NEEDS ASSESSMENT Preschool Development Grant Birth-5
Presented to the Florida Office of Early Learning
Prepared by the Anita Zucker Center for Excellence in Early Childhood Studies, College of Education, University of Florida
And the Family Data Center, Institute for Child Health Policy, College of Medicine, University of Florida TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION FLORIDA EARLY CHILDHOOD NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 1 Figure 1: Florida Early Care and Education...... 1 Figure 2: Early Childhood Data Repository Key Partners...... 3 Figure 3: Assessment of Effectiveness of Early Childhood Care and Education System ...... 4
DEFINITIONS OF TERMS...... 5 Quality Early Childhood Care and Education ...... 5 Early Childhood Care and Education Availability ...... 5 Vulnerable Children ...... 5 Underserved Children ...... 6 Children in Rural Areas ...... 6 Early Care and Education ...... 6
FOCAL POPULATIONS FOR THE PDG B-5 GRANT...... 6 Table 1: Race and Ethnicity ...... 6 Florida’s Distribution of Poverty...... 7 Figure 4: Children B-5 Living Below FPL...... 7 Designated Rural Counties...... 8 Figure 5: Designated Rural Counties in Florida ...... 8 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Data...... 9
NUMBER OF CHILDREN BEING SERVED AND AWAITING SERVICE...... 9 Health Care Services ...... 9 Medicaid or Medikids enrollment: Unduplicated Child Count...... 9 Table 2: Unique child count enrolled in Medicaid or Medikids . . . . . 10 Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve...... 10 Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children...... 10 Figure 6: Children B-5 Receiving WIC Services ...... 11 Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve...... 11 Young Children’s Mental Health Services...... 12 Figure 7: Children 1-5 Receiving Mental Health Services . . . . . 13 Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve...... 13 Number of Children Being Served in State and Federally Sponsored Early Childhood Care and Education Services ...... 14 The Florida School Readiness Program...... 14 The Florida Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten Program ...... 14 Federally Sponsored Early Childhood Care and Education Programs: Head Start, Early Head Start, and Migrant Head Start ...... 14 Office of Early Learning Data: Unique Child Count of Enrollment ...... 14 Table 3: Unique Child Count Enrolled in SR and VPK by per Month for Fiscal Year 2017-2018 ...... 15 Seasonality of State Early Childhood Care and Education Program Enrollment. . . . 15 Chart 1: Florida SR and VPK Enrollment Trends ...... 15 Head Start Enrollment...... 16 Children’s Enrollment across Early Childhood Education Program ...... 16 Table 4: Head Start Connection to Support Services ...... 16 Table 5: Concurrent Program Enrollment ...... 17 Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve...... 17
NUMBER OF CHILDREN IN WAITING LISTS FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD SERVICES ...... 18 Florida School Readiness Program...... 18 Chart 2: Florida Monthly ELC Waiting List Totals ...... 19 Chart 3: Florida Average SR Waiting List SFY 2017-2018...... 20 Early Head Start, Head Start, Migrant Head Start Waiting List Data...... 21 Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve...... 21
QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY ...... 21 Measuring the Quality and Accessibility of Child Care among Vulnerable Children and Families: The Florida Index of Child Care Access...... 22 The FLICCA Sub-Indices...... 22 Selection...... 22 Table 6: Child Count by Provider Type ...... 22 Infrastructure...... 23 Measuring Access in the Spatiotemporal Context...... 23 The Florida Index of Child Care Access Policy Matrix...... 23 Table 7 . Example Quality Groups and Weights ...... 23 Figure 8: Policy Matrix ...... 23 Scenario 1—Positive Selection and Positive Infrastructure...... 24 Scenario 2—Negative Selection and Positive Infrastructure...... 24 Scenario 3—Positive Selection and Negative Infrastructure...... 24 Scenario 4—Negative Selection and Negative Infrastructure ...... 24 FLICCA results for August 2017...... 25 Figure 9: Policy Matrix ...... 26 Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve ...... 27 Current Initiatives to Inform Parents about What Constitutes High Quality Early Care and Education Services ...... 27 GAPS IN DATA AND RESEARCH TO SUPPORT COLLABORATION ...... 28 ECCE System Service Use by Families with Children...... 28 Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve ...... 28 Limitations of the Data to Support Collaboration and Strategies to Improve. . . . . 29
PROGRAMS/SERVICES AND MAXIMIZE PARENTAL CHOICE ...... 29 Input from Families...... 29 Most Needed Services ...... 29 Stakeholder Focus Groups and Community Case Studies ...... 30 Current and Future Initiatives to Maximize Parental Choice...... 30
QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY OF PROGRAMS AND SUPPORTS ...... 31 Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve...... 32
BUILDING MEASURABLE INDICATORS OF PROGRESS...... 32
ISSUES INVOLVING ECCE FACILITIES...... 33 Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve...... 33
BARRIERS TO THE FUNDING AND PROVISION OF HIGH-QUALITY EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION SERVICES AND SUPPORTS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES...... 33
TRANSITION SUPPORTS AND GAPS...... 34
SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION...... 35 Vision ...... 35 Mission...... 35 Priorities...... 35
References...... 36 Appendix A: Distinct Count of Children by County Enrolled in Medicare and MediKids . . 37 Appendix B: Head Start, Early Head Start, and Migrant Head Start Enrollment by Grantee . . 39 Appendix C: Early Head Start, Head Start, and Migrant Head Start Enrollment by City. . . . 41 Appendix D: Children’s Enrollment in Multiple Early Care and Education Programs by Early Learning Coalition ...... 43 Appendix E: Florida School Readiness Program Waiting List Data...... 48 Appendix F: Data Sharing Agreement Status as of July 15, 2019...... 50 Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency...... 52 INTRODUCTION FLORIDA EARLY CHILDHOOD NEEDS ASSESSMENT
The PDG Birth-5 funding provided the impetus for Florida stakeholders from health, education, and social support sectors to convene and reconceptualize how and for what purposes we can work more efficiently and effectively to sup- port the needs of young children and their families . The Florida comprehensive early childhood system includes educa- tion, health, and other social support services that promote family self-sufficiency which, if accessed by families in need, empower them to attend to their children’s health, social-emotional, and educational needs . The image below (Figure 1) identifies critical programs and services that encompass the comprehensive early childhood system of programs and services that support young children and their families .
Figure 1: Florida Early Care and Education
This new, more comprehensive, definition of the early childhood system in Florida has provided the necessary stimulus to engage stakeholders from each of the aforementioned sectors, through the convening of the State Advisory Council (SAC) . Florida’sPDG B-5 SAC is comprised of key leaders from every sector that implement services for young children: Florida Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Agency for Health Care Administration, Agency for Persons with Disabilities, Association for Child Care Management, Florida Association for the Education of Young Children, Florida Association of Early Learning Coalitions, Association of Healthy Start Coalitions, Florida Association for Infant and Mental Health, Children’s Services Councils, Department of Children and Families, Department of Education, Department of Health, Executive Office of the Governor, Head Start State Collaboration Office, and the Office of Early Learning at the Department of Education (OEL) . The SAC is led by Chairman Eric Hall, Chancellor of Innovation, Department of Education . All members of the SAC have been actively engaged in several “all hands” meetings . During these meetings, all relevant stakeholders were committed to fostering collaboration that supports a more integrated and comprehensive system for vulnerable young children and their families .
