFCE grant is discussed in further detail under the next Board Strategic Direction.]
EEC also administers Supportive Child Care services for children who have open cases with the Department of Children and Families (DCF). The services are designed to meet the needs of families that are experiencing a high degree of stress and disorganization. DCF refers children living at home or in foster care – who have been the subject of a supported 51A – for Supportive Child Care to support their growth and development and to protect their health and well-being. Supportive Child Care programs contracted by EEC provide an array of comprehensive educational and care services, augmented by health and nutritional services, case management, social services, and transportation between child care and home or school. EEC provides an additional $15.65 per child to support the cost of these additional services. EEC in partnership with the Department of Children and Families (DCF) is working on expanding and continuously refining this program.
MENTAL HEALTH CONSULTATION SERVICES
EEC’s mental health initiatives are aimed at providing mental health promotion, prevention, and intervention services as soon as possible for children and their families. Mental Health Consultation Services provided by a clinician or behavioral specialist support positive interactions in children’s care settings and address social-emotional needs so that children can be successful in their care setting and ready to learn. In FY 2010 EEC continues to fund two types of mental health consultation programs:
Mental Health Consultation Services Grants
• Initiated in FY07
• FY09 Grant Total- $2,030,000
• FY10 Grant Total- $900,000 6
Page 6
• 10 Grantees serving child care programs in more than 70 cities and towns
Mental Health Consultation Services grantees serve as an “on-call” resource to child care programs, responding to referrals of children exhibiting behavioral challenges and providing on- site consultation by a mental health consultant to coach and mentor program staff.
Through this grant, EEC aims to accomplish the following objectives:
• Reduce the number of suspensions and expulsions of children from EEC funded programs
• Enhance staff competencies to work with behaviorally challenged children, thereby benefitting all children enrolled in the program
• Strengthen parenting skills and parent involvement, and
• Promote collaboration for better access to services for children and families.
In past years, grantees have provided more than 26,000 hours of consultation services to nearly 1000 classrooms or family child care homes. Approximately 1,500 referred children received individualized services, and were retained in their program. With a steep reduction in funding this fiscal year, EEC anticipates that programs will be able to serve a smaller number of providers and children – although EEC has encouraged grantees to pursue strategies to leverage resources through collaborations and third party billing.
Comprehensive Mental Health in Child Care (CMHCC) programs
• Initiated in 2001
• FY10 contract total - $620,000
• 14 contractors are located in: North Adams, Holyoke, Springfield, Worcester, Fitchburg, Lawrence, Lynn, Gloucester, New Bedford, Weymouth, and Boston
In collaboration with MassHealth/Mass. Behavioral Health Partnership, EEC has worked to connect early education and care providers with mental health clinics to locate clinicians on-site at 15 child care programs that have Supportive Child Care contracts with EEC. These “embedded” mental health clinicians provide support and training to staff at the child care program and link families with needed clinical services through the partnering clinic. Goals include:
• Reducing expulsions or suspensions of children due to behavioral issues • Preventing repeat psychiatric hospitalizations of children • Improving the quality of child, parent, and family relationships, and • Reducing the risk factors that impact children’s emotional development and their acquisition of knowledge and skills necessary for success in school
Annually, approximately 600 children receive individual therapeutic services through the CMHCC program, allowing them to remain in care. EEC funds approximately 2/3 of the clinician’s salary to support non-billable services like home visits, classroom observations, service coordination and collateral contacts, training and travel costs. The remaining 1/3 is funded by billing insurances for the clinical services that are provided.
See Appendix C for a list of grantees and communities served
DECREASING EXPULSION RATES 7
Page 7
Expulsion rates from preschool came to national attention in 2005 when Walter Gilliam published his seminal study on this topic. [Gilliam, W. S. (2005). Prekindergarteners left behind: Expulsion rates in state prekindergarten systems. New Haven, CT: Yale University Child Study Center.] At the time Massachusetts was found to have the 9th highest rate of states studied. Debate since then has focused on the methodology used in the report and the populations he focused on. Either way, it has highlighted the need for greater attention to the comprehensive services provided to children in early care and education programs. Because of limits of data collection, EEC does not have data on expulsion rates for all early care and education programs. Discussions, however, are underway for Dr. Gilliam to return to Massachusetts for a follow-up study.
In response, EEC mental health grantee’s reports confirm the research that mental health consultation services significantly reduce terminations due to challenging behavior. EEC’s endeavors to provide strong social-emotional supports for all children are not limited to mental health consultation. Quality enhancement and workforce development efforts clearly improve overall classroom practice as well as support teachers’ ability to manage challenging behavior. Finally, EEC’s strengthened licensing regulations ensure that programs implement a procedure to prevent suspension and expulsion, including meeting with the parents, developing a behavioral intervention plan, providing referral options, and pursuing options for supportive services to the program.
BIRTH TO SCHOOL-AGE TASKFORCE
This year a Birth to School-Age Taskforce convened. Its purpose is to put forth recommendations to the Department of Early Education and Care (EEC) and the Executive Office of Education (EOE) to strengthen supports and services to effectively meet the needs of children birth to school-age, their families, and other significant caregivers to ensure continuously improving development and learning outcomes for children in the earliest years. The goal of the Taskforce is to develop a plan to ensure the healthy development of all children pre-birth to age three in Massachusetts with a focus on ensuring good health, strong families/communities, positive learning experiences, and systems.
The Taskforce is organized into the following subcommittees: • Good Health • Positive Learning Experiences • Strong Families/Communities • Strong Systems • Diversity
To date, the Birth to School Age Taskforce has produced a preliminary set of desired outcomes/indicators/strategies for infants and toddlers, their families, systems and communities, which will be developed further during the ongoing work of the Taskforce Subcommittees. The Taskforce subcommittees are continuing their work in researching strategies (and their efficacy and evidence-based nature) that align with each strategy.
Summary of Outcomes Developed by the Taskforce - Child
8
Page 8
Basic Needs
• Infants and toddlers are safe in their home, care, and community setting. • Infants and toddlers are receiving adequate nutrition.
Health and Well-B ei n g
• Infants and toddlers are physically and mentally healthy. • Infants and toddlers have quality primary care. • Infants and toddlers have access to quality health and dental care coverage.
Development and Learning
• Infants and toddlers are on track for their optimal development. • Infants and toddlers are entering school “ready to learn” and are performing well by the third grade. • Infant and toddlers have access to high-quality, affordable early education and care. • Infants and toddlers have high-quality learning experiences with their families/ primary caregivers.
Relationships
• Infants and toddlers have consistent, stable, responsive, and nurturing relationships in their out of home care settings that are culturally responsive. • Infants and toddlers have consistent, stable, responsive, and nurturing relationships in their family settings.
Summary of Outcomes Developed by the Taskforce - Parents/Families
Basic Needs
• Parents/Families have adequate, stable and affordable housing options. • Infants and toddlers have adequate and stable housing. • Parents/Families of infants and toddlers are economically secure. • All parents/families of infants and toddlers have stable work that generates a livable wage to provide for their infants and toddlers. • All parents/caregivers of infants and toddlers receive sufficient paid leave to care for sick children. All parents/caregivers receive adequate paid family leave to care for newborn or adopted infants and toddlers.
Health and Well-B ei n g
• Families have access to and are informed consumers of health care and receive consistent, coordinated health, dental and mental health services. • Pregnant women receive comprehensive pre and postnatal health care and support. • Pregnant women are physically and mentally healthy during and after pregnancy.
Development and Learning
• Parents/Families are competent in their role as their infant and toddler’s first teacher. • Parents/families of infants and toddlers have the knowledge and resources to support the optimal development of their infants and toddlers. 9
Page 9
• Parents/families have meaningful choices in services for infants and toddlers and are supported in accessing services and supports.
Relationships
• All families of infants and toddlers have informal and formal support networks
Summary of Outcomes Developed by the Taskforce – Community/Program
Basic Needs
• Infant and toddler caregivers/educators receive respect, support, and adequate compensation for their work.
Relationships
• Parents/families of infants and toddlers are actively involved in leadership, advocacy and governance. • Programs work to foster consistent, stable, responsive, and nurturing relationships in the families they serve and in their care-giving settings. • Infant and toddler caregivers/educators see and treat parents as the children’s primary teachers and partner with them in their children’s care and learning • Families of infants and toddlers at risk for out of home placement have: 1) access to strength-based family support services that work together to prevent disruption, provide permanency, if needed, 2) access to pre & post-permanency supports, and 3) access to a coordinated system for visits between children, placement, & families as often as possible.
Development and Learning
• Programs ensure that Infant and Toddler educators are competent, knowledgeable, and confident in supporting the optimal development of children in their care and have a commitment to ongoing high quality professional development opportunities. • All communities have the capacity to strengthen families and support the healthy growth and development of its infants and toddlers • All communities have a coordinated network of high-quality, accessible services and resources
The Taskforce is also working to map current state supporting systems and services for infants and toddlers and their families in Massachusetts and examining how those state funded supports play out in local communities. During September and October EEC will hold several community meetings across the state in coordination with the United Way of Massachusetts Bay and Merrimack Valley to engage community partners in this important work and provide an opportunity for feedback on the outcomes, indicators, strategies and key next steps developed by the Taskforce.
A final meeting for this first Phase is set for November 6th and a report is planned for submission in January. This report will conclude Phase I of the taskforce with recommendations and a report specific to pre-birth to 3. Phase II will begin after Phase I concludes to examine linkages through age five.
10
Page 10
AFTER-SCHOOL AND OUT OF SCHOOL TIME INITIATIVES
EEC is currently engaged in several initiatives focused on the After-School and Out of School Time (ASOST) Field these span curriculum enrichment, program improvement, and increasing access to programming.
SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING AND MATHEMATICS (STEM)
EEC and the Department of Higher Education (DHE) have launched a new initiative to expand science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) educational offerings in afterschool and out-of-school time programs. This pilot project has provided 30 staff from eight EEC- licensed afterschool programs in Greater Boston/Northeast and Western Massachusetts, with professional development on STEM curricula from the Museum of Science (“Engineering is Elementary”) or WGBH (“Design Squad”). As of July, all eight participating after ASOST programs have completed training on and are in the process of implementing it with their students. EEC surveyed the educators prior to and after completing the training and is currently analyzing this data. EEC is also in the process of developing student evaluation tools and a system for tracking curriculum use by the participating programs. Commissioner Killins will present the pilot results at the annual Massachusetts STEM summit in October. DHE’s STEM Pipeline Fund financed the FY09 pilot. The FY10 budget directs the immediate transfer of all Pipeline Fund dollars to the General Fund.
QUALITY RATING AND IMPROVEMENT SYSTEM – AS/OST STANDARDS
As EEC has developed a Quality Rating and Improvement System, it has included ASOST programs from the start. There has been considerable work dedicated to determining the standards for the ASOST field. Currently there is discussion about including the Council on Accreditation (COA) as one of the top levels of the QRIS standards, and even if it is included what alternative pathways might programs use to reach this level. Currently there are fewer than 15 COA accredited programs in the state. The cost of the COA accreditation process has recently increased making it increasingly difficult for programs to pursue this recognition. Massachusetts has a similar number of COA accredited programs to other states.
YOUTH WORKER CERTIFICATIONS
EEC currently does not certify school-age staff. Within the state, there are at least two groups working on piloting credentials for school-age youth workers. One is the P-21 Professional Youth Worker Credential (PYWC) and the second is School-Age & Youth Development (SAYD) credential.
The P-21 Professional Youth Worker Credential (PYWC) is part of the Massachusetts statewide Pathways to Success by Twenty-One Initiative (P-21). P-21 is a statewide effort led by the Commonwealth Corporation to improve educational and employment outcomes of Massachusetts’ most at-risk youth.
11
Page 11
The P21 Professional Youth Worker Credential is a competency-based curriculum for youth workers who do not have a higher education credential or certificate in a related field of study. The model is based on the School Age Youth Development (SAYD) credential piloted by Achieve Boston and addresses the 8 of the 11 competency areas developed by Achieve.
The PYWC was first piloted in Hampden County, with 24 students (as of March 3, 2009 20 students had completed the pilot) from 12 agencies. The coursework and training was held at Holyoke Community College. College credits were through Cambridge College and will also be honored by UMB and Urban College. A part-time Student Support Coordinator provided assistance to participants and instructors. The PYWC was offered at no cost to participants.
The Commonwealth Corporation oversees the PYWC, and the Medical Foundation coordinated the instruction and documentation of competencies. A local partners forum consisting of the Hampden County Regional Employment Board, Department of Youth Services (DYS), FutureWorks One Stop Career Center, ESE and several Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Youth providers provided input on the implementation of the pilot.
Participants who completed the required training and coursework, documented competency understanding and application, and completed a demonstration project at their worksite were awarded a P-21 PYWC certificate from the Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development and Commonwealth Corporation, and a $1,000 stipend from the Hampden County Regional Employment Board.
The School-Age & Youth Development (SAYD) credential was a pilot professional development program for staff working with children and youth in out-of-school time and youth development programs. It targeted promoting leadership development and reducing staff turnover. The credential consisted of three college courses (9 credits total) and forty-five hours of community- based training over an 18 month period from January 2007 until June 2008. Participants met with their supervisors during this time to incorporate learning from the classes into their work. Participants were evaluated on their work through a portfolio review and panel interview at the end of the credential period. There was no cost to participants and staff who completed the pilot received a stipend and in some cases a salary increase.
ARRA SUMMER LEARNING VOUCHERS FOR SCHOOL-AGE YOUTH
To increase capacity for school-age youth and to address the summer learning gap, the EEC Board dedicated up to $2.5M towards vouchers for youth to attend summer learning programs. Approximately 800 youth participated in this opportunity and attended more than 250 programs. EEC will be reporting on this project for the federal ARRA reporting requirements. This summer EEC also visited several of these programs for monitoring and quality control. Following is information about these site visits:
Determining Visits:
EEC planned to visit 20% of programs that received ARRA Summer Learning promotion funding during the month of August. Sites were visited based on the following criteria:
• Providers with 5 or more children would receive a visit • Any program whose lead agency includes a Head Start program would receive a visit • Programs with 4 or less children would be randomly sampled 12
Page 12
Program 5+ T O T A L COMMIS- Program Program Type: 5+ CHILDREN HS RANDOM CHILDREN VISITS IN SIONER Type: Type: Center ENROLLED REGION DISTRICT FCC C a m p Based Boston Region 1 6 4 11 11 0 7 4 Southeast Region 3 1 1 5 4 0 4 1
Northeast Region 6 11* 8** 25 22 11 13 1
Greater Boston & 1 3 3 7 6 1 2 4 Central Region
Western Region 0 1 6 7 7 1 3 3 TOTALS 11 22 22 55 50 13 29 13 *Head Start visit is also random visit. Visit counted as HS on chart ** Head Start visit is also 5+ visit. Visit counted as HS on chart Commissioner Districts: Boston; Brockton; Fall River, Holyoke, Lawrence; Lowell, Lynn, New Bedford, Springfield, Worcester
Preparing for the Visits:
Training was provided on August 5th in the Boston EEC Central Office on use of SACERS and FCCERS-R Environment Rating Scale Tools. The visit list was shared with EEC Regional Directors to assure that programs to be visited did not have outstanding licensing issues and that program visits would not overlap with licensing visits. A phone call was made to the program prior to the visit to announce and explain the visit.
Visits:
Eleven EEC program staff made 48 visits between August 11th and September 4th, to the ARRA Summer Learning Promotion Sites:
• 9 family child care homes; • 13 camps; and, • 26 licensed center based programs throughout the state.
Visit Outcomes
Data from the visits is to be analyzed. All CCR&Rs, who administered these vouchers, will al so receive an audit compliance visit from EEC auditors within the year.
FACILITIES INVENTORY
Facilities are an important element of quality. In 2008 EEC provided a $10,000 grant to the Children’s Investment Fund, which contributed to the significant amount of funding they raised from private sources and their own resources, to pay for a Facilities Inventory. The following update was provided by Mav Pardee, Program Manager at the Children’s Investment Fund.
13
Page 13
Rationale for the Study
Investing in high quality early education has proven to be effective in addressing the educational disparities faced by children at risk. But quality is the crucial component, and one factor too often ignored is the condition of the facility housing an early childhood or out-of-school time program. It is essential that in planning to improve education at all levels, policymakers consider the impact of facilities on children and staff. There is growing evidence that a well- designed, well-equipped environment supports learning, while a poorly adapted and overcrowded environment undermines it.
Project goals, activities and target population:
The Facilities Inventory Project will be the first study of its kind in Massachusetts or the U.S. It will document the condition of ECE and OST facilities in Massachusetts and the cost of improvements, provide data to drive decisions for a campaign for public facilities financing in MA, and may help position MA for new federal initiatives related to education. It will also guide the Children’s Investment Fund’s training, technical assistance, and financing for our target population -- providers serving the most vulnerable children in the Commonwealth.
The Fund has selected two research firms, the Wellesley Centers for Women and On-Site Insight, to work together to conduct the study. The research team will develop facility standards and the survey methodology, and review 130-150 non-profit child care sites. The final report will be completed in 2010 and will document the condition of the facilities, provide estimates for improvements, and make recommendations. The focus of the assessment will be non-profit programs serving low income children ages 0-14. It will include an assessment of the building envelope and systems, classrooms/activity spaces, administrative and support areas, and outdoor space.
Standards and measurement tools
We will use national accreditation standards, and the EEC draft Quality Rating Improvement Scale (QRIS) as starting points, even though they pay limited attention to facility quality and functionality. Some other resources to be used are: EEC’s Early Childhood Standards, the U.S. Department of Defense Unified Facilities Criteria for Child Development Centers and Youth Programs, and the MA School Building Authority Educational Program Space Standards and Guidelines. For outdoor space, we will use the National Program for Playground Safety Standards. We will develop a set of suitable standards for each age group and standards for the entire facility. The final standards will have three levels:
Level 1: Meets Massachusetts’ state regulations: licensing standards and state building code related to buildings that house programs for infant-toddler, preschool and school age programs
Level 2: Meets professional association standards: QRIS, ECE and OST accreditation standards, AAP and APHA
Level 3: Meets a broader range of facilities requirements for high quality programs
The research team will review existing tools and then draft a detailed measurement tool for this project.
14
Page 14
The project will be managed by the Fund’s Program Manager, Mav Pardee, who has 30+ years experience in program development, consultation, and evaluation for infant through school age providers. We have a 24- member Advisory Committee of public officials, ECE and OST leaders, funders, and others knowledgeable about the field to provide guidance for the project.
COLLABORATION AND COORDINATION OF RESOURCES
EEC collaborates with its sister agencies within the Secretariat as well as many other state and human service agencies. Some of our participation on boards, task forces, committees, and interagency ventures is legislatively mandated, and other relationships have developed because of shared visions. EEC staff serves in multiple capacities across these groups. Most groups meet monthly, some less frequently. The agencies and entities we partner with are: - EOHHS Nutrition Board - United Way Increasing Youth - Child Abuse Prevention Board Opportunities Impact Council - Children’s Behavioral Health Advisory - DTA/EEC Streamlining Working - Board of Accreditation of Homemaker Group Services - Young Children’s Interagency Work - Task Force on Behavioral Health and Group: Behavioral Health Initiative the Public Schools - Connected Beginnings Advisory - DYS Advisory Committee Board - OCA Child Advocate Advisory Board - Head Start Nutrition Board - Governor’s Advisory Council for - Head Start State Advisory Board Refugees and Immigrants - New Americans Agenda for MA – - Interagency Child Welfare Task Force Office of Refugees and Immigrants - Advisory Council for Comprehensive - Smart from the Start Advisory Interdisciplinary Health Education Committee and Human Service Programs - Shaken Baby Advisory Committee - Early Childhood Intervention Advisory - Department of Elementary and Committee Secondary Education (ESE) - WIC Advisory Board Comprehensive System of Personnel - CARD Development (CPSD) Advisory Group - Bessie Tartt Wilson Voucher Study - Department of Elementary and - Parent Information Resource Center Secondary Education (ESE) (PIRC) Advisory Committee Interdisciplinary Health Education - MA Early Childhood Oral Health and Human Services Advisory Council Consortium - MA Afterschool Partnership (MAP) - Interagency Council on Housing and Advisory Team Homelessness - Interagency Coordinating Council - McKinney Vento Homelessness (ICC)(DPH) Steering Committee - MA Special Education Advisory - United Way Healthy Child Council (SAC) Development Impact Council - MA Infant-Early Childhood Mental - United Way Action Planning Team Health Group (APT) - Thrive in Five - DCF Strategic Planning Group
15
Page 15
EEC fosters collaboration, intentionally seeks out, and appreciates the involvement of both state and community based agencies to advise us in our work, participate in strategic and program planning/development, coordinating resources, and policy and regulation revisions and review. Below is sample list of EEC committees involving outside agencies, providers and family members: - EEC Parent Advisory - Birth to School Age Task Force - EEC Family Child Care Standards - EEC Advisory Council, including its Committee work groups for Professional Development, Universal PreK and Operations
EEC also works directly with public schools to provide training and technical assistance based on needs determined by the state’s data (i.e., transition from Early Intervention to public school special education) or at the request of the individual district. In addition, EEC has a formal relationship with ESE to administer all aspects of the Early Childhood Special Education allocation grants (IDEA), ARRA preschool funds, State Performance Plan/Annual Performance Report (SPP/APR) and Indicators 6, 7 and 12, and participate with Program Quality Assurance (PQA) visits. EEC also conducts visits to early childhood special education classrooms across the Commonwealth as part of its Quality Monitoring.
EEC has written and been awarded three grants, each requiring the participation of other agencies. These grants, and their respective work groups, include:
- SpecialQuest State Leadership Team Steering Committee - Center for Social Emotional Foundations for Early Learning (CSEFEL) - National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE): Personnel Center
STRATEGIC DIRECTION: INCREASE AND PROMOTE FAMILY SUPPORT, ACCESS AND AFFORDABILITY.
This section summarizes EEC’s efforts to strengthen families and assist families with accessing support services, including early care and education.
FAMILY ACCESS AND AFFORDABILITY
EEC provides financial assistance to families across the Commonwealth to access child care services. The following table describes the number of children EEC serves by type of financial assistance, setting type, and age.
16
Page 16
FY09 Children Served by Account Type 70,000
60,000 57,3 56,35 55,5 58,8358,9 58,25758,604 56,6 56,649 56,52 56,1 56,9812 56,0 50,000 13 47 1 2 95 30 36 08 16,061 25859260732583825911 2652226452261042602826017260182549225649 40,000
30,000 DTA 33,355 Income Eligible 20,000 25,509 25,49926,992 26,799 26,322 26,301 24,47224,579 24,97624,805 24,594 24,337 Supportive 10,000
- 5,619 5,618 5,734 5,517 5,530 5,583 5,701 5,833 5,981 6,064 6,097 6,392 6,592 Jul-08 Aug- Sep-08Oct-08 Nov- Dec-08Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar- Apr-09 May- Jun-09 Jul-09 08 08 09 09 Service Month
FY09 Children Served by Program Type
70,000
60,000 2370 2325 2294 2261 2628 2644 2684 2605 2540 2526 2462 2416 50,000 14,93215,020 15,002 14,65714,78215,44814,97414,88514,82614,56814,724 14,896 40,000 30,000 20,000 In-home 10,000 39,32839,22339,21538,94238,92738,84338,50039,84141,53041,59141,06741,341 FCC 0 Centerbased
10/1/0 11/1/0 12/1/0 7/1/08 8/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 2/1/09 3/1/09 4/1/09 5/1/09 6/1/09 8 8 8 In-home 2628 2644 2684 2605 2540 2526 2462 2416 2370 2325 2294 2261 FCC 14,657 14,782 15,448 14,974 14,885 14,826 14,568 14,724 14,932 15,020 14,896 15,002 Centerbased 39,328 39,223 39,215 38,942 38,927 38,843 38,500 39,841 41,530 41,591 41,067 41,341
17
Page 17
FY09 Children Subsidized by Age Group 70,000
60,000
50,000 25,529 26,065 26,001 26,945 26,530 26,562 24,872 23,778 23,961 24,241 24,270 24,757 40,000
30,000
17,734 17,680 17,519 17,483 17,183 18,365 19,416 19,159 18,830 18,592 20,000 16,745 16,726
10,000 10,416 9,492 9,497 10,143 10,427 10,260 10,069 9,964 10,063 9,994 9,835 9,581
- 3,839 3,860 4,590 4,640 4,442 4,208 4,005 3,889 3,817 3,708 3,578 3,471 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May- Jun-09 school age preschool 09 toddler infant
NUMBER OF CHILDREN WAITING FOR STATE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE (MAY 2009)
Children By Age Boston Central Metro Northeast Southeast Western Statewide Infant-Toddler 1,855 748 1,259 2,011 1,279 1,047 8,199 Pre-School 934 483 1,115 1,482 962 621 5,597 School Age 1,173 654 1,123 1,611 1,006 812 6,379 Total 3,962 1,885 3,497 5,104 3,247 2,480 20,175
For additional information about the children EEC serves, see Appendix D
In addition, many very young children spend time in what is referred to as “family, friend, and neighbor care” (FFN). This is care which is not subject to EEC’s licensing regulations and is provided by those close to the family. EEC distributes a very small number of vouchers to children in this arrangement (called In-Home Vouchers). Besides this small group, and because of the limitations of data collection, EEC has minimal understanding about these arrangements. Many of EEC’s family outreach efforts though are inclusive of family, friend, and neighbor caregivers.
LOCAL AND REGIONAL COORDINATION
The following describes how EEC has been working to coordinate its local and regional presence.
18
Page 18
EEC’s new Coordinated Family and Community Engagement Grant (CFCE) provides the foundation for community wide coordination of efforts on behalf of children, families and programs to promote school readiness through family support and education focused programs and services.
Through the FY2010 CFCE renewal grant, EEC is developing innovative approaches to comprehensive planning, coordination and delivery of local family access and community engagement services through the Community Partnerships for Children Programs (CPC), Massachusetts Family Network Programs (MFN), Parent Child Home Programs (PCHP) and Joint Family Support Programs (JFSP). The goal of consolidation is for local communities to develop coordinated and collaborative community wide plans to enhance family access, education, and support across and within early education and care program models, to realize efficiencies, and promote greater outcomes through shared resources and efforts in addition to those provided by the state. This effort also expanded the age-range with which these councils work.