1 Through the convening of the SAC, Chairman Hall has set the stage to support meaningful and sustained commitment from stakeholders and agency heads . The structure for convening and collaborating to construct a collaborative and coordinated system for Early Childhood Education and Care has effectively been set by the facilitators from the UF Lastinger Center . Prior to the first convening of the SAC, each of the representative agency heads committed to the shared mission set forth in Florida’s PDG Birth-5 application to develop a more coordinated system to support positive health and developmental outcomes for children, and self-sufficiency for families .
The PDG Birth-5 needs assessment team based at the University of Florida’s Anita Zucker Center for Excellence in Early Childhood Studies and OEL proposed development of a new Early Childhood Data Repository to include child-level information from each of the state and federally sponsored programs that provide services that support family self- sufficiency and positive child developmental outcomes . With the primary aim of integrating the best available dataand information to guide the discussion and subsequent decision-making . The status of the data sharing agreement process is shown in Appendix F: Data Sharing Agreement Status .
Once data sharing agreements have been completed and the necessary data have been included, the research team from the Anita Zucker Center will provide distinct counts of children and families represented within each of the service programs, and then link client records across the service system to provide distinct counts of children within different profiles of services . This count of children within service profiles will enable key stakeholders to understand the extent to which children and families are enrolled in multiple services, the types of service profiles that are common and the extent to which different service profiles relate to differential child and family outcomes . Due to the nature of the data set that is being constructed, the research team will be positioned to not only look at statewide trends, but will also examine how access, participation, and impact of services vary by location, elementary school attendance zones, and over time . This more refined approach to data analysis will provide the information necessary to direct targeted interventions throughout the early childhood system to address barriers to access and participation, resulting in more robust positive outcomes for children and families . Each of the following agencies and organizations have committed to sharing relevant child and family demographic and service information to be included in the Early Childhood Data Repository . Figure 2 shows the key data partners and the programs they administer that relate to supporting young children and families . The center section of the figure illustrates the data integration process that results in a unified data set reporting on the complete service history of individual children throughout the state of Florida . The right side of the figure illustrates the type of variables that will be included in the repository and are classified by purpose . The five classifications include: demographics, linking variables, risk/protective factors, child and family services, and outcome variables . The variables classified as linking will be available only to the data custodian of the project team and will be removed from the remaining variables once the linking process is complete .
2 Figure 2: Early Childhood Data Repository Key Partners
Once the limited data file is curated by the data custodian it will be shared with the analysis team to conduct the analyses . Figure 3 illustrates the analysis process that will be used to conduct the ongoing assessment of the effectiveness of the early childhood care and education system . The left column shows the classifications of data to be shared with the analytic team . The linking variables contained within the black box in the figure shows that these variables will not be shared with the analysis team . The two columns in the center of the figure show the interim phase of the analyses during which unduplicated counts of children within and across program service receipt will be calculated, service utilization rates will be constructed using the available demographic data to determine individual program eligibility, and finally service receipt profiles will be constructed . The service receipt profiles will be constructed by identifying all of the services that a child or family participated in during the child’s life history as well as identifying the services that the child or family were qualified for but didn’t use . These service history profiles will then be aggregated compared with individual child and family outcomes to determine the extent to which certain services coalesce to support differential child outcomes . The findings from this ongoing research will position Florida to change the way administrative data are used to make data informed decisions .
3 Figure 3: Assessment of Effectiveness of Early Childhood Care and Education System
Following a presentation describing the Early Childhood Data Repository and the Sunshine State Early Childhood Data System to the SAC, the members discussed their interest in an integrated data system and benefits such a system would have to support data-driven decision-making . At the conclusion of the presentation, the SAC reviewed and generated a list of enduring research questions that should be addressed to inform ongoing assessment and monitoring of the impact that the early childhood care and education system is having with regard to addressing the needs of children and their families . The primary enduring questions are: 1 . How many children are being served by X program? 2 . What is the number of children awaiting services in X program? 3 . Among children eligible for X service, what percentage participate? 4 . Does service participation vary by geography? 5 . Do children effectively and efficiently transition to services over time? 6 . Does participation in program X predict outcome Y? 7 . Does participation in program X1 , X2 , and X3 predict different outcomes than participation in any one service? The aforementioned questions identified by the SAC guided the process of data acquisition, and using the best available data and information, guided the PDG Birth-Five needs assessment . The description of services and supports available and accessed by families in Florida are described in the following sections of the report . While the Early Childhood Data Repository is under construction, the PDG Birth-5 needs assessment team relied on data and information contained in the Early Childhood Needs Assessment Portal (ECENA) and other data that are publicly available through state and federal reporting processes (e .g . US Census, Office of Head Start, Florida Charts) .
4 DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
Quality Early Childhood Care and Education Florida has identified both structural and process features of child care that are included in the state definition of quality .
Structural characteristics of quality are measured through accreditation, and include teacher-child ratios, group size requirements, teacher qualifications, and the learning environment and materials . In 1996, the Florida Legislature established the Florida Gold Seal Quality Care Program as a universal mechanism to acknowledge early care and education providers who were providing services to young children and their families at a level of performance above the required licensing regulations monitored by the Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF) . The Florida Gold Seal Quality Care Program recognizes programs that achieve accreditation from one of 15 approved accrediting agencies . Programs that achieve Gold Seal status can receive higher reimbursement rates for children receiving child care subsidy through the Florida School Readiness Program (SR), as well as tax incentives through the Department of Revenue or county tax appraiser . At the time data were collected and analyzed for the Preschool Development Grant Birth-5 needs assessment, the Florida Gold Seal Quality Program was the only measure of quality that was consistently implemented throughout the state .
Process characteristics of quality, including the manner in which teachers interact with children in the learning environment to support learning, is measured through the use of the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS; Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2008; La Paro, Hamre, & Pianta, 2012; Hamre, La Paro, Pianta, LoCasale-Crouch, 2014) . These measures of process quality have recently been adopted as a result of legislation signed by Governor Scott (HB 1091) that explicitly directed the Florida Office of Early Learning to establish a statewide definition of quality based on direct observational assessment of teacher-child interactions that is applied to all providers participating in SR . The required measurement of quality is to be used to inform differential subsidy reimbursement rates to incentivize providers to perform at higher quality levels . Beginning in the 2018-2019 State Fiscal Year, the Florida Office of Early Learning began implementing the direct observation measurement system using the CLASS . In future years, the results of the CLASS will be used to measure the quality of early care and education services available to young children and their families throughout the state of Florida .