In addition to the desired outcomes involving outreach to families, EEC expects:
• Information on early education and care options, parenting education, and community resources is readily available and accurate; and is available at locations in the community that families frequent and in languages spoken by families in the community.
• Children experience literacy, language and print rich environments at home, in their early education and care programs and at school and families will be involved in literacy rich activities.
• In partnership with special education programs, enhanced transition supports are provided for children in Early Intervention, and those who are eligible, are smoothly transitioned into special education programs and other community resources and programs.
• In partnership with special education programs, families with preschool children receiving special education services are provided with options about where to receive special education and related services in settings with typically developing peers.
• Every community supports and maintains at least one free, child safe, accessible public space (e.g., library, community center) where families can take their children to play, find resources on parenting, support literacy, and network with other families.
• Families and educators have access to comprehensive services to support their children’s healthy development at home, at their early education and care program and in the community.
• Families have meaningful leadership opportunities in their communities, schools and programs. Training is available to assist in becoming effective advocates for their children.
• Data, collected locally and aggregated statewide, is used to measure the need for and effectiveness of local early education and care strategies and programming.
• Prior to making a transition to a new program, all children and families are contacted by their child’s school and are invited to visit the classroom/program.
In FY10, the roles of CCR&Rs and EEC’s regional offices in achieving the most effective regional and local coordination will include:
19
Page 19
• Rebidding of the CCR&R contracts with clear requirements that connect CCR&Rs to the statewide system that EEC is building to meet the needs of families and early education and care and out of school time professionals in order to promote optimal development for children. [See Re-Procurement of Child Care Resource and Referral Contracts for more info]
• Reorganizing EEC staff in regional offices to enhance EEC’s capacity for family and community engagement and program monitoring on a regional level. Responsibilities in this new role will include: o promoting and engaging communities in awareness activities which support children as lifelong learners; o providing technical assistance and resources to communities; o ensuring inclusion of all children in early education and care programs within and external to public schools , and o acting as a liaison for parents, child care and family support programs, public schools, and regional staff of other state agencies to the Department of Early Education and Care. [See next section for more information]
EEC PROVIDES MULTIPLE POINTS OF ENTRY AND OUTREACH FOR FAMILIES INCLUDING THOSE IN HARD TO REACH POPULATIONS
EEC provides multiple points of entry and outreach for families including the following:
• FY10 marks the launch of the voluntary Coordinated Family and Community Engagement (CFCE) grant opportunity which consolidates formerly discrete EEC funded community based family support and local planning and coordination grants, including Parent Child Home Program (PCHP), Massachusetts Family Network (MFN), and Community Partnerships for Children (CPC) under one lead agency. The funding amount available to support this community approach is $15,000,000.
This consolidated approach to community funding is designed to strengthen the relationships between families, the programs designed to serve them, and communities. EEC is building on a local infrastructure of supports and services across the Commonwealth to ensure that all families with young children, especially those with the greatest educational need and experiencing multiple risk factors, have access to the resources they need to support optimal development of their children.
EEC received 120 responses representing 137 CPC Programs, 34 MFN Programs, 22 PCHP Programs, and 11 JFSP Programs. Of the 120 responses, 45 represent consolidations of more than one program type. Three are from CPCs collaborating with another CPC, and 71 were from CPCs that did not apply in collaboration with other programs.
The landscape of our family and community engagement programming has changed. In FY09, EEC managed the following individual grants: • 141 Community Partnerships for Children • 42 Massachusetts Family Network
20
Page 20
• 25 Parent Child Home Programs • 11 Joint FamilySupport grantees
As a result of our FY10 Coordinated Family and Community Engagement consolidation grant opportunity, grant applications reflected the following: • 45 consolidations: involving partnerships between 46 CPCs, 34 MFNs, 22 PCHPs, and 11 JFSPs • 3 consolidations between CPCs only • 71 non-consolidated CPCs • 8 non-consolidated Massachusetts Family Network • 3 non-consolidated Parent Child Home Programs • 0 non-consolidated Joint FamilySupport grantees
Coordinated family and community engagement grantees are required to have community based councils that include parent representatives as well as representatives from community and regionally based agencies, such as: WIC, libraries, public schools, Early Intervention, Head Start, adult education, health care providers, faith based organizations, DCF area offices, higher education, Child Care Resource and Referral agencies, etc. With broad representation on these councils, community strengths and needs are identified by a variety of sources, and budget allocations are determined by the council. An understanding of the resources and supports available in the community on the part of the council membership provides another entry point for families in obtaining referrals or direct services that meet their needs.
Our family and community engagement grant includes these desired outcomes:
• Outreach to all families with newborns or newly adopted infants is conducted by a local, knowledgeable resource person, offering information about community resources and access to information about healthy child development.
• Specific strategies and outreach mechanisms are in place to engage hard to reach families including but not limited to those for who English is a second language, families experiencing homelessness, families living in isolation and families experiencing multiple risk factors.
The Parent Child Home Program (PCHP) and outreach to families with newborns are examples of two initiatives that provide the opportunity for EEC to reach families who may not be engaged in the world of early education and care and might prefer to receive early literacy support and/or family engagement and support in alternative means. PCHP provides a foundation for early literacy, focusing on the parent as a child’s first teacher. Both PCHP and outreach to families with newborns can provide the linkage for hard to reach or isolated families to the broader world of early education and care.
All of the grantees offer activities, like playgroups, in languages and locations appropriate for the families in the communities they serve, e.g. for Spanish, Japanese, German speakers (Assabet Valley); Spanish (Boston), and Spanish, Portuguese, Creole (Somerville). Playgroups that are linguistically and culturally sensitive to the needs of families provide an
21
Page 21
excellent vehicle to engage families, to reduce isolation and to provide education and support.
EEC is developing a quarterly reporting tool to measure outcomes on the community level. In addition, EEC will be requiring grantees to complete the Strengthening Families self- assessment tool developed by the Center for the Study of Social Policy that will be the foundation for future planning and evaluation. Information gathered from the community based council members and the self-assessment tool will support future recommendations for program design and professional development for early education and care program staff.
• Child Care Resource and Referral agencies (CCR&Rs) - a network of child care resource and referral agencies across the state with offices located in the following communities- New Bedford, Hyannis, Brockton, Springfield, Quincy, Worcester, Boston, Cambridge, Greenfield, Pittsfield, Concord, Beverly, Fitchburg and Lawrence. The model for Comprehensive Child Care Services requires CCR&Rs to: . Provide up to date, user friendly information on available child care resources, . Determine eligibility for financial assistance, . Establish local linkages and identify opportunities for shared planning and collaborations, . Provide customized services for families of children with disabilities, and . Respond to parental requests for technical assistance related to using child care, child development, or accessing community resources. o Support Services include: . supporting parents in their dual role as workers and parents, . offering parents comprehensive consumer education which includes consultation about child care and referrals to programs, . community collaborations and planning by building connections within the community and generating resources for families, . compiling, analyzing, and sharing information with parents, providers, and communities to work toward ongoing improvement of the child care system, . public advocacy/policy: improving public policy for children and families, and . each CCR&R offers a variety of educational workshops for parents o While there is not consistent accessibility to information in their preferred language of the families they serve, some of the CCR&Rs provide some translated materials, but more often have bilingual staff to meet the needs of the families they serve. One CCR&R wrote in a survey about the capacity of CCR&Rs to offer translated materials and services:
Our experience is that having bilingual staff is the main reason for an increase in the number of contacts from the Spanish community, mainly providers. There is a community recognition that our agency is trying to be responsive to their needs. For less frequently requested languages, a phone translation service might be adequate.
• Child care centers and family child care providers – Parents already find their local child care center and family child care provider directly through community resources. EEC is working to incorporate additional training and supports for professionals in the field on topics about engaging and supporting families. As this happens, educators/providers will become
22
Page 22
more skilled at working with parents as partners and connecting them to the supports they need.
• EEC Regional office capacity: Educational specialists will now be located in EEC’s Regional offices. Their role will include providing technical assistance and support to programs and families. For example, their role could include supporting the capacity of programs to reach families who are considered “hard to reach” as well as supporting parents who need assistance in navigating the early education and care services and supports available in their community. (Additional information about this new role at EEC is described under EEC Internal Re-organization.)
• Statewide: EEC has availed itself of a Google internet service that allows parents and providers to access information on its website in multiple languages. EEC’s website now also has a child care search engine, which allows families to locate options near them geographically. Also, EEC’s Learn and Grow Together Guide for families has been translated into Spanish and Portuguese. This guide includes child development information, age appropriate activity ideas that promote early literacy and healthy social emotional development, behavior management tips and space for families to record their questions and concerns in preparation for their well doctor visits. Families also have an opportunity to include milestones in their children’s lives. In addition to a limited number of hard copies, Learn and Grow Together is available electronically on our website. Hard copies were distributed to EEC regional offices, CCR&Rs and family support and engagement programs at the community level. EEC’s expectation is that families that engage with EEC at those access points will receive a copy of the resource guide.
RE-PROCUREMENT OF CHILD CARE RESOURCE AND REFERRAL CONTRACTS
In order to comply with recent audit findings, EEC will be re-procuring the contract for Comprehensive Child Care Services, which includes voucher management, professional development and resource and referral services in FY10. In the upcoming re-procurement, professional development funding, which was separated from the current contract in 2005, will be re-bid separately.
Child care subsidies play a key role in EEC’s mission of providing the foundation to support all children in their development as lifelong learners and contributing members of the community, and supporting families in their essential work as parents and caregivers. To be successful in supporting EEC’s strategic direction of increasing and promoting family support and access and affordability, the re-procurement of resource and referral services and vouchers will be guided by a strengths-based approach that recognizes families as their child’s first teacher and acknowledges them as experts on their own child.
There are three general types of state CCR&R Networks: Coordinating, Managing, and Voluntary. Coordinating and Managing Networks are funded and have staff. They receive mainly public funds, such as Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) dollars distributed by State Child Care Administrators. Coordinating and Managing Networks also leverage funds from corporations, foundations, membership dues, fee-for-service contracts, and state grants. Voluntary Networks have no budget or rely on small membership fees and infrequent grants for 23
Page 23
projects. Massachusetts has a voluntary network. EEC will be exploring the best type of network for Massachusetts.
TRANSLATION
Over the last two years EEC has begun a concerted effort to translate important documents into the languages spoken by the children and families we serve. Appendix E contains a chart of documents translated to date. EEC has also engaged a Google translation service of its website and is working with the Office of Refugees and Immigrants on further efforts.
EEC WEBSITE TO MAKE GOOGLE TRANSLATION SERVICE AVAILABLE
As part of EEC’s commitment to improve services to its non-native English speaking constituency, the Department has added a free service from Google Language Tools to our website which offers automated translation of written web content to the public. Through this service, language translation is available in many languages including Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, French, and Vietnamese (and many more) for all posted EEC web content. A user can select their language and type in any website at http://www.google.com/language_tools?hl=en in order to receive free translated information in their native language. Through the use of this tool, all materials on EEC’s web site are available in multiple languages. EEC will also recommend that programs consider adding this free service to their website as well.
INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION WITH THE HEAD START STATE COLLABORATION OFFICE AND THE MASSACHUSETTS OFFICE OF REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS (ORI)
This spring, Richard Chacon, Executive Director of the Office of Immigrants and Refugees, met with EEC Regional Licensors staff and EEC central staff to provide an overview of services provided by ORI, information related to the Governor’s New American Initiative, and the role of the Governor’s Advisory Council on Immigrant and Refugees. Accomplishments of projects under the EEC and ORI partnership were also mentioned. This spring also, EEC’s Commissioner met with ORI and Greater Boston Legal Services to discuss how to improve services for individuals with Limited English Proficiency. Plans discussed included: an internal assessment of EEC’s capacity, a community needs assessment, development of interpretation and translation policies and procedures, training and interpreter services, monitoring and evaluation, and collaboration with state agencies to share new and existing services.
Early this summer, as part of expanding licensing opportunities for immigrant and refugee communities, EEC licensors, central staff, and a Head Start program director will meet with Representative Richardson and Framingham constituents to address the needs of the Portuguese community regarding licensing child care. This is an ongoing partnership, established in November of 2008, with the purpose of developing effective solutions that meet the needs of the local communities related to quality child care for Limited English Proficiency populations.
24
Page 24
TRIAL COURT CARE
History
Massachusetts previously supported Trial Court Care Programs, alternatively known as CourtCare. Massachusetts’ Trial Court Care programs were funded through a unique line-item. The funding was to provide on-demand child care services, as well as support and referral services for their families. Trial Court Care Programs had a contract with the former Office of Child Care Services (OCCS) and a facilities contract with the Administrative Office of the Trial Court (AOTC), as AOTC provided the space, equipment and furnishings. The Trial Court Care programs served only families with business before the court. The intent was to keep kids away from the adult court room proceedings and to link these families to subsidies and other support services. The CourtCare programs are a nationally recognized model of care, which was successfully replicated in many states across the country such as Colorado, California, Pennsylvania, Florida, Louisiana, Texas and New York. Massachusetts’ Trial Court Care Programs were closed in FY03 due to state budget cuts.