Early Childhood Care and Education Availability In the PDG B-5 grant application, Florida described availability in terms of licensed capacity of programs regulated by the Florida Department of Children and families to provide early care and education services .A 2013 study of availability of child care services was conducted as a partnership between the Office of Early Learning, the University of Florida Lastinger Center and the University of Florida Family Data Center, (http://www .floridaearlylearning .com/ Content/Uploads/floridaearlylearning .com/files/NeedsAssessment_FINAL2013 .pdf). Relying on this broad definition of availability, the study found that there was an abundance of child care availability for children and families throughout the state of Florida . At first glance, this presents a promising outlook for families seeking child care for their children . Unfortunately, this definition of availability didn’t account for the quality of services and thereby did not account for the potential of the available capacity to support healthy development and learning among the children attending care . The 2013 study also found that this abundance of capacity had the probable effect of diffusing children’s enrollment within communities . This situation, wherein local families are distributed across a plethora of providers, makes it difficult for these providers to maintain enough enrollment to sustain healthy business operations and secure the necessary resources to provide developmentally beneficial services . To better account for the differential quality in service provision, the needs assessment modified the definition of availability by categorizing the quality of child care services provided using the Florida Gold Seal Quality Care Program designation to identify high-quality programs .
Vulnerable Children As defined in the in the Florida PDG B-5 application, vulnerable is defined as any child experiencing factors that may place them at risk of school failure, including children in foster care/protective services; children with special needs requiring early intervention services; children with family income at or below 150% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL); children who have observed domestic violence; children who have been adopted; and children who are homeless or using transitional housing .
5 Underserved Children Underserved is defined as children who are eligible for services but cannot access them due to lack of slots, funding availability or other constraints . This will be reported based on waiting list data that have been obtained by state agencies . By using waiting list data to measure the extent to which children are underserved, this strategy accounts for the expressed demand for services by families in need of publicly funded support . This measure doesn’t account for families that are eligible for services but are otherwise unknown to the agencies who provide services .
Children in Rural Areas Rural community is defined by Section 288 .0656, Florida Statutes, as a county with a population of 75,000 or fewer, or a county with a population of 125,000 or fewer, that is contiguous to a county with a population of 75,000 or fewer . An estimated 64,000 children live in rural communities in FL .
Early Care and Education The early care and education system in Florida refers to the early learning and child development services families access through centers, family child care homes, Voluntary Prekindergarten Education Program (VPK), and school-based programs to support the development and learning of children birth through age five . This includes the SR program, Early Head Start, Head Start, Migrant Head Start, IDEA Part C and IDEA Part B-619, and other regulated providers of early care and education services .
FOCAL POPULATIONS FOR THE PDG B-5 GRANT To provide appropriate direction for the needs assessment, and for the purposes of this grant, Florida has prioritized children living in poverty, children living in rural or underserved areas, and children with disabilities as the most vulnerable populations for primary focus within the unified Florida Early Childhood Strategic Plan . According to estimates provided by the U .S . Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, Florida has 1,323,610 children under the age of six, 51 .2% (677,668) of which are living below 200% of FPL and 39 .4% (521,502) are below 150% of FPL . Additionally, 3 .7% of children under the age of six have been determined eligible for special education services and have either an Individual Education Plan (IEP) or Individual Family Service Plan (IFSP) . Table 1 below shows the racial and ethnic diversity of young children in Florida .
Table 1: Race and Ethnicity
Florida Under 6 Population: 1,323,610 Race Count Percent White 889,465 67 .20% Black or African American 276,634 20 .90% American Indian and Alaska Native 3,971 0 .30% Asian 34,414 2 .60% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 1,324 0 .10% Some other race 45,003 3 .40% Two or more races 72,799 5 .50%
Ethnicity Count Percent Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 399,730 30 .20% White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 565,181 42 .70%
Source: U .S . Census Bureau: https://factfinder .census .gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview .xhtml?src=CF, accessed June 2019
6 Florida’s Distribution of Poverty The map in Figure 2 illustrates the geographic distribution of children under 6 who are living below the FPL . Each county in Figure 4 is overlain with the percentage of children in poverty, represented by a color gradient, and an indicator for whether the county’s unemployment percentage exceeded the national average . Counties wherein the unemployment rate exceeds 4 .1% are shown with textured lines within its boundaries . This map illustrates that areas with higher-than-average unemployment rates are distributed throughout the state, whereas areas with greater densities of families below the FPL are clustered in the northern mid-west part of the state . Madison and Lafayette counties have the most pronounced poverty rates with 64% and 86% respectively .
Figure 4: Children B-5 Living Below FPL
Data Source: www.flhealthcharts .com, accessed June 2019
7 Designated Rural Counties While understanding the general economic conditions of each of the counties in Florida is informative, as represented by unemployment rates and proportion of families below the federal poverty line, adding additional information regarding population density is also an important consideration . Ar ural community is defined by section 288 .0656, Florida Statutes, as “a county with a population of 75,000 or fewer or a county with a population of 125,000 or fewer that is contiguous to a county with a population of 75,000 or fewer .” Nearly 48% of counties in Florida have been designated as rural . An estimated 64,000 children live in rural communities in Florida . The map in Figure 5 shows the 32 counties that have been designated by the state of Florida as rural .
Figure 5: Designated Rural Counties in Florida
Source: https://www .enterpriseflorida .com/wp-content/uploads/bootcamp-rep-porter-presentation-rural-legislative- plan .pdf, accessed June 2019
8 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Data The basic demographic data used to describe race, ethnicity, poverty indicators, and urbanicity have been drawn from the U .S . Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) . While these data provide a reasonable estimate of the state population demographic characteristics at the county level, they are not without limitations . The ACS methodology selects a sample of communities throughout the country to detect changes in demographic characteristics from the decennial census . These change ratios are then applied to geographic areas throughout the country . As a result of this methodology, the ACS presents a fuzzy picture of the reported community characteristics . Counties are relatively large geographic areas, often representing very heterogeneous populations . Locally implemented interventions that are used to address the risks to healthy child development associated with high unemployment, high poverty, and rural communities must be informed by data that are more specific and representative of the needs of children and families at the local level . As will be described later in this report, the Early Childhood Data Repository and associated Sunshine State Early Childhood Information Portal will rely on state administrative service data from health, education and social support organizations and agencies . As a direct report of children and families who have applied for, been determined eligible, and participated in services, these data will provide a much clearer picture of the extent to which children and families are receiving the services for which they are eligible that will support self-sufficiency and positive child and family outcomes .