According to the AOTC, a 2006 survey of Trial Court Departments demonstrated support for reinstatement of the CourtCare program, particularly in Boston, Brockton, Chelsea, Fall River, Lawrence, Plymouth, Springfield, West Roxbury, and Worcester. The estimated cost to re- establish these courts would be approximately $2.5 million. The Trial Court reports that total child enrollment in all ten of the CourtCare centers during FY02 totaled 19,972. The Office of the Trial Court expects the same, if not more, demand for care, if these programs were reinstated.
Program Model
EEC’s model of CourtCare would be developed similar to the flexible center-based model used for some licensed domestic violence and teen parent programs. This model also aligns with the new child care regulations coming into effect later this year. This model allows a vendor to open a flexible small mixed group child care program, and tailor its staffing pattern to the needs of the program based on children in attendance. EEC would ensure that all staff and qualified volunteers working in these programs had passed EEC’s BRC requirements. EEC would allow for licensing variances to account for programmatic accommodations to best fit the program model and target population. Some of these variances might be in the following areas: evacuation drills, reports to parents, parent conferences, children’s records, amended children’s enrollment forms, medical and immunization requirements, food and food preparations, outdoor space and outdoor playtime and medication administration. EEC would do its best to work with vendors to ensure those programs can meet the needs of the court care population and the needs of the court in each courthouse location.
The role of the court care programs will be to:
• Reduce the stress on the courts and court personnel by offering high quality child care for citizens having court business.
• Provide a positive child care model to parents of children who may not be currently receiving child care and limited experiences with leaving their child with a stranger.
25
Page 25
• Program can provide a first line of support and understanding for a child whose parent may have just been through a difficult court hearing. Educators can take the time to talk to parent and ensure parent is stable before they take the child.
• Provide safe and nurturing licensed child care to children while their family members are involved with court business in a quick and efficient manner.
• Reduce the risk to injury to children by providing child-safe and professionally staffed quality child care.
• Reduce children’s exposure to details of crime, violence, rape, and custody battles.
• Assist parents through the use of a quick and high quality screening tool assess children for indicators of social emotional developmental problems and delay and assist with providing appropriate referrals for support.
• Provide staff and qualified volunteers who are familiar with and appropriately sensitive to cultural practices and diversity of court clients and shall have the ability to have conversational skills in languages commonly spoken by the court clients.
• Provide programs with staff that respect the privacy rights of clients and maintain appropriate confidentiality and neutrality regarding court cases and court business;
• Provide trained mandated reporters to help support children and families by identifying child abuse and neglect in high risk families;
• Provide referral information to families in a wide away of services and supports such as health, dental, vision, housing, nutrition, child care resources, literacy, special needs and Massachusetts Family Networks; and
• Through upcoming information technology upgrades EEC will have the ability to gather various sources of data and track children into the EEC IT system to inform and better plan for the future needs of early education and care families.
Next Steps
EEC is in support of the Court Care initiative, and with additional funding would pursue implementation.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION: CREATE A WORKFORCE SYSTEM THAT MAINTAINS WORKER DIVERSITY AND PROVIDES RESOURCES, SUPPORTS, EXPECTATIONS, & CORE COMPETENCIES THAT LEAD TO THE OUTCOMES WE WANT FOR CHILDREN.
EEC has identified the following key elements that must be in place to establish a comprehensive Workforce Development System for Massachusetts:
1. Statewide Infrastructure Building, Leadership, and Strategic Planning 2. Core Competencies (and Orientation) 3. Professional Development Data Management System 4. Credentialing and Career Lattice (Career Pathways), and 5. Professional Development Opportunities and Resources Aligned with Requirements and Workforce Needs
26
Page 26
Toward that end, EEC has begun envisioning and building a workforce development system as three interconnected levels: statewide, regional, and local. In this vision, these levels share common elements of workforce development as noted above. Each level also contributes unique functions, key partners, linkages, and pathways to the system. Information and data travels throughout the system from the local to the regional and state levels and back. Patterns of need are identified at the local and regional levels, encouraging coordination and economies of scale in the development and provision of resources. Broad direction is determined at the state level, but implementation is adapted to the characteristics and needs of each region and local community. Best practices are identified and shared across the continuum. Multiple pathways (non-credit and credit-bearing) for professional development that are aligned through EEC’s core competencies, are accessible at each level of the system to support implementation of EEC’s licensing regulations, the Quality Rating Improvement System (QRIS), Universal Pre- Kindergarten (UPK), and other initiatives.
Through legislative language EEC is required to provide an annual update on its efforts to develop a workforce development system. To read the most recent report see http://www.eec.state.ma.us/docs/WorkforceDevelopmentReport0309.pdf.
EEC’s primary professional development initiatives are:
EEC CORE COMPETENCIES
The Professional Development Workgroup of EEC’s Advisory recently completed its review of the 8 Core Competency areas and the attendant indicators that were recommended by the Workforce Development Task Force. EEC is aiming to issue the initial set of competencies and indicators in FY2010. EEC has already imbedded these Core Competency Areas in grant and contract requirements for FY2008, FY2009, and FY2010 including the Building Careers and CFCE Program and Practitioner Support Grants, and CCR&R contracts for professional development. Each entity is responsible for indicating how their professional development offerings align with the eight core competency areas and identifying the appropriate competency area when entering their offerings into EEC’s Professional Development Calendar.
EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS’ SCHOLARSHIP
FY2010: 1018 students - $3,200,000
Funding for the Early Childhood Educators’ Scholarship (ECE Scholarhip) program is in the Department of Higher Education’s (DHE) budget. The program is jointly administered by DHE, Office of Student Financial Assistance (OFSA) and EEC. The purpose of the program is to support costs associated with tuition, fees, and related expenses for up to three courses per semester in an Associates or Bachelors degree program in early childhood or a related field. The goal is to increase access to higher education for early education and care and out of school time providers currently working in the field. As compensation levels in this profession often makes it difficult for individuals to afford higher education opportunities, and this challenges the advancement of the field. The Scholarship program is also a link to other professional development opportunities.
27
Page 27
ECE scholarships are awarded to individual educators annually. Award amounts depend on the number of credits an applicant has applied for and the institution of higher education that the applicant has chosen to attend. Only colleges and universities in Massachusetts that offer an Associate or Bachelors degree program in early childhood or a related field are eligible. ECE scholarships are awarded for no less than 1 course/3 credits a year to no more than 3 courses/9 credits per semester. Educators must be working in an EEC licensed or authorized program for at least one year to participate in the ECE Scholarship program.
To ensure that the ECE Scholarship continues to meet the needs of the early childhood and out of school time workforce, EEC and DHE convened an interagency workgroup to review the existing legislative requirements, current eligibility criteria, available data, relevant state and federal requirements, and current policies and practices for awarding scholarships. Membership of the work group includes: EEC, DHE, OSFA, and representatives from two year and four year institutions of higher education. The ECE Scholarship Workgroup will be responsible for providing a brief impact report regarding the intent of the legislation and will provide recommendations regarding data (collection and analysis), support (for matriculating students), targeting (for non- traditional, adult and diverse learners) and marketing of the scholarships (to current early education and care professionals).
BUILDING CAREERS IN EARLY EDUCATION AND CARE
FY2010: 21 grants - $932,776
The purpose of the Building Careers program is to increase access to higher education for early education and care and out of school time educators who are seeking a degree in early childhood education or a related field by funding college courses and academic advising. The program is intended to build pathways to college and professional development for what are often non-traditional students, by providing career and academic advising, using a cohort model, and scheduling courses at times that are convenient for working adults. A goal of the program is to enhance the ability of early education and care and out of school time educators to plan and implement curriculum and to assess children and youth. Another goal is to promote the inclusion of children with special needs in early education and care and out of school time programs.
Building Careers originated as a 3-year federal grant (FY05-FY07) in the Early Learning Services unit at the Department of Education. The program was transitioned to EEC in FY2006. Building Careers is now a continuation grant that EEC currently awards to 21 public and private colleges and universities in Massachusetts; 14 two-year and 7 four-year institutions are currently participating. Grants range from $38,784 for two-year institutions and $54,000 for four-year institutions. Each program is required to maintain a cohort of 20-30 students; estimates from FY09 indicate that just over 700 students were served through the program. There is a Building Careers Coordinator at each institution responsible for the oversight and assurance of coursework and support services; outreach and recruitment of new students; collaboration with other institutions of higher education, local CFCE councils, CCR&Rs, and high schools.
See Appendix F for funding award amounts.
BUILDING CAREERS: COLLEGE COURSES IN SPECIAL EDUCATION
28
Page 28
FY2010: supplemental funding for special needs courses - $271,600
All 21 Building Careers colleges have opted to offer at least one course in children with special needs and disabilities. Supplemental grant amounts range from $7,450 to $12,950 depending on whether the college is offering an undergraduate or graduate course. Courses are open to Building Careers students and other educators in early education and care who are working with preschool age children with disabilities and to educators who are responsible for training others in the field. The federal special education funds for these courses are provided to EEC by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (ESE) to address special needs and disabilities, as would be documented in children’s IEPs, in preschool settings.
See Appendix F for funding award amounts.
CDA SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM
FY2010: 00 scholarships - $00,000 (to date)
The Council for Professional Recognition awards Child Development Associate (CDA) credentials for family child care, center-based preschool, center-based infant-toddler, home visitor, and bi- lingual. The CDA Scholarship program supports the cost of the application fees for Assessment ($325), Second Setting ($225), and Renewal ($50) CDA. Income eligible Massachusetts residents working in a child care program and applying for their CDA credential are eligible. All recipients must have their high school diploma or GED. This program has been suspended until the second half of FY2010 at which point, EEC will determine if sufficient funding exists to implement it.
PROGRAM AND PRACTITIONER SUPPORT GRANTS
FY2010: 95 grants to CFCE Councils - $1,988,257
In FY2010, EEC combined separate funding streams to the CFCE Councils (formerly known as CPCs) for accreditation support and professional development into a single grant. The combined grant gives CFCE Councils greater flexibility in responding to the inter-related needs of programs and educators in their local communities. These grants are intended to improve educational and developmental outcomes for children in early education and out-of-school time programs by:
• increasing the number of well-trained practitioners by providing developmentally appropriate learning experiences, as well as the resources needed to achieve related credentials, Associates, and Bachelors degrees; and by
• expanding the number of programs that are accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), the National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC), or the Council on Accreditation (COA-Standards for Afterschool Programs) by funding supports, consultation for, and costs associated with, accreditation and re- accreditation.
This grant is also intended to support early education and care programs across the state in preparing for participation in both the Universal Pre-Kindergarten (UPK) Program, and the Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS), which is in development. Both UPK quality
29
Page 29
standards and the draft QRIS standards recognize accreditation and highly skilled staff as critical components of program quality.
See Appendix F for funding award amounts.
CHILD CARE RESOURCE AND REFERRAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
FY2010: 15 contract amendments - $703,679
The specific goals of the Professional Development Required Services amendment for Child Care Resource and Referral agencies (CCR&Rs) is to conduct outreach to programs and collaborate with local partners to support the promulgation of new child care regulations by offering needed professional development; to increase the number of well-trained practitioners by providing developmentally appropriate learning experiences as defined by core competency areas; to provide the resources needed to achieve related credentials, Associates, and Bachelors degrees.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT REGISTRY
FY2009 – 5,553 applications processed
EEC reviews more than 5,000 applications and transcripts annually to qualify educators working in child care centers for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers as Teachers, Lead Teachers or Directors. This free service provides educators with a certificate documenting their qualifications, simplifies hiring for programs, and expedites the licensing process for EEC. This on-line application will become the basis for a workforce registry for all the educators in EEC-licensed early education and out of school time programs. New regulations will require annual registration for all in the field beginning in January 2010. This will give EEC, for the first time, data on the size and composition of the workforce. Going forward, EEC intends to develop a more sophisticated workforce registry that tracks and guides the professional development of educators in the field.
EEC does not issue certificates verifying the qualifications of Family Child Care Providers or staff in School-Age programs. For Family Child Care Providers the review of qualifications occurs during the general licensing process, but a unique certificate is not issued. For School-Age staff a review of qualifications occurs during the licensing visit, but unique certificates are not issued.
See Appendix G for EEC’s Teacher, Lead Teacher, Director I and II certification requirements.
EEC PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CALENDAR
An important tool for aligning and maximizing professional development resources as described above is the web-based EEC Professional Development Calendar. The Calendar was launched in FY2009 as a centralized source of information on courses and training for all educators and licensees. In addition to empowering educators to make informed decisions about their professional development options, EEC’s Professional Development Calendar will foster collaboration across training entities, reduce duplication to maximize resources, and make it easier for EEC licensors to identify resources for providers as issues arise. Because the CFCE Councils and CCR&Rs are required to post their EEC-funded professional development offerings on the calendar, the calendar is generating data on types of courses offered throughout the 30
Page 30
state and educators served in those courses, as well as other information that helps guide policy and funding decisions by the agency. The EEC Professional Development Calendar can be accessed at: http://www.eec.state.ma.us/ProfessionalDevelopment/WebFindTraining.aspx.
Following are a few charts, which describe the offerings posted on the Professional Development Calendar.