NUMBER OF CHILDREN BEING SERVED AND AWAITING SERVICE Data reported in this section of the report are drawn directly from the agencies providing the child and family services described . As such, these are the best available data to describe the services in which children are participating . All agencies represented on the State Advisory Council (page 1) have committed to sharing child-level data to link children across the Early Childhood Care and Education system to inform our understanding of the extent to which different programs contribute to family self-sufficiency and beneficial child health and education outcomes . While the initial plan was to include data from all the services and agencies represented on the State Advisory Council, the process for obtaining agency approval and securing data sharing agreements has taken longer than anticipated . The status of the data sharing agreement process is described in the System Integration and Interagency Collaboration section of this report . Health Care Services Medicaid or Medikids Enrollment: Unduplicated Child Count Florida KidCare serves as the umbrella organization for the four government health insurance programs: Medicaid, MediKids, Florida Healthy Kids and the Children’s Medical Services Managed Care Plan . Florida KidCare is governed by local and state health care experts and relevant state agency leaders that provide leadership on a seamless continuum of coverage for 2 .4 million Florida children from birth through the end of age 18 T. o construct an unduplicated count of children known to be enrolled in 2 of the 4 medical service options used by young children in Florida, the needs assessment team constructed a child-level dataset with uniquely identified children for 6 state fiscal years with data provided by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration . This dataset provided the necessary information to count the number of distinct children enrolled in either Medicaid or MediKids beginning in 2012-2013, the year that the Kindergarten class of 2017-2018 was born . An analysis of these data revealed that the number of children enrolled in these health care programs is stable . Annual counts within age cohort uctuatefl only a few percentage points per year . A promising trend in these data show that each new birth cohort enrolls more children as infants than the previous year’s birth cohort . This trend in increased enrollment has been maintained over time . In State Fiscal Year 2017-2018 the analysis revealed that the number of children enrolled in these health care services increases substantially for each birth cohort . The table presented in Appendix A shows the unique count of children enrolled in these services at the county level . The analyses of the county level reports show that for the majority of urban counties, this positive enrollment trend holds true . The exceptions to that trend appear in areas designated as rural, indicating that families in rural communities are facing barriers to accessing the state’s infrastructure to enroll, are not informed about the availability of the program, or are being impeded by some other latent barrier that has yet to be revealed and described . Table 2 reports the unique count of children enrolled in Medicaid or Medikids by age for state fiscal years 2012-2013 through 2017-2018 .
9 Table 2: Unique Child Count Enrolled in Medicaid or Medikids
Age as of 9/1/17 SFY1213 SFY1314 SFY1415 SFY1516 SFY1617 SFY1718
Kindergarten (5) 151,578 [Infant] 149,969 [1] 151,633 [2] 153,314 [3] 152,949 [4] 144,005 [5] 4 154,202 [Infant] 155,233 [1] 153,344 [2] 154,341 [3] 153,662 [4] 3 157,627 [Infant] 156,864 [1] 155,147 [2] 154,511 [3] 2 159,940 [Infant] 158,563 [1] 157,714 [2] 1 160,078 [Infant] 158,333 [1] Infant 158,598 [Infant]
Notes: SFY= State Fiscal Year (Jul 1st – Jun 30th) Numbers in bracket indicate age on Sep 1st, during each SFY .
Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve The data provided to the needs assessment team by the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration includes data regarding 2 of the 4 programs managed within the Florida KidCare umbrella . This lack of complete data has resulted in an incomplete picture regarding the extent to which the eligible birth to 5 population in Florida has adequate access to health care coverage . Additionally, access to health care coverage for young children doesn’t necessarily result in children attending well-child visits on time with a primary care physician . In an effort to expand access to needed data to inform a comprehensive understanding of the extent to which children have access to health care coverage and ultimately the rate at which they use routine health care services, the needs assessment team initiated communication with a representative from Florida Healthy Kids Corporation and the Florida Department of Health . This relationship was centered on executing data sharing agreements and securing data reporting on the Florida Healthy Kids Program and the Children’s Medical Services managed care plan for children with special health care needs .
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children According to the USDA “the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) provides federal grants to states for supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition education for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, infants and children up to age five who are found to be at nutritional risk .” The Florida WIC program is managed by the Florida Department of Health through local WIC agencies . Figure6 displays county-level proportions of eligible children receiving WIC program services, symbolized by the green graduated circle, wherein larger proportions of families receiving WIC are represented by larger circles . In addition, each county in Figure 6 is overlain with the percentage of children in poverty, represented by a color gradient, and an indicator for whether the county’s unemployment percentage exceeded the national average, wherein a county exceeding 4 .1% unemployment displays textured lines within its boundaries . Taken together, this map offers stakeholders an intuitive tool aimed at identifying counties with increased risk factors, evidenced by higher poverty and above average unemployment that would benefit from increasing access to WIC . For example, Glades County has an unemployment rate exceeding the national average and falls within the second highest poverty band but has the lowest percentage of eligible families receiving WIC . Another example, Madison County, which has unemployment exceeding the national average and falls within the highest poverty band, is contained within the second lowest band for eligible families receiving WIC . Families in these counties face elevated risks associated with attaining self-sufficiency due to high poverty and high unemployment that necessitate increased access to WIC .
10 Figure 6: Children B-5 Receiving WIC Services
Data Source: www.flhealthcharts .com, accessed June 2019
Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve While the needs assessment team was able to obtain data regarding the percentage of eligible clients who participated in WIC through the Department of Health managed online data portal, the percent of WIC-eligible data is based on a three- year average that may not capture recent population changes. The team was not able to obtain information of sufficient quality and specificity to describe participation and access to other nutrition support services available to families and young children. Additionally, the county-level WIC analysis does not take into account that clients may receive services in surrounding counties. For example, a Glades County resident might have appointments and other business in Hendry County and choose to access WIC benefits through the offices there. Ongoing efforts to improve the quality of data to inform State Advisory Council efforts to build a more integrated Early Care and Education System include continuing to pursue data sharing agreements with the Florida Department of Children and Families and the Florida Department of Health to obtain individual level data to be linked within the Early Childhood Data Repository.
11 Young Children’s Mental Health Services Children who have experienced traumatic events in early childhood are at higher risk for negative health, education and social-emotional outcomes . Intervening early by providing access to mental health services when needed has been shown to increase children’s resilience to the trauma and increase their likelihood of achieving positive health, social- emotional, and education outcomes . Figure 7 displays county-level proportions of children ages 1 to 5 receiving state subsidized mental health services, symbolized by the blue graduated circles, wherein larger proportions of children receiving mental health services are represented by larger circles . In addition, each county in Figure 7 is overlain with the percentage of children in poverty, represented by a color gradient, and an indicator for whether the county’s unemployment percentage exceeded the national average, wherein a county exceeding 4 .1% unemployment displays textured lines within its boundaries . Taken together, this map offers stakeholders an intuitive tool aimed at identifying counties with increased risk factors, evidenced by higher poverty and above average unemployment that also have elevated risk for deleterious social emotional outcomes for children, as evidenced by the proportion of children 1 to 5 already receiving mental health services . For example, Holmes County, which has an unemployment that exceeds the national average and lies in the highest poverty band, has at least 19 .61 per 1,000 of children 1 to 5 receiving mental health services . Having knowledge of the economic risks, in addition to the fact that in some areas more than 44 per 1,000 of children 1 to 5 are receiving mental health services, provides valuable insight for resource allocation planning aimed at making sure that children enter school with all the services they need to address their mental health needs . Furthermore, this map allows stakeholders to identify areas that might have elevated risk due to high unemployment and high poverty that have a lower than expected uptake of child mental health services . The panhandle and the southern part of the state show higher rates of children participating in early childhood mental health programs .