There were 1262 Courses listed on the Professional Development calendar in FY09
889 of those were funded in part or in total by EEC
19,353 Educators attended professional development offerings2
Professional Development Opportunities by Core Competencies
Understanding growth and 291 299 development of children and youth 372 284 Guiding and interacting with children and youth 195 Partnering with families and 383 228 communities 374 Health, safety and nutrition
Learning environments and curriculum
2Agencies listing courses on the calendar enter results of EEC’s evaluation forms into the calendar database after each course is completed. Data on educators is collected from evaluation result data. Some agencies have not listed results and some courses do not require evaluations (such as first aid and CPR). Of the 1262 courses listed in FY09, 956 were evaluated. Due to discrepancy between courses listed and courses evaluated, actual numbers of educators served in all categories is higher than numbers listed through evaluation result data.
31
Page 31
Educators by Program Type
933 994 6623 Family Child Care Group Child Care 7622 Schol Age Child Care Public Preschool
Education Level of Educators
110 360
2344 3377 Some high School High School/GED
598 Some College AA 4153 2320 CDA BA MA
32
Page 32
STRATEGIC DIRECTION: CREATE AND IMPLEMENT AN EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY THAT ADVOCATES FOR AND CONVEYS THE VALUE OF EARLY EDUCATION AND CARE TO STAKEHOLDERS, CONSUMERS, AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND POSITIONS EEC AS A NATIONAL EDUCATION LEADER.
EEC’s Board and the agency are both committed to communicating with the variety of audiences with which EEC engages. At this time, EEC does not have the on-staff capacity to pursue this work, and this condition will likely remain through the budgetary constraints. Further work on EEC’s website is also currently on hold pending EOE’s IT consolidation project. The following is work EEC will engage in around communications:
• The public understands and values the purpose of EEC. • Families of all languages understand the services and resources offered by EEC. • All stakeholders in the field and consumers are aware of EEC initiatives, policies and procedures and have access to information to facilitate advocacy. • State and local leaders understand how EEC initiatives serve and benefit their communities. • EEC is fully aware of and responds to the type, style and nature of the information needed by external stakeholders and consumers. • All EEC staff members are knowledgeable of agency initiatives, operations, key staff functions, and the agency’s community partners. • EEC is known among major press outlets and institutions of higher education as the authoritative resource on early education and care issues in the state and for leading developments in the field. • EEC is known as a national education leader, at the forefront of Universal Pre-Kindergarten and unrivaled in the development of quality standards for all early education and care programs.
STRATEGIC DIRECTION: BUILD THE INTERNAL INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT ACHIEVING THE VISION.
The following projects describe EEC’s efforts to build an infrastructure to effectively support the vision.
IT SYSTEM
EEC continues to provide IT resources to insure staff and programs have adequate resources to meet their goals. All staff has desktop machines; the EEC network infrastructure is state-of-the art and complies with all ITD standards and best practices. EEC’s custom database applications and growing data warehouse provide a rich source of child, family, and provider data for research study and analysis.
Summary of IT Resources
• Database stores of all provider licensing and regulatory compliance history back to FY1997
• Data warehouse of financial assistance data for children and families in voucher or contracts back to FY2006 and FY2000 respectively. 33
Page 33
• Professional development records and certifications for early childhood professional back to FY2002.
EEC Unified IT System
With IT Bond Funds awarded over 4 fiscal years, EEC is developing an enterprise unified IT system that will provide on-line eligibility determinations, provider reimbursement, and data collection of child and family attributes facilitating longitudinal study of these children as they pass into public school and beyond. This system will integrate EEC’s legacy applications and streamline many internal and external processes.
HEAD START STATE ADVISORY COUNCIL
On December 1, 2007 President Bush signed into law the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007, PL 110-134. Section 624B of the 2007 Head Start Act, 42 USC 9837b relates to each state's responsibility to establish a "State Advisory Council on Early Childhood Education and Care (SAC) for children from birth to school entry." The Act expressly allows the Governor to designate an existing entity in the State to serve as the SAC (see Section 642B (b)(1)(B).)
SAC Functions and Membership
Under the Act, the functions of the SAC are limited to strategic planning. The Act enumerates the SAC's functions as follows:
1. Creating a statewide strategic plan that includes, among other things, "a periodic statewide needs assessment concerning the quality and availability of early childhood education and development and services for children from birth to school entry, including an assessment of the availability of high-quality pre-kindergarten services for low-income children." Section 642B(b)(1)(D)(i)(I). The Act lists six other elements that must be included in the SAC's statewide strategic plan, such as identifying opportunities for collaboration and coordination, developing recommendations for the establishment of a unified data collection system and a statewide professional development plan, and making recommendations for improvements in state early learning standards. See Section 642B(b)(1)(D)(i)(II)-(VII). 2. Holding public hearings and presenting the statewide strategic plan to the Commonwealth’s Director of Head Start Collaboration and the Governor. See Section 642B(b)(1)(D)(ii). 3. After submission of the statewide strategic plan, meeting periodically to review any implementation of the recommendations in such report and any changes in state and local needs. See Section 642B(b)(1)(D)(iii).
The Act contains a proposed SAC membership list, and states that the Governor shall take steps to ensure "to the maximum extent possible" that the SAC includes the nine representatives expressly identified in the statute, along with representatives of any other entities "determined to be relevant" by the Governor. See Section 642B(b)(1)(C).
34
Page 34
EEC has made the following proposal which is pending with the Governor’s office. Massachusetts’ will designate the Board of Early Education and Care as the Commonwealth’s SAC. The Commonwealth’s Director of Head Start Collaboration will be designated as the individual responsible for coordinating the activities of the SAC. Formalizing a SAC makes Massachusetts eligible for up to $1.1M in funding for these activities.
ASSIGNING STUDENT IDENTIFIERS (SASIDS) TO PRE-K CHILDREN
During August, Commissioner Killins and ESE Commissioner Chester signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to exchange data regarding children participating in EEC financial assistance programs. The intent of the MOU is to develop a data share system in which EEC will disclose to ESE information about children participating in EEC funded programs for the purpose of ESE assigning a State Assigned Student Identification (SASID) number to each child. This will allow EEC, in consultation and coordination with ESE, to engage in longitudinal studies of child outcomes as children transition from early education and care programs into the public K-12 school system and beyond. This project will allow the Commonwealth to evaluate the effectiveness of programs, and ultimately facilitate the Governor’s “Readiness Passport” program.
The two agencies will first pilot the data exchange by automating the exchange of key child data elements with ESE to either look up the existing SASID of a child, or if the child is too young, to assign one. EEC intends to pilot this data exchange with one or both of the following populations:
• Teen Parents and their children served by EEC’s financial assistance systems; and/or • Greater Springfield children served by EEC's financial assistance programs.
The pilot will initially focus on the data quality of EEC’s data, and the efficiency of the exchange.
MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY EFFORTS
EEC has a responsibility to ensure that it safeguards the Commonwealth’s assets, including the children in care each day. EEC ensures the accountability of the system by auditing routinely for financial and safety risks and ensuring quality programming. Fiscal risks are addressed through EEC’s processes for auditing, program monitoring, and fiscal recoupment. Safety risks are attended to through EEC’s licensing regulations and regular licensing visits. EEC has also begun to collect data on all of its grant programs about outcomes accomplished from the work, to ensure that the larger goals and purposes of the agency are being accomplished.
FUTURE DATA COLLECTION EFFORTS
In the near future, EEC is interested in re-instating the Community Profiles data collection project. These surveys would be sent to all programs and providers in the Commonwealth, with
35
Page 35
coordination by the CFCE lead agent. The surveys gather data about supply, demand, quality, curriculum, teacher quality, and community concerns. Much of this data is not currently collected elsewhere by EEC. The data would be aggregated into Community Profiles and be used to inform policy decisions.
EEC INTERNAL RE-ORGANIZATION
To better meet perform EEC’s daily operations and reach its strategic vision, the agency has been re-organized into the following divisions.
• The Office of the Commissioner includes units that directly support the Commissioner and the whole agency. These include a Policy, Research and Evaluation Unit and an Information and Outreach Unit. Also under the Office of the Commissioner is the Office of the General Counsel that interacts and provides guidance to the Board of Early Education and Care and legal support to all units in the agency, Information Technology that supports all EEC units and their work thorough multiple specialized applications and reporting systems, Human Resources and Facilities that support employees and the physical environment of the EEC offices and the Executive Administrative Support to the Commissioner.
• The Office of Administration and Finance supports the mission through all fiscal activities and is responsible for all issues related to the budget, the procurement of services including contracted care and vendor slots for children, administration and management of grants and funding that enhance services for children and families, and the payment of all EEC expenses.
• The Office of Regional Operations, Support and Engagement supports the mission thorough regulating all care provided to children thorough the licensing of programs including residential and placement care of children outside the traditional family units i.e. 24 hour facilities, adoption and foster care, investigation of alleged complaints of mistreatment and abuse of children while in these settings. Also in this office is the Family and Community Engagement and Program Monitoring Unit that directs the implementation of a statewide strategy for family and community engagement through the consolidated community/ regional office infrastructure. This Family and Community Engagement and Program Monitoring Unit will disseminate information about programs, grants and other EEC sponsored opportunities for families (e.g., translated resources and materials) and providers (e.g., professional development resources). The Family and Community Engagement and Program Monitoring Unit also includes a strong regional field and family feedback and input component as the Department develops and implements policies, promulgates regulations and promotes best practices in licensing monitoring. The Educator/Provider Support Unit will manage EEC’s Professional Development Registry and develop the technical assistance and training to support new and existing licensing regulations and requirements. This unit will also oversee programs including: Special Quest (training for early educators on the inclusion of students with disabilities); CSEFEL (training for early educators on the social and emotional development of children); Mind in the Making (training on the intersection between the
36
Page 36
science of early child development and practice in the field); Communities of Practice (meeting with public school preschool and other early education programs to share and gather input on a variety of topics); financial support and technical assistance via grants to support program accreditation.
The organizational structure will look like:
37
Page 37
COMMUNITY PROFILES
EEC has created profiles of each of the 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts. See http://www.eec.state.ma.us/docs/CommunityProfilesAllCitiesAndTowns.pdf for an individual profile for each city and town. Included here is an overall summary of the profiles.
SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY PROFILES
Population Demographics:
The following statistics describe the population of children in Massachusetts in terms of total population, percent in poverty, children speaking a language other than English, and children living with a single parent. Understanding characteristics of children enables programs and providers to tailor services in a culturally appropriate manner.
Child Population: In Massachusetts there are 1,005,601 children ages 0-11. Monroe has the fewest children with 11, and Boston has the most with 79,379.
Single Parent Households: In Massachusetts, 26% of households with children under age 18 are headed by single parents. Southborough has the least percentage at 1% and Springfield has the highest percent at 54%.
Young children living in poverty (ages 0-5): In Massachusetts, 12% of children ages 0-5 live below the federal poverty income threshold. Fifty cities and towns have 0% of children living below this threshold and Gosnold has the highest at 75%, but this is due to a very small child population. In Holyoke, 45% of children live below the federal poverty line.
Older children living in poverty (ages 6-11): In Massachusetts, 12% of children ages 6-11 live below the federal poverty threshold. Thirty-two cities and towns have 0% of children living below this threshold and Holyoke has the greatest percentage at 43%.
School Children with primary language other than English: In Massachusetts, 15% of school children have a primary language other than English. In 33 cities and towns 0% of children have a primary language other than English. In Lawrence and Chelsea, more than 80% of the children have a primary language other than English.
Population born outside of US: In Massachusetts, 13% of parents/children were born outside of the US.
Environmental Risk Factors
The following set of statistics describes environmental factors that, without remediating support, may impede the child’s ability to be ready for school.
Children receiving Food Stamps: In Massachusetts, 17% of children are in families receiving food stamps.
Children referred by DCF: In Massachusetts, 3% of children ages 0-5 were referred to DCF in one year. During the same year, there were 121 cities and towns where no children were
38
Page 38
referred. Adams had the highest percentage with 12% of children 0-5 referred by DCF. Similarly for children ages 6-11, 120 cities and towns had no children referred. Russell had the highest percentage for this age bracket, at 12%.
Children who are homeless, receiving child care: In Massachusetts, 0.2% of children who are homeless are receiving child care. The majority of communities (260 cites or towns) have no homeless children receiving child care. Boston and Newbury have very close to 1% of all children 0-11 who are homeless and receive child care.
Women Receiving Prenatal care: Massachusetts has a very high percent of women receiving prenatal care at 82%.
Educational Risk Factors
These risk factors are related to the child or parent’s educational history or other factors that correlate to children who are at risk of having challenges in school.
Children born to mothers who have less than a high school degree: In Massachusetts, 11% of children are born to mothers with less than a high school degree. There are 55 communities where no children were born to mothers with less than a high school degree. In Holyoke, nearly half of the children, 45%, are born to mothers with less than a high school degree.
Low Birth Weight Children: 1% of Massachusetts children are born at low birth weight of less than 3.3 pounds. 296 communities had no low weight births. Ayer had the highest percentage at 5%.
Children in Early Intervention: 10% of Massachusetts aged 0-3 are receiving Early Intervention services through DPH. 15 communities had no children in Early Intervention. Monterey had the highest percentage at 21% in EI.
Early Education and Care Resources
EEC Licensed Program Type: Massachusetts’ total capacity of 246,996 can serve 24.5% of the population aged 0-11 through these programs.
EEC Funded Program Type: The number of EEC funded programs (5,827) and the number of children receiving EEC financial assistance (54,120) and the number of children on the income eligible waitlist (19,828) are listed by program type. 32% of Massachusetts licensed and license exempt capacity are receiving EEC assistance or in Public Pre-K.