12 Figure 7: Children 1-5 Receiving Mental Health Services
Data Source: www.flhealthcharts .com, accessed June 2019
Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve While the rates of participation show the relative connection to mental health services distributed throughout the state, the currently available data do not include child-level indicators of risk such as involvement with reported cases of abuse and neglect, parental incarceration, developmental screening related to social emotional development, or other indicators of social emotional problems . Once the data sharing agreements have been executed and data transferred from the Department of Health and the Department of Children and Families, the Early Childhood Data Repository will have the information needed to construct indicators of mental health risk that can be used to guide the selection and strategic deployment of targeted and systematic interventions . The Florida Association for Infant Mental Health (FAIMH) will be a critical partner in expanding Florida’s capacity to meet the social-emotional needs of young children who
13 are vulnerable . Initiativesshould include expansion of direct therapeutic services, trauma-informed or trauma- sensitive interventions and the development of professional development initiatives that target educators and other early childhood service providers to learn to recognize symptoms of trauma and respond to the social-emotional . development needs of young children in the state of Florida
Number of Children in State and Federally Sponsored Early Childhood Care and Education Services. In Florida there are three primary programs that serve to help families access early care and education services that support children’s development and provide care while parents work or attend school . The three programs that help families access early childhood care and education services are the Florida School Readiness Program (SR), the Florida Voluntary Pre-kindergarten Program (VPK) and the federally sponsored Early Head Start, Head Start, and Migrant Head Start Programs .
The School Readiness Program The SR Program is administered through the Florida Department of Education, Office of Early Learning . Funding for the SR Program is provided through the Child Care Development Fund (CCDF) from the US Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families . The SR Program, in alignment with CCDF guidelines and regulations, provides child care subsidies to families whose annual household income is below 85% of the state median income and are employed or enrolled in school or career preparation programs . The SR Program is locally managed by 30 Early Learning Coalitions and Redlands Christian Migrant Association (RCMA) . The primary aims of the SR Program are to support family self-sufficiency and provide young children access to early education and care experiences that will support children’s development and learning to facilitate readiness for kindergarten .
The Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten Program The Florida VPK program is a state funded early childhood education program that was initially implemented statewide in 2004 as one of the first state funded universal Pre-Kindergarten programs . As a universally available program, the Florida VPK program is available to all children in Florida who are 4 years old by September 1 of their entering year . The primary aims of the VPK program are to provide universal access to early childhood education services to all children in Florida to increase children’s readiness for kindergarten entry . There are more than 6,200 private and public early childhood education providers who have met the program requirements to serve children statewide .
Federally Sponsored Early Childhood Care and Education Programs: Head Start, Early Head Start, and Migrant Head Start Head Start, Early Head Start, and Migrant Head Start are federally sponsored programs to provide comprehensive services to young children and their families with the aim of promoting family self-sufficiency and achieving positive child outcomes so that vulnerable children are placed on positive learning trajectories and enter school ready to learn . The Head Start Program's comprehensive services include quality teaching and learning experiences for children, facilitated access to medical and dental services, family needs-finding, and facilitated service connection for families in need of additional resources . Florida has 69 different program grantees distributed throughout the state .
Office of Early Learning Data: Unique Child Count of Enrollment The total count of unique children who received SR or VPK services during the 2017-2018 fiscal year is 356,508 . This number includes a unique count of children who have been enrolled in an SR or VPK funded program at any point during the 2017-2018 fiscal year by program type . The process of cross-tabulating the unique count of children by provider type resulted in some children appearing more than once in the table . The total number of distinct children enrolled in the SR Program (subsidized child care) during the 2017-2018 state fiscal year is 203,562 . This number includes any child who received services at any point during the 2017-2018 fiscal year . The total number of children enrolled in the Florida Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten Program (VPK) for the 2017-2018 state fiscal year is 174, 465 . This count includes any child who was enrolled in the program for any portion of the year . While these counts of distinct children are reasonable measures of the reach of the program relative to the number of children served, they don’t adequately capture the volume of turnover throughout the fiscal year . T o illustrate the amount of fluctuation, Table 3 reports the total count of Florida children birth to five enrolled in the SR Program and the VPK program by month from state fiscal year 2017-2018 .
14 Table 3: Unique child count enrolled in SR and VPK by per month for fiscal year 2017-2018
Service Month School Readiness VPK July 2017 145,971 5,410 August 2017 165,314 149,590 September 2017 140,579 161,343 October 2017 143,988 165,795 November 2017 145,879 165,788 December 2017 145,668 161,851 January 2018 148,521 163,843 February 2018 146,852 162,817 March 2018 151,027 160,650 April 2018 147,814 159,505 May 2018 153,759 169,750 Source: Florida Department of Education, June 2018 152,621 77,604 Office of Early Learning administrative data
Seasonality of State Early Childhood Care and Education Program Enrollment To better highlight the seasonality of enrollment throughout the program year for the state supported early care and education programs, the needs assessment team developed Chart 1: Florida SR and VPK Enrollment Trends . The blue line on the chart shows the number of children enrolled in the SR Program for each month of the 2017-2018 fiscal year . The orange line on the chart shows the enrollment of the VPK program for each month of the year . While enrollment for both programs is lower in the summer months, a trend that reflects typical school enrollment patterns, there are differences between the two enrollment patterns . The families that are enrolling in the SR Program decline between August and September, then enrollment gradually increased throughout the remainder of the year . The enrollment pattern for the VPK program is a little different . Enrollment spikes sharply in August, the traditional start to the school year, remains relatively steady through the duration of the traditional school year, then drops of sharply between May and June .
Chart 1: Florida SR and VPK Enrollment Trends
15 Head Start Enrollment In Florida, as reported in the 2018 Head Start Program Information Summary report, there were 121 programs (61 Head Start, 60 Early Head Start) who served 46,564 children (36,115 in HS; 10,449 EHS) and 579 pregnant women . In addition to referring to the state summary report provided by the Florida Head Start Collaboration Director, the needs assessment team compiled data from the individual grantee annual snapshot reports hosted by the Office of Head Start . Unfortunately, all grantees did not have snapshot reports posted to the Office of Head Start website . The data table in Appendix B shows the cumulative enrollment, total children served, from each of the Head Start Grantees with posted information . The total cumulative enrollment from these data are 41,088 . The difference between the state reported total and the aggregate total of available Head Start Grantee snapshot data is 5,476 children .
In addition to providing early care and education services, Head Start and Early Head Start programs helped parents connect to needed services .T able 4 below shows the needs expressed by families and the number of families that ultimately were connected to needed services as a result of their partnership with Early Head Start, Head Start or Migrant Head Start programs .
Table 4: Head Start connection to support services
Types of Family Services Number of families Number of families that expressing interest/need for received service service Emergency/crisis intervention 6,253 7,707 Housing assistance 3,480 3,165 Mental health services 2,017 2,516 English as a second language 3,245 3,008 Adult education 6,253 5,904 Job training 4,484 4,308 Substance abuse prevention 471 1,226 Substance abuse treatment 105 179 Child abuse and neglect services 950 2,527 Domestic violence services 656 1,459 Data Source: US Administration for Children and Families, Office of Head Start, https://www .acf .hhs .gov/ ohs/reports, 2018 Head Start Program Information Summary Report Florida Results
Children’s Enrollment across Early Childhood Education Programs One of the chief benefits of obtaining state administrative data from the Florida Department of Education, Office of Early Childhood is the ability to link service participation across early childhood education programs . Using data housed in the Early Childhood Data Repository, the needs assessment team calculated a distinct count of children participating in one or more early childhood education programs at any point during the 2017-2018 SFY . The information regarding Early Head Start, Head Start, and Migrant Head Start enrollment is yielded from a flag in the child enrollment record that is populated when Early Learning Coalition personnel are informed of enrollment . It is important to look at concurrent enrollment in these three programs to get a better understanding of the extent to which families rely on multiple early care and education supports to meet their needs for their children’s care and education care while they are at work or attending school . The analysis of these data show that the majority (51%) of children that enroll in state supported systems are engaged with SR services only . The next highest group of children (42%) are enrolled in VPK services only . The data revealed that less than 2% of the total population of children are enrolled in a state sponsored system and a Head Start program . This low percentage of concurrent enrollment among Head Start and either VPK or SR could be due to an under-reporting of data, that could be corrected once the
16 data sharing process from the Head Start Grantees is implemented . Table 5: Concurrent Program Enrollment shows the statewide enrollment patterns of families accessing multiple early care and education programs . Appendix D reports data summarizing multiple program enrollment by Early Learning Coalition . The analysis of the Early Learning Coalition specific data revealed that 29 of the 30 ELCs and RCMA had children that were simultaneously enrolled in either SR or VPK and had the Head Start flag .
Table 5: SFY 2017-2018 Concurrent Program Enrollment
ECE Service Enrollment Number Percent VPK Only 150,927 42% VPK & HS 1,832 1% SR Only 180,555 51% SR & HS 1,352 <1% SR & VPK 21,483 6% SR, VPK, & HS 359 <1% Total 356,508 100%
Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve At the present time, the early childhood program participation data contained within the Early Childhood Data Repository is limited to the SR and VPK programs with the additional flag for Head Start enrollment when reported by families to the Early Learning Coalitions . This limited participation data does not account for children participating in the Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV), IDEA Part C (Birth to 3 Early Childhood Special Education), IDEA Part B 619 (Special Education Services 3-5), and locally funded early childhood education and care support programs . While the needs assessment team was able to obtain some information regarding EHS, HS, and MHS enrollment at the state level and for most of the EHS, HS, MHS Grantees, these data are not at the child level and are not linkable to the other child records contained within the Early Childhood Data Repository . Most importantly, these data are not linked to health, education, and social-emotional indicators of impact, limiting the state’s ability to determine the extent to which enrollment in these services, in isolation or in tandem, is supporting the desired outcomes of school readiness .
17 NUMBER OF CHILDREN ON WAITING LISTS FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD SERVICES
Florida School Readiness Program Data used to describe the extent to which families seeking child care support are underserved was derived from Early Learning Coalition waiting list data provided by the Florida Department of Education, Office of Early Learning . These data were analyzed to understand seasonal fluctuation as well as identify coalitions that have higher than average waiting lists (see Chart 2 below) . The analysis of seasonal fluctuations shows that, for the vast majority of early learning coalitions, the number of families remains relatively stable through the duration of the state fiscal year . Some coalition see a peak in waiting list numbers in January, while a few others see a peak in waiting list numbers in August and September . While most of the early learning coalitions see gradual curves throughout the year, Miami-Dade Monroe has a different pattern, with several peaks throughout the year in August, December and June . This pattern could be influenced by parental needs for services that are dependent on fluctuations in the local economy most likely influenced by tourist season, or through the administrative practices used to review and clear the waiting list . Engagement with the local early learning coalitions is necessary to fully understand the patterns seen in the waiting list data over the course of the year .
In addition to analyzing questions related to the seasonality of parent demand for early care and education services, the needs assessment team explored the average monthly waiting list totals for each Early Learning Coalition to identify geographic patterns of unmet needs (see Chart 3 below) . The Coalition counts of children on the waiting list for services throughout the year range from a minimum of 0 (Early Learning Coalition of Alachua County) to a maximum of 5062 in the Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, with an average across coalitions of 996 children per month . The state-wide counts of children on the waiting list range from 27,227 to 34,071 with an average of 30,869 children on the SR waiting list, which is equal to 15% of the total number of children served during the 2017-2018 SFY . This high number of children on the waiting list monthly and annually is also reflected in the input provided by family focus groups and interviews completed as part of the strategic planning process . During these interviews, parents identified help paying for child care as a high-priority need .
18 Chart 2: Florida Monthly ELC Waiting List Totals
19 Chart 3: Florida Average SR Waiting List SFY 2017-2018
20 Early Head Start, Head Start, Migrant Head Start Waiting List Data Waiting list data for the 2017-2018 program year has been reported by the Florida Head Start Collaboration office as 7,363 children awaiting Head Start Enrollment, 4,840 children awaiting Early Head Start enrollment, and 510 children awaiting enrollment in Migrant Head Start Services .T aken together there are more than 12,000 children in Florida on the waiting list to attend a Head Start program . Since these data were generated as part of a state level report, it is not possible to examine the Head Start program data by geographic region to see if there are any relevant patterns to report .
Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve The limitations regarding the data describing children and families awaiting services are significant . The only early childhood care and education system component from which the needs assessment team was able to obtain geographically specific waiting list data was from the Florida Department of Education, Office of Early Learning . While many of the critical services provided to young children and their families are statutorily restricted from putting children on a waiting list (i .e ., Early Childhood Special Education IDEA Part C and IDEA Part B 619), other programs such as Head Start have waiting lists . The Florida strategy to address the current system shortcomings is to continue to pursue a more robust Early Childhood Data Repository that will not only include information regarding enrollment, but also information regarding children that are awaiting services . This strategy could be partially fulfilled through the execution of data sharing agreements, but also through the development of an integrated parent application portal that might ease family application and access to multiple supports for which they are eligible, but also provide the raw data necessary to determine the rate of family application, and the duration and persistence as they seek access to services .
QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY Children accessing publicly supported early care and education services in Florida are presented with numerous options to maximize the fit between parent preferences, needs associated with working and school schedules, and the needs that they have identified for their children .
Families that participate in the VPK program have the ability to select among providers approved as VPK programs who have demonstrated the provision of services above minimum licensing requirements, by hiring teachers who meet advanced education requirements and implementing a curriculum designed for the purpose of supporting children’s development and learning . VPK services are provided in private and public settings, which enhances parental choice, promoting universal accessibility to the services . During the past several years Florida has maintained an enrollment of more than 75% of 4-year-old children, demonstrating that this is truly a program with a high participation rate reflective of adequate accessibility and availability .
Table 6: Child Count by Provider Type shows the count of children who have been enrolled in an SR- or VPK-funded program at any point during the 2017-2018 state fiscal year by program type . The process of cross-tabulating the unique count of children by provider type resulted in some children appearing more than once in the table . The total difference between this count and the count of distinct children served during the same time period (365,508) is 16,660 . This difference is the result of children enrolling in more than one type of provider over the course of the year . The number of provider types used per child range from one to four arrangements during the year . Licensed private child care centers is by far the most commonly used provider type, constituting 79% of the total program type use during the 2017-2018 SFY .
21 Table 6: SFY 2017-2018 Child Count by Provider Type
Provider Type Child Count Percent Licensed Private Centers 296,298 79% License-Exempt Centers 15,764 4% Large Family Child Care Home 3,091 1% Licensed Family Child Care Home 9,059 2% Registered Family Child Care Home 902 0% Private School 2,327 1% Public School 45,484 12% Specialized Instructional Service Providers 247 0% Grand Total 373,172
Measuring the Quality and Accessibility of Child Care among Vulnerable Children and Families: The Florida Index of Child Care Access Child care is a local phenomenon with community markets differing based on demographics and geography . Unfortunately, children in many communities do not have reasonable access to the type and quality of services necessary to develop the knowledge, skills, and dispositions supportive of school and social success . Through the reauthorization of the Child Care Development Fund in 2014, new federal regulations were instituted that specifically direct states to make strategic investments to increase child and family access to high-quality early care and education services (CCDBG Act Sec . 658A) . The Florida Index of Child Care Accessibility (FLICCA) was formulated in responseto that regulation . Requiring only administrative data, the FLICCA is a systematic tool for detecting differential access to child care among subsidy recipients . It can be used by any local or state government to guide policy development . The FLICCA describes the state of child care markets in different geographic areas using two sub-indices (selection and infrastructure) for a specific point in time . The sub-indices serve as proxy measures for understanding child care utilization . Each of the two sub-indices can be either negative or positive, resulting in four possible combinations of accessibility for a given geographic area . After calculating each of the sub-index scores for a given geographic area, administrators and researchers can use the Index Policy Matrix to identify areas that warrant deeper, more localized analysis to develop logical, locally informed interventions . For purposes of this current analysis, zip code was selected as the preferred geographic area to measure . This choice was made because zip code designations are made to accommodate the efficient delivery of mail, and the geographic area contained within a zip code is reflective of the ease of commute within the area and the population density . For example, areas that are more rural tend to be larger, and areas that have a higher population density tend to be smaller . Additionally, areas that are difficult or time consuming to traverse are also smaller . These factors make zip code an appropriate geographic designation that attends to the logistical considerations similar to those made by parents when selecting a child care provider .
The FLICCA Sub-Indices In Florida, as is the case for many states, there is no uniform practice for obtaining child care vacancy information . Considering this, our research team constructed two proxy measures (selection and infrastructure), representing two sub-indices . Both the selection and infrastructure sub-indices incorporate observed measures at the zip code level: (1) the type of care facility; (2) the number of children using vouchers in those types of facilities; (3) the total capacity of the settings; (4) the quality levels of the facilities as determined through the Gold Seal Quality Care Program . The first sub- index— selection—captures the selections made by parents within the context of other possible selections . The second sub-index—infrastructure— indicates the degree to which all the children receiving subsidies in a given zip code could attend high-quality center-based care .
Selection The selection sub-index shows how well parents are making decisions to enroll their children in the highest quality care given the context of availability in their respective zip codes . More specifically, selection measures the difference in the proportions of subsidy recipients enrolling in Gold Seal providers (high-quality) versus Non-Gold Seal providers
22 given zip code capacity at the respective types of providers . Selection can be calculated for zip codes that have provider capacity greater than zero and at least 1 child served in a contracted SR provider that is listed through the DCF regulated provider list . Weights for the different quality levels have been incorporated in the formula to place importance on the parental enrollment decision . Gold Seal providers are given a group weight equal to positive one . All other centers (i .e .,N on-Gold Seal providers) are given a group weight equal to negative one . Table 7 shows the weighting scheme using Florida’s Gold Seal status as a proxy for high quality .
Table 7. Example Quality Groups and Weights
Quality Group Gold Seal Non-Gold Seal Weight +1 -1
A positive selection value, X, indicates the number of children enrolled in Gold Seal care divided by the Gold Seal care capacity was greater than the number of children enrolled in Non-Gold Seal care divided by the Non-Gold Seal capacity . This mathematical calculation functionally accounts for the locally different availability of high-quality options within their zip code when making a child care selection . A negative selection value, -X, indicates that the proportion of children enrolled in Non-Gold Seal care was greater than the proportion of children enrolled in Gold Seal care .
Infrastructure Infrastructure is used to identify whether a zip code has an abundance or shortage of high-quality care relative to the number of children using subsidized care within the given zip code . Infrastructure was calculated for zip codes with one or both of the following: (1) at least 1 child served in subsidized care; (2) high-quality capacity . Infrastructure measures high-quality capacity minus the number of children receiving subsidies in a zip code .
A positive infrastructure value, Y, indicates how many more Gold Seal slots than children receiving subsidies . A negative infrastructure value, -Y, indicates how many more children are receiving subsidies than there are Gold Seal slots .
Measuring Access in the Spatiotemporal Context The FLICCA is intended to be a direct measure of how well families access available child care services that meet their needs and support children’s development and learning . As a direct measure of the child care selection and use behavior of families using SR vouchers, the FLICCA intentionally calculates selection and infrastructure for a particular point in time . By including the time componentin the application of the FLICCA, our team can measure change in both parent selection and infrastructure . This spatiotemporal measurement increases the utility of the Index to reflect the impact of system and policy changes through time, helping policy makers evaluate the effectiveness of their system in achieving the goals of increasing access to high-quality services for children .
The Florida Index of Child Care Access Policy Matrix The FLICCA Policy Matrix is a tool for interpreting the interplay of the two Index sub-indices . The Policy Matrix has four cells that refer to four different possible scenarios for a geographic area: (1) positive selection, positive infrastructure; (2) negative selection, positive infrastructure; (3) positive selection; negative infrastructure; (4) negative selection, negative infrastructure . The Index Policy matrix is used by policy makers to identify the types of interventions necessary for increasing access to high-quality care in a zip code for families receiving subsidies . Each cell contains policy recommendations based on selection and infrastructure in that zip code . Figure 8 displays the FLICCA Policy Matrix with the negative/positive selection sub-index on the top row and the negative/positive infrastructure sub-index on the left-hand column . Figure 8: Policy Matrix
Selection Non-Gold Seal Infrastructure Positive (+) Negative(-)
Positive (+) Negative (-)
23 Scenario 1—Positive Selection and Positive Infrastructure
In the first scenario, the upper-left corner of the FLICCA Policy Matrix, both the selection and infrastructure sub- indices are positive . This means that in the context of the SR contracted care available to parents, a greater proportion of parents are choosing high-quality . Additionally, there are a greater number of high-quality child care slots than there are children receiving subsidies in these areas . Since both sub-indices are positive, administrators and researchers should investigate these areas to better understand how to implement interventions in the other three types of areas .
Scenario 2—Negative Selection and Positive Infrastructure
In the second scenario, the upper-right corner of the FLICCA Policy Matrix, the selection sub-index is negative and the infrastructure sub-index is positive . This means that in the context of the SR care available to parents, a greater proportion of parents are choosing Non-Gold Seal care . However, there are a greater number of Gold Seal child care slots than there are children receiving subsidies . Given the poor selection by parents despite there being more Gold Seal slots than children receiving subsidies, The FLICCA Policy Matrix indicates a need for administrators and researchers to investigate why parents are not choosing Gold Seal providers and develop interventions to improve parent selection (e .g ., a parental awareness campaign) .
Scenario 3—Positive Selection and Negative Infrastructure
In the third scenario, the bottom-left corner of the FLICCA Policy Matrix, the selection sub-index is positive and the infrastructure sub-index is negative . This means that given the SR care available to parents, a greater proportion of parents are choosing to use it . It also means that there are a greater number of children receiving subsidies than there are Gold Seal slots . Given that parents are more often enrolling their children in Gold Seal care despite the shortage of Gold Seal infrastructure, the FLICCA Policy Matrix indicates a need for an increase in Gold Seal slots to make sure that all children receiving subsidies are able to enroll in high-quality care .
Scenario 4—Negative Selection and Negative Infrastructure
In the fourth scenario, the bottom-right corner of the Index Policy Matrix, both the selection and infrastructure sub-indices are negative . This means that given the SR care available to parents, a greater proportion of parents are choosing low quality care . It also means that there are a greater number of children receiving subsidies than there Gold Seal child care slots . Based on the negative selection sub-index, the Index Policy Matrix indicates a need for administrators and researchers to investigate why parents are not choosing the Gold Seal providers and develop interventions to improve parent selection (e .g ., a parental awareness campaign) . Additionally, based on the negative infrastructure sub-index, there is a need for an increase in Gold Seal slots to make sure that all children receiving subsidies are able to enroll in Gold Seal care .
24 FLICCA results for August 2017 The FLICCA map in Figure 9: FLICCA August 2017 shows the output from the coalescence of the selection and infrastructure calculations for each of the zip codes in Florida that have children enrolled in SR services, have providers designated as high-quality by the Florida Gold Seal Quality Care Program, and have an adequate number of providers listed by DCF as regulated providers . The zip codes are color-coded to correspond to the policy matrix to increase the interpretability and ease with which the local policy maker can identify the aspect of child care access that might warrant policy intervention . In areas that are shaded in green with grey hash marks, both family selection and existing infrastructure appear to be functioning well . The blue with grey horizontal lines areas of the map show areas where infrastructure is positive, but the selection, or families’ effective use of available Gold Seal child care slots, is less than optimal . These blue areas of the map are likely to be improved through a better understanding of parent selection practices, or constraints that might be limiting their choice set . Some possible culprits include high-priced child care providers, provider-imposed limits of SR vouchers they are willing to enroll, and provider hours that do not meet the work and/or school demands of the family . The orange with grey dots areas of the map show that while family use of available Gold Seal slots is good, the area does not have adequate infrastructure to serve all families using SR vouchers within the given zip code . This situation is improved through an increase in available infrastructure, which in most cases is easier said than done . To increase infrastructure within a given zip code, the Early Learning Coalition can either identify Gold Seal providers not currently contracted to provide SR services and convince them to start, or work with existing programs to provide the professional development supports necessary to increase operational quality so that Gold Seal status is achieved . On the opposite end of the continuum, areas that are shaded pink with grey squares indicate that both infrastructure and parent selection behaviors are not functioning well . This is a complicated situation to address, which would require additional information and analyses drawn from existing administrative data and collection of additional information from families using care in this area, as well as providers serving families . Areas of the map that are yellow indicate that while the area has Gold Seal capacity (infrastructure) there are no children using SR services to enroll with these providers . Areas of the map that are white (blank) have neither families selecting services nor providers offering services through the Gold Seal program . Finally, there are a few areas that are grey . These areas have a local licensing agency that regulates child care and early education providers . Unfortunately, the lists of providers in these areas that contain the necessary descriptive information about the child care providers are not publicly available . Due to this limitation the FLICCA cannot be calculated with the available data .
25 Figure 9: August 2017 FLICCA Map
26 Analysis of the frequency of the different performance levels of the zip codes for which adequate data are available, revealed that the number of areas in the state that have All Positive results is almost equal to the number of areas where the index is All Negative . While the quantity of zip codes across these two FLICCA designations is equal, the geographic area covered by the All Negative performing zip codes is greater and visually noticeable . Areas that fall into the blue category (providers with positive infrastructure, but negative parent selection) tend to be large in terms of geographic area, but they are frequently situated in rural areas. So, the distance between the supply of high-quality programming might not be accessible to families who do not have reliable transportation . The least frequently occurring areas on the map are those where the selection practices of families are positive on average but supply of high-quality programming is low .
Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve Unfortunately, due to insufficient data, the needs assessment team was not able to calculate the index for almost 10 percent of the zip codes within which children are enrolled in early care and education services with support from the SR Program . Future collaboration with the counties that operate local licensing agencies is necessary to obtain the provider capacity and quality information necessary to include these areas in the calculation . An additional limitation of this analysis is the adequacy of the measure of quality that was applied . While the Florida Gold Seal Quality Care Program is the only universally implemented measure of quality, the process to earn Gold Seal designation is not consistent across all child care accrediting agencies . For example, some accreditation agencies require an onsite visit as part of the accreditation process, while others make accreditation decisions solely on inspection of documents submitted for review . Future calculations of the index will be informed by the data collected by Early Learning Coalitions as theywork to implement HB 1091, which required formal observation of teacher-child interactions using a valid and reliable tool . The Florida Office of Early Learning has selected the Classroom Assessment Scoring System, a nationally recognized tool that is the most commonly used tool throughout states as part of their Quality Rating