Affordability
2009 Regional median price of center based early education and care: Infant, Toddler, and Preschool price for the region where community is located.
39
Page 39
Median of Prices of Full Time Child Care Centers
Region Age Group Median 1 Western Infant $51.00 Toddler $46.00 Preschool $36.00 2 Central Infant $54.00 Toddler $50.00 Preschool $41.00 3 Northeast Infant $67.00 Toddler $60.00 Preschool $46.20 4 Greater Infant $73.40 Boston Toddler $67.80 Preschool $54.97 5 Southeast Infant $50.00 Toddler $47.00 Preschool $40.00 6 Boston Infant $62.00 Toddler $55.00 Preschool $40.00
Quality
Percent of group center programs that are accredited by NAEYC: 40% of Massachusetts group centers and public preschools are accredited by NAEYC.
Number of family child care providers that are accredited by NAFCC: 79 family child care providers in Massachusetts are accredited by NAFCC.
40
Page 40
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: SECTION 85 OF CHAPTER 215 OF THE ACTS OF 2008
SECTION 85. The board of early education and care, established in section 3 of chapter 15D of the General Laws, shall, in consultation with the advisory council established under section 3A of said chapter 15D, assess and report on the current and potential capacity of the existing early education and care system to: enhance the quality of early education and care programs; provide multiple points of entry and outreach for families including those in hard to reach populations; deliver comprehensive services including mental health consultation and intervention services to decrease expulsion rates; foster collaboration and coordinate resources among providers of early education programs and linkages with human services agencies, the department of elementary and secondary education and local school districts; undertake school readiness assessments and program evaluations; maximize resources for workforce and professional development for early education and care professionals; and reestablish trial court child care programs.
The board shall include in its report a review of the local and regional organizational structures required by section 4 of chapter 15D of the General Laws, along with recommendations for how to achieve the most effective regional and local coordination to enhance the quality of services delivered through the early education and care system. The report shall also include recommendations relative to any legislation necessary to support or authorize such plans. The board shall submit its report not later than December 15, 2008, to the clerks of the house of representatives and the senate who will forward the same to the joint committee on education.
41
Page 41
APPENDIX B: DEFINITION OF QUALITY
Dimensions of High-Quality Preschool Programs
Overview: Nationally there is no single definition or method of measuring infant and toddler or preschool quality.3 Preschool programs are typically rated or assessed on two dimensions of quality – process and structure. Structural features which are thought to contribute to quality include: group size, adult-child ratio, state or program-level standards for children, background and training of staff, and other program features (e.g. NAEYC accreditation). Process features include the actual experiences that occur in the classroom or home including the interactions, activities, relationships, and routines. Research has consistently found that process and structural quality are related and that both influence the quality of children’s educational experiences and outcomes.
Quality Framework: Research and best practices point to the following important elements of high-quality early education from the child, family, and program perspectives. Each element below is cited by supporting research, if available, and alignment with NAEYC standards, Head Start performance standards, and the draft Quality Rating and Improvement System standards (QRIS) is noted as well.
Program Quality from a Child’s Perspective
• Warm and responsive relationships between the child and adults4 (draft QRIS standard category, NAEYC standard 1.B, 3.B, Head Start performance standards) • Ongoing opportunities for child to demonstrate curiosity and to learn important skills, knowledge, and dispositions (e.g., individualized and challenging materials and activities, structured activities throughout the day) (NAEYC standard 3, Head Start performance standards) • Ongoing opportunities for child to make decisions throughout the day (e.g., activity choice) and direct their own learning through a balance of teacher/ family child care provider directed, child initiated activities (NAEYC standard 1.D, Head Start performance standards) • Opportunities to develop friendships and engage in positive interactions with peers (NAEYC standard 1.C) • Respect for child’s home language and culture (e.g., incorporated into curriculum and routines) (NAEYC standard 1.A) • Opportunities for child to learn school readiness skills (e.g., language and literacy, problem solving, listening, direction following, emotional and behavioral regulation, early
3 According to Harvard’s Center on the Developing Child, although there has been rigorous evaluation of intensive model programs and scaled-up programs, available data do not decisively answer whether specific program features are more important than others or whether the full combination is critical to achieve strong impacts. For example, although it is possible that improvements in particular dimensions of program quality (such as improving the curriculum) may be more influential than another, current research does not give us all of the information needed to differentiate among multiple, positive program characteristics. 4 Peisner-Feinberg, E.S., Burchinal, M.R., Clifford, R.M., Culkin, M.L., Howes, C., Kagan, S.l., Yazejian, N., Byler, P., Rustici, J., & Zelazo, J. (1999). The children of the cost, quality, and outcomes study go to school: Executive summary. Chapel Hill, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center.
42
Page 42
mathematics and numeracy, early scientific thinking, information about the world and how it works) (NAEYC standard 2, Head Start performance standards) • Variety in child’s daily schedule (e.g., active and quiet time, indoor and outdoor time, short and longer activities) (NAEYC standard 2.A.11, Head Start performance standards) • Variety of learning format opportunities including whole group, small group and individual interaction with the teacher/family child care provider (NAEYC standard 3.D, Head Start performance standards)
Program Quality from a Family’s Perspective
• Families are included as partners in program (draft QRIS standards, NAEYC standard 1.A & 7, Head Start performance standards) which should include: • Consultation about interests and abilities of their children • Direct communication between families and the classroom teacher/family child care provider • Respect of the role of the parent /primary caregiver as the child’s first teacher/family child care provider • Welcomed into the program and allowed to observe/participate • Information is shared about each child’s progress • Opportunities to contribute to program policies • Home language and culture is respected and incorporated into program • Offered information about nutrition and comprehensive services, when needed
Program Quality from a Teacher/ Family Child Care Provider/Curriculum/Classroom Perspective
• Teachers/family child care providers have specific training in early childhood education5 (NAEYC standard 6) • Teachers/family child care providers have appropriate educational credentials67 (draft QRIS standards, NAEYC standard 6.A, Head Start performance standards) • Teachers have bachelor’s degree8
5 Clarke-Stewart, Gruber & Fitzgerald (1994). Children at home and in day care. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; Kontos, Hsu & Dunn (1994). Children’s cognitive and social competence in childcare centers and family day care homes. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15, 387-411. 6 Barnett, W. S., Lamy, C., & Jung, K. (2005), The effects of state prekindergarten programs on young children’s school readiness in five states. Rutgers University: National Institute for Early Education Research; Gormley, W.T., Gayer, T., Phillips, D. & Dawson, B. (2005). The effects of universal pre-k on cognitive development. Developmental Psychology, 41 (6), 872-874; Early, D.M., Maxwell, K. L., Burchinal, M., Alva, S., Bender, R.H., Bryant, D., et al. (2007). Teachers’ education, classroom quality, and young children’s academic skills: Results from the seven studies of preschool programs. Child Development, 78 (2), 558-580. 7 NIEER and Pre-K Now define this as a bachelor’s degree and specific training in early childhood education. NAEYC has phased-in timeline for credentials (BA requirement by 2020). Head Start has phased in additional requirements for teachers; 50% must have BA by 2013. According to Pre-K Now, classroom aides should have a minimum of a child development associate credential. 8Kelley, P. & Camilli, G. (2007). The impact of teacher education on outcomes in center-based education programs: A meta-analysis. NIEER Working Papers; Marshall, N. L., Creps, C. L., Burstein, N. R., Cahill, K. E., Robeson, W. W., Wang, S. Y., Schimmenti, J., & Glantz, F. B. (2003). Family Child Care Today: A Report of the Findings of the Massachusetts Cost/Quality Study: Family Child Care Homes. Wellesley Centers for Women and Abt Associates, Inc.; Whitebook, M. (2003). Early Education Quality: Higher Teacher Qualifications for Better Learning Environments: A Review of the Literature. Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, University of California, Berkeley; Early, D. M., Bryant, D. M., Pianta, R. C., Clifford, R. M., Burchinal, M. R., Ritchie, S., Howes, C., Barbarin, O. (2006). Are teachers’ education, major, and credentials related to classroom quality and children’s academic gains in pre-kindergarten? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 174-195.; Pianta, R., Howes, C., Burchinal, M., Bryant, D., Clifford, R., Early, D., & Barbarin, O. (2005). Features of pre-kindergarten programs, classrooms, and teachers: Do they predict observed classroom quality and child-teacher interactions? Applied Developmental Science, 9, 3, 144-159.; Kelley, P. & Camilli, G. (2007). The impact of teacher education on outcomes in center- 43
Page 43
• Head Start has phased in additional requirements of teachers, 50% must have BA by 2013 • NAEYC has phased-in timeline for credentials (BA requirement by 2020 • Teachers/ family child care providers have frequent and meaningful interactions and relationships with children9 (draft QRIS standards, NAEYC standard 3) • Teachers/ family child care providers have frequent and meaningful interactions and relationships with parents/guardians (NAEYC standard 1.A, Head Start performance standards) • Teachers/ family child care providers provide language-rich environment10 (NAEYC standard 2, Head Start performance standards) • Teachers / family child care providers use a high quality, age-appropriate, flexible, and research-based curriculum11 aligned to K-12 standards (NAEYC standard 2) • Curriculum should include specified goals, outcomes, and content related to all aspects of child development (cognitive, physical, social, emotional, etc.) (Head Start performance standards, NAEYC standard 2) • Teachers/ family child care providers regularly assess each child’s progress and make adjustments to curriculum and activities as necessary to support individualized learning needs and styles (draft QRIS standards, NAEYC standard 4, Head Start performance standards)12 • Teachers/ family child care providers perform screenings and refer children who have special needs for further evaluation (NAEYC standard 3, Head Start performance standards) • Teachers/ family child care providers are paid a professional salary with benefits (defined by national organizations such as Pre-K Now as comparable to K-12 educators) • Teachers and family child care providers have opportunities for and are provided with ongoing professional development (draft QRIS standards, NAEYC standard 6) • Teachers / family child care providers have collaborative relationships with and are supported by other staff, parents, and professionals (NAEYC standard 6.B, Head Start performance standards). • The development of secure relationships in out-of-home care settings for infants and toddlers by having a limited number of consistent teachers/family child care providers over an extended period of time. Teachers /family child care providers must demonstrate
based education programs: A meta-analysis. NIEER Working Papers.; Clarke-Stewart, K.A., Vandell, D. L., Burchinal, M. R., O'Brien, M., & McCartney, K. (2002). Do regulable features of child care homes affect children's development? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 52-86. 9 NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (1996). Characteristics of infant child care: Factors contributing to positive caregiving. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11, 269-306; NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (2000b). Characteristics and quality of child care for toddlers and preschoolers. Applied Developmental Science, 4, 116-135; Phillips, D., McCartney, K., and Scarr, s. (1987). Child-child quality and children’s social development. Developmental Psychology, 23, 537-543. 10 McCartney, K., & Phillips, D. (Eds.) (2006), The handbook of early childhood development. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, NICHD Early Child Care Research Network (2000a). The relation of child care to cognitive and language development. Child Development, 71, 960-980; Snow, C.E., Burns, M.B. & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 11Zill, N., Resnick, G., Sorongon, A., Kim, K., O’Donnell, K., McKey, R.H., et al. (2003). Head Start FACES 2000: A whole-child perspective on program performance. Fourth Progress Report. Prepared for the Administration for Children and Families. 12Kowlaski, K., Brown, R.D., & Pretti-Frontczak, K. (2005). The Effects of Using Formal Assessments on Preschool Teachers Beliefs about the Importance
of Various Developmental Skills and Abilities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 23-42; Meisels, S. J., Atkins-Burnett, S., Xue, Y., Nicholson, J., Bickel, D. D., and Son, S-H. (2003). Creating a system of accountability: The impact of instructional assessment on elementary children's
achievement test scores, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(9), Retrieved June 17, 2008 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n9/; Hallam, R., Grisham-Brown, J., Gao, X. and Brookshire, R. (2007). The Effects of Outcomes-Driven Authentic Assessment on Classroom Quality, Early Childhood Research and Practice, 9(2), from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v9n2/hallam.html. 44
Page 44
an understanding of the child's family culture and, whenever possible, speak the child's language (Head Start performance standards); • Trust and emotional security so that each child can explore the environment according to his or her developmental level (Head Start performance standards); and • Opportunities for each child to explore a variety of sensory and motor experiences with support and stimulation from teachers/ family child care providers and family member (Head Start performance standards) • Programs must support the social and emotional development of infants and toddlers by promoting an environment that (Head Start performance standards): • Encourages the development of self-awareness, autonomy, and self-expression; and • Supports the emerging communication skills of infants and toddlers by providing daily opportunities for each child to interact with others and to express himself or herself freely. • Programs must promote the physical development of infants and toddlers by (Head Start performance standards): • Supporting the development of the physical skills of infants and toddlers including gross motor skills, such as grasping, pulling, pushing, crawling, walking, and climbing; and • Creating opportunities for fine motor development that encourage the control and coordination of small, specialized motions, using the eyes, mouth, hands, and feet.
Program Quality from a Program Perspective
• Linked to community resources and services for families/children (draft QRIS standards, NAEYC standard 8, Head Start performance standards) • Led by competent and highly-qualified leaders/directors that use reflective supervision and provide professional support and feedback13 (draft QRIS standards, NAEYC standard 10) • Attainment of national accreditation14 (draft QRIS standards, level 4) • Well-equipped and safe classrooms with age-appropriate and culturally competent materials for learning (draft QRIS standards, NAEYC standard 2 & 5 & 9, Head Start performance standards) • Provides or refers to professionals for vision, hearing, behavioral health, dental, other health, and other services (draft QRIS standards, Head Start performance standards) • Appropriate nutrition provided (e.g. breakfast and lunch if needed) (Head Start performance standards) • Recruit staff that reflect the cultural diversity of the children and families served (draft QRIS standards) • Small class/group size and high staff/child ratio1516 (part of draft QRIS standards through licensing regulations, Head Start performance standards)
13 Indicators of Quality Child Care: Research Update, produced for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2002, http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/ccquality-ind02/ 14School Readiness in Child Care Settings: A Developmental Assessment of Children in 22 Accredited Child Care Centers, Minnesota Department of Human Services, 2005; Whitebook, M., Sakai, L., and Howes, C. (2004). Improving and Sustaining Center Quality: The Role of NAEYC Accreditation and Staff Stability. Early Education and Development, 15 (3), 305-326; Whitebook, M., Sakai, L., and Howes, C. NAEYC Accreditation as a Strategy for Improving Child Care Quality: An Assessment by the National Center for the Early Childhood Work Force, Washington, DC: National Center for the Early Childhood Work Force, 1997. 15 Considerable evidence exists that lower ratios and group sizes are associated with a wide range of developmental indicators. At the same time, research suggests that this feature of a program is only associated with better outcomes to the extent that it provides the conditions that make more positive classroom dynamics possible. 45
Page 45
• Active role in facilitating transitions for children between programs and settings, including public schools if applicable (draft QRIS standards, Head Start performance standards) • Continuous evaluation of the environment and current practices, which provides ongoing plan for improvement (draft QRIS standards, NAEYC standard 10.F, Head Start performance standards)
Most Critical Features
The principal elements of program quality that have consistently produced positive impacts on children, according to the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University include: 1) highly skilled teachers/ family child care providers; 2) small class sizes and high adult-to-child ratios; 3) age-appropriate curricula and stimulating materials in a safe physical setting; 4) language-rich environment; 5) warm, responsive interactions between staff and children; and 6) high and consistent levels of child participation.17
16 NICHD Early Child Care Research Network (1999). Child outcomes when child care center classes meet recommended standards for quality. American Journal for Public Health, 89, 1072-1077; Phillips, Howes, & Whitebook (1992), The social policy context of child care: effects on quality, American Journal of Community Psychology, 20 (1): 25-51. 17 Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University (2007), A Science-Based Framework for Early Childhood Policy: Using Evidence to Improve Outcomes in Learning, Behavior, and Health for Vulnerable Children. http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu. Citation for effect of high/consistent participation is: Hill, J.L., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Waldfogel, J. (2003). Sustained effects of high participation in an early intervention for low-birthweight premature infants. Developmental Psychology, 39(4), 730-744. 46
Page 46
APPENDIX C: MENTAL HEALTH CONSULTATION SERVICES GRANT
Target Mental Health Consultation Services Grantees Agency City/Town Communities Served Associated Early Care and Education Boston Boston Brookline Chelsea Revere Winthrop Behavioral Health Network Springfield Agawam Chicopee East Longmeadow Granby Hampden Holyoke Ludlow Springfield West Springfield Wilbraham Community Care Services, Inc. Taunton Attleboro Mansfield North Attleboro Norton Raynham Taunton Community Healthlink (Together for Kids) Worcester Athol Auburn Ayer Blackstone Bolton Charlton Clinton Devens Douglas Fitchburg Gardner Holden Hudson Jefferson Leicester Leominster Millbury North Grafton Oakham Oxford Rutland Shrewsbury Southbridge Spencer 47
Page 47
Target Mental Health Consultation Services Grantees Agency City/Town Communities Served Sterling Stowe Upton Webster Westborough Whitinsville Winchendon Worcester Fall River Public Schools Fall River Fall River Somerset Westport Greater Lawrence Community Action Lawrence Andover Lawrence Methuen North Andover Hampshire Ed Collaborative Northampton Amherst Ashfield Athol Belchertown Buckland Charlemont Chesterfield Colrain Deerfield Erving Gill-Montague Goshen Greenfield Hadley Hawley Heath Leverett Mohawk New Salem Orange Plainfield Shelburne Shutesbury Southhampton Sunderland Ware Westhampton Whately Williamsburg Quincy Community Action Programs Quincy Braintree Quincy Randolph Weymouth 48
Page 48
Target Mental Health Consultation Services Grantees Agency City/Town Communities Served The Home For Little Wanderers Boston Boston Brookline Chelsea Dorchester Revere Winthrop
49
Page 49
APPENDIX D: DEMOGRAPHICS OF CHILDREN SERVED BY EEC FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
The slides are provided for children served by vouchers and by contracts. The difference between voucher and contract is an artifact of how EEC provides financial support to families to pursue child care services, and therefore creates a separation in EEC’s data systems. Children receive the same services regardless of funding stream.
50
Page 50
IE = Income Eligible DTA = Families participating in an ESP activity TP = Teen Parent DCF = Children receiving Supportive Services, referred by Department of Children and Families (DCF)
51
Page 51
IE = Income Eligible DTA = Families participating in an ESP activity TP = Teen Parent DCF = Children receiving Supportive Services, referred by Department of Children and Families (DCF) 52
Page 52
IE = Income Eligible DTA = Families participating in an ESP activity TP = Teen Parent 53 DCF = Children receiving Supportive Services, referred by Department of Children and Families (DCF)
Page 53
IE = Income Eligible DTA = Families participating in an ESP activity TP = Teen Parent DCF = Children receiving Supportive Services, referred by Department of Children and Families (DCF) 54
Page 54
IE = Income Eligible DTA = Families participating in an ESP activity TP = Teen Parent DCF = Children receiving Supportive Services, referred by Department of Children and Families (DCF)
55
Page 55
IE = Income Eligible DTA = Families participating in an ESP activity TP = Teen Parent
DCF = Children receiving Supportive Services, referred by Department of Children and Families (DCF) 56
Page 56
APPENDIX E: EEC TRANSLATED DOCUMENTS
TRADITIONAL HAITAN Document Name SPANISH PORTUGUESE KHMER VIETNAMESE CHINESE CREOLE WEB SITE TRANSLATION
Web Language for new site: Find Child Care (region resources); Tips for Choosing Child Care; Help Paying for Child Care; About Family Support Programs (and Early Intervention); Keeping Sleep X Time Safe - Infant Safety Campaign (for providers and parents); Open a Child Care Program; Work in Child Care; Link to Spanish Search function (Find Child Care and Other EEC Resources)
TRADITIONAL HAITAN Document Name SPANISH PORTUGUESE KHMER VIETNAMESE CHINESE CREOLE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE DOCUMENTS DTA/EEC TA DOC x x x x x Financial Assistance Application x x Financial Assistance Agreement x x x x x x Parent's Right to a Review x x x x x x Parent's Right to a Hearing x x x x x x Parents: Your Center is Closed x x x x x x In-home Relative Voucher x x x x x x Voucher x x x x x x Termination Letter x x x x x x Babble Notice (translate information) x x x x x x Attendance Notification Agreement x x x x x x 6 Documents - Resources in Each Region x (6) x (6) x (6) x (6) x (6) x (6) Reassessment Letter x x x x x x Family Guide: Families Learn and Grow Together x x Keeping Sleeptime Safe (1 for providers/1 for parents) x (2) x (2) Financial Assistance TA Doc x x Choosing Child Care x x 57
Page 57
6 Waiting List Letters (removal, renewal, confirmation, funding x (6) x (6) availability for voucher, contract and CPC)
TRADITIONAL HAITAN Document Name SPANISH PORTUGUESE KHMER VIETNAMESE CHINESE CREOLE FAMILY CHILD CARE FORMS (can be found at: http://www.eec.state.ma.us/kr_licensing_fcc.aspx) Inactive Letter and Telephone Disconnect letter x x x ApplicationChildCareLicensingExemption x x x FCC Application x x x FCC Payment Instruction x x x FCC AltOutdoor Play Space x x x FCC Assistant Application Checklist x x x FCC Assistants Documentation Checklist x x x FCC Authorization To Release Form x x x FCC BRC_CORI20061117 x x x FCC Brochure x x x FCC Change Address Application Form x x x FCC Change Capacity Letter x x x FCC Children Record Chart x x x FCC Children Record Review Instructions x x x FCC Enrollment Packet x x x FCC Equivalent Qualifications x x x FCC Licensing Guide x x x FCC Medical Letter x x x FCC New Application Checklist x x x FCC New Appplication x x x FCC Renewal Application x x x FCC Renewal Application Checklist x x x FCC Renewal Assistance Sheet x x x FCC Sample Forms Packet x x x FCC Upgrade Application x x x
58
Page 58
TRADITIONAL HAITAN Document Name SPANISH PORTUGUESE KHMER VIETNAMESE CHINESE CREOLE FCC Upgrade Application Checklist x x x FCC Upgrade Payment Instruction x x x FCC Variance Request Form x x x Fee Schedule x x x 2009 COMPLETED PROJECTS Market Price Survey Email x Market Price Survey for FCC Providers x One- liner (revised) x x x x x x Renewal notification x x x x x x Directions: update your programs SEARCH profile x Indicator 7 letter (EC SPED) x
59
Page 59
APPENDIX F: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT GRANTEE ALLOCATIONS
FY10 CCR&R ALLOCATIONS
FY10 Professional CCR&R Professional Development Development Contract CCR&R DBA Allocation Child Care Outlook Franklin Community Action $23,461.58 PET via. Subcontract with NEFW PET $78,833.47 Resources for Child Care Child Care of the Berkshires $24,311.28
Child Care Resources Children's Aid and Family Services $31,579.12
Child Care Connection Family Service Organization of Worcester $39,149.90
Child Care Circuit Community Day Care of Lawrence $125,430.06
Child Care Resource Center CCRC $29,551.35 Child Care Search Community Team Work (CTI) $30,464.61
Community Care For Kids Region 4S QCAP $22,816.84 Home Health & Child Care Services, Inc. Region 4S Home Health $6,586.07 Community Care For Kids Region 5 QCAP $14,716.77 Home Health & Child Care Services, Inc. Region 5 Home Health $37,083.15
Community Action Committee of Cape Child Care Network Cod & Islands (CACCCI) $23,748.06
People Acting in Community Endeavors Child Care Works (PACE)* (PACE) $55,676.45
Child Care Action for Boston Community Choices/Boston/ABCD Development (ABCD) $107,351.95 TOTAL $650,760.66 *PACE, as the head of the CCR&R Network, received an additional $52,918.27 to support EEC’s efforts to: 1. Better coordinate professional development offerings statewide by reducing duplication among CCR&Rs and encouraging collaboration to maximize the use of the available resources; 2. Assure that professional development resources are distributed equitably across the state, taking into account programs in underserved geographic areas; 3. Address professional development needs that were not anticipated in the FY2010 contract amendment.
60
Page 60
FY10 BUILDING CAREER GRANT ALLOCATIONS
FY2010 Building FY2010 Careers FY2010 FY2010 Special Grant Special Special Education Eligibility Education Education Maximum Amount Undergrad Graduate Eligibility (Fund Eligibility Eligibility (Fund Code College Name Code 250) Amount Amount 251)
Anna Maria College $54,400 $10,950 $12,950 $23,900
Becker College $54,400 $10,950 $12,950 $23,900
Berkshire Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Bridgewater State College $54,400 $10,950 $12,950 $23,900
Bristol Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Bunker Hill Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Cape Cod Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Fitchburg State College $54,400 $10,950 $12,950 $23,900
Greenfield Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Holyoke Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Mass Bay Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Massasoit Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Middlesex Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Mount Wachusett Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
North Shore Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Northern Essex Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Quinsigamond Community College $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Salem State College $54,400 $10,950 $12,950 $23,900
University of Massachusetts Boston $54,400 $10,950 $12,950 $23,900
Urban College of Boston $38,784 $7,450 $7,450
Worcester State College $54,400 $10,950 $12,950 $23,900
TOTAL $923,776 $271,600
61
Page 61
FY10 PROGRAM AND PRACTIONER SUPPORTS (FUND CODE 395) FINAL GRANT ALLOCATIONS
FY10 Grant Award Region Lead Agency Amount
1 ABCD, Head Start Inc. 6 $22,629
2 ACCEPT Education Collaborative 4 $156
3 Agawam Public Schools 1 $2,722
4 Amherst Public Schools 1 $5,890
5 Ashburnham-Westminster RSD 2 $3,251
6 Ashland Public Schools 4 $1,262
7 Attleboro Public Schools 5 $5,342
8 Ayer Public Schools 2 $2,950
9 Barnstable Public Schools 5 $6,491
10 Bellingham Public Schools 2 $1,185
11 Boston Public Schools 6 $565,179
12 Bourne Public Schools 5 $2,881
13 Brimfield Public Schools 2 $4,130
14 Brockton Public Schools 5 $85,482
15 Brookline Public Schools 6 $4,985
16 Cambridge Public Schools 4 $54,870
17 Cape Cod Children's Place 5 $1,622
18 Central Berkshire RSD 1 $7,364
19 Chelsea Public Schools 6 $10,417
20 Chicopee Public Schools 1 $5,753
21 Communities United, Inc. 4 $6,668
22 Community Action, Inc. 3 $958
23 Community Day Care Center, Inc. 3 $10,200
62
Page 62
FY10 Grant Award Region Lead Agency Amount
24 Community Teamwork Inc (for Sudbury PS) 4 $3,054
25 Community Teamwork, Inc. (B,C,D,T,W) 4 $27,039
26 Concord Children's Center 4 $6,578
27 Dennis-Yarmouth RSD 5 $5,750
28 Discovery Schoolhouse, Inc. 4 $1,316
29 Duxbury Public Schools 5 $3,765
30 Everett Public Schools 3 $5,105
31 Fairhaven Public Schools 5 $2,747
32 Fall River Public Schools 5 $18,247
33 Falmouth Public Schools 5 $13,494
34 Fitchburg Public Schools 2 $21,252
35 Framingham Public Schools 4 $15,672
36 Frontier RSD 1 $2,902
37 Greater Lawrence (Methuen) 3 $1,853
38 Hamilton-Wenham RSD 3 $165
39 Hampshire Ed Collaborative (Belchertown) w/HEC South Hadley 1 $6,679
40 Hampshire Ed Collaborative (Easthampton) 1 $4,551
41 Hampshire RSD 1 $3,747
42 Harwich Public Schools 5 $2,910
43 Haverhill Public Schools 3 $22,430
44 Holliston Public Schools 4 $3,000
45 Holyoke-Chicopee-Springfield Head Start Holyoke (lead) and Granby,Chicopee 1 $26,846
46 Hudson Public Schools 4 $1,910
47 Hull Public Schools 4 $477
48 Infant Toddler Children's Center 4 $3,996
49 Lee Public Schools (for Berkshire Hills) 1 $12,708
50 Leominster Public Schools 2 $4,490 63
Page 63
FY10 Grant Award Region Lead Agency Amount
51 Lowell Public Schools 3 $51,912
52 Ludlow Public Schools w/East Longmeadow 1 $5,726
53 Lynn Public Schools 3 $94,746
54 Malden Public Schools 3 $6,454
55 Marblehead Public Schools 3 $3,360
56 Martha's Vineyard RSD 5 $5,668
57 Mashpee Public Schools 5 $1,324
58 Medfield Public Schools 4 $10,803
59 Medford Public Schools 3 $11,395
60 Milford Public Schools 2 $7,659
61 Mohawk Trail RSD 1 $4,090
62 Montachusett Opp Council (Quabbin) w/MOC Athol-Royalston and MOC Gardner 2 $10,873
63 Nantucket Public Schools 5 $5,244
64 Narragansett RSD 2 $3,914
65 Nashoba RSD 2 $3,516
66 New Salem-Wendell RSD (for Erving Elementary Schools) 1 $3,558
67 Newton Public Schools 4 $5,520
68 North Adams Public Schools 1 $8,036
69 Northampton Public Schools 1 $4,972
70 Norwood Public Schools 4 $9,563
71 Old Rochester RSD 5 $4,107
72 Orange Public Schools 1 $516
73 Oxford Public Schools 2 $3,881
74 PACE (Acushnet, Dartmouth, New Bedford) 5 $14,899
75 PACE (Berkley Freetown Lakeville) 5 $4,389
76 PACE (Dighton, Rehoboth, Seekonk, Swansea) 5 $2,722
77 Pathways for Children 3 $2,382 64
Page 64
FY10 Grant Award Region Lead Agency Amount
78 Peabody Public Schools 3 $5,873
79 Pentucket Public Schools 3 $2,343
80 Pittsfield Public Schools 1 $3,279
81 Plymouth Public Schools 5 $6,132
82 QCAP Head Start (Braintree, Quincy) 4 $29,716
83 Revere Public Schools 6 $7,090
84 Roudenbush Community Center 3 $3,953
85 Salem Public Schools 3 $6,228
86 Sandwich Public Schools 5 $3,413
87 Self Help, Inc., CDS Partnership 4 $25,437
88 Self Help, Inc., HOCKOMOCK Partnership 4 $63,030
89 Self Help, Inc., SACHEM Partnership 5 $31,821
90 Self Help, Inc., SHARE Partnership 5 $42,193
91 Shrewsbury Children's Center 2 $12,431
92 SMOC Head Start 2 $983
93 Somerville Public Schools 4 $48,663
94 Southern Berkshire RSD 1 $2,477
95 Spencer Child Care Center w/ Child Works Child Care Center (Spencer) 2 $15,967
96 Springfield Public Schools 1 $107,636
97 Triton Public Schools 3 $1,191
98 Triumph, Inc. 5 $33,340
99 Uxbridge Public Schools 2 $212
100 Wakefield Public Schools 3 $18,395
101 Walpole Public Schools 4 $4,986
102 Wareham Public Schools 5 $3,578
103 Watertown Public Schools 4 $11,618
104 West Springfield Public Schools 1 $2,382 65
Page 65
FY10 Grant Award Region Lead Agency Amount
105 Westfield Head Start 1 $3,818
106 Westfield Public Schools 1 $1,270
107 Westwood Public Schools 4 $1,382
108 Weymouth Public Schools 4 $4,865
109 Whitman-Hanson RSD 5 $29,824
110 Winchendon Public Schools 2 $1,072
111 Winchester Public Schools 4 $5,600
112 Winthrop Public Schools 6 $4,054
113 Worcester CAC (consolidated with Southbridge in FY09) 2 $6,746
114 Worcester Public Schools 2 $66,346
115 YMCA of Worcester (Circle of Friends) 2 $24,754
116 YMCA of Worcester (Together We Can) 2 $17,860
TOTAL $1,988,257
66
Page 66
APPENDIX G: EEC CERTIFICATIONS
7.21: Staff Qualifications in Group Day Care Centers (http://www.eec.state.ma.us/docs/group_school_regs.pdf)
The licensee shall insure that the center is staffed by appropriate numbers of persons with experience and/or education in the field of early childhood education. (1) Definitions. For the purposes of staff qualifications in 102 CMR 7.21(2) the following definitions shall apply: (a) Alternative Early Childhood Training Program. The successful completion of a post-secondary early childhood teacher training program, approved by the Office, which includes both academic study of the categories in 102 CMR 7.21(3) and at least one practicum as defined b e l o w . (b) Early Childhood Continuing Education Unit. An Early Childhood Continuing Education Unit (CEU) is recognition for participation in an early childhood learning program designed for staff at day care centers. One CEU is granted for each 10 hours of instruction. CEUs must be approved by organizations designated by the Office. (c) Practicum. The successful completion of a minimum of 150 hours, over at least an eight week period, of direct work with infants and toddlers or preschoolers, supervised by personnel from an institution of higher learning or an alternative early childhood training program, with at least three site visits, including conferencing, and placement with a lead teacher qualified staff member. Responsibilities of the student intern shall include program planning, parent relations, and 102 CMR 7 management of the whole group for a portion of the placement. The practicum must be with the appropriate chronological or developmental age to qualify staff to work with the corresponding age group. One practicum may substitute for nine months of work experience. (d) Related Field of Study. A program at an accredited institution of higher learning which includes the study of caregiving, development, education, health care, or psychology of children, birth to eight years of age, or provision of direct services to children and their families. (e) Work Experience. Experience in providing direct care and teaching during all types of program activities to a group of children, one month to seven years of age, or special needs children up to age 16, at least 12 hours per week, on a regular basis, in periods of at least four weeks in one program. Work experience of less than 12 hours per week may count as follows: 50 hours of consistent work at one program is equivalent to one month of work experience. Work experience, whether paid or unpaid, must meet the staff supervision requirements in 102 CMR 7.08(4)(d). Work experience must be in a licensed group day care center, family day care home or equivalent program accepted by the Office. (2) Staff Qualifications. The licensee shall employ directors, lead teachers, teachers and assistant teachers who by prior education, training, experience and interest in fostering development and early childhood education are qualified to meet the needs of the children enrolled, and who meet the qualifications for their respective staff positions. (a) Assistant Teacher. Must be at least 16 years of age or have a high school diploma or equivalent; must work at all times under the direct supervision of at least a teacher qualified staff person. (b) Teacher. 1. Must be at least 21 years of age or have a high school diploma or equivalent and meet one of the following sets of requirements: a. Have successfully completed three credits in category Child Growth and Development and have nine months of work experience or one practicum; or b. Have a Child Development Associate (CDA) Credential; or c. Have graduated from a two-year high school vocational program in early 67
Page 67
childhood education, approved by the Office for both the education and experience requirements and have been evaluated and recommended by the program instructor. 2. The following education may substitute for a portion of the required work experience: a. An Associate's or Bachelor's degree in early childhood education or a related field of study may substitute for six months of the required experience. b. A Bachelor's degree in an unrelated field of study may substitute for three months of the required experience. c. For infant-toddler teachers, one continuing education unit (10 hours of instruction) in category Infant and Toddler Development, Care and/or Program Planning may substitute for three months of work experience. 3. To be qualified as a preschool teacher, three months of the required work experience must be in caregiving to preschool age children. 4. To be qualified as an infant/toddler teacher, three months of the required work experience must be in caregiving to infant/toddlers. (c) Lead Teacher for Infants and Toddlers. 102 CMR 7 1. Must be at least 21 years of age and meet one of the following sets of requirements for education and experience. At least nine months of work experience or one practicum must be with infants and toddlers. If all work experience is with infants and toddlers, the total work experience required is reduced by _. a. High School diploma or equivalent; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Development and three credits in Infant and Toddler Care; and ii. 36 months of work experience. b. High School diploma or equivalent; Child Development Associate (CDA) Credential in Center-Based, Home Visitor or Family Day Care setting with infant/toddler endorsement; and i. three credits in the category of study of Child Growth and Development; and ii. 27 months of work experience. c. Associate's degree in Early Childhood Education or a related field of study; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Developm e n t and three credits in Infant and Toddler Care; and ii. 18 months of work experience. d. Bachelor's degree in an unrelated field of study; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Development and three credits in Infant and Toddler Care; and ii. 18 months of work experience. e. Bachelor's or advanced degree in Early Childhood Education or in a related field of study; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Development and three credits in Infant and Toddler Care; ii. and nine months of work experience.
68
Page 68
f. Alternative Early Childhood Training Program; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Development and three credits in Infant and Toddler Care; and ii. 27 months of work experience. g. Department of Public Health Early Intervention Specialist Certificate. (d) Lead Teacher for Preschoolers. 1. Must be at least 21 years of age and meet one of the following sets of requirements for education and experience. At least nine months of work experience or one practicum must b e w i t h preschoolers. 102 CMR 7 a. High School diploma or equivalent; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Development, and two credits in Planning Programs, Curriculum or Classroom management; and ii. 36 months of work experience. b. High School diploma or equivalent; Child Development Associate (CDA) Credential in Center Based, Home Visitor, or Family Day Care setting with a preschool endorsement; and i. three credits in category Child Growth and Development; and ii. 27 months of work experience. c. Associate's degree in Early Childhood Education or a related field of study; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Development, and two credits in Planning Programs, Curriculum or Classroom management; and ii. 18 months of work experience. d. Bachelor's degree in an unrelated field of study; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Development, and two credits in Planning Programs, Curriculum or Classroom management; and ii. 18 months of work experience. e. Bachelor's or advanced degree in Early Childhood Education, K-3, Teacher of Young Children with Special Needs Certification from the Department of Education, or in a related field of study; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Development, and two credits in Planning Programs, Curriculum or Classroom management; and ii. nine months of work experience. f. Alternative Early Childhood Training Program; and i. 12 credits in at least four categories of study except Day Care Administration including three credits in Child Growth and Development, and two credits in Planning Programs, Curriculum or Classroom management; and ii. 27 months of work experience.
69
Page 69
g. Department of Education Pre K-3 Early Childhood Teacher Certificate. (e) Director I must meet the requirements of lead teacher; have six months of work experience after meeting lead teacher qualifications; have evidence of satisfactory completion of at least two credits or three CEUs in category Day Care Administration; and have evidence of satisfactory completion of at least two additional credits or three CEU's in any category 102 CMR 7.21(3)(a) through (k). (f) Director II must meet all the requirements of Director I and have evidence of satisfactory completion of an additional two credits or three CEU's in any category 102 CMR 7.21(3)(f), or 102 CMR 7.21(3)(h) through (l). 102 CMR 7
(3) Categories of Study. The requirement for a category of study must be met with credits from an accredited institution of higher learning, alternative early childhood training program or with an Early Childhood Continuing Education Unit (CEU). Four CEUs are equal to three credits, three CEUs are equal to two credits. CEUs will not apply to Child Growth and Development. No more than three of the required 12 credits for lead teacher certification may be met with CEUs. The study of Early Childhood Education shall be categorized as follows: (a) Child Growth and Development, Birth-Eight Years. (b) Planning Programs and Environments for Young Children (c) Curriculum for Early Childhood Settings (d) Child and Classroom Management (e) Advanced or Specialized Early Childhood Education or Development (f) Children with Special Needs, Birth-16 years. (g) Infant and Toddler Development, Care, and/or Program Planning (h) Health and Safety in Early Childhood (i) Families and Community (j) Day Care Policy (k) Supervision or Staff Development in Early Childhood Education (l) Day Care Administration
70
Page 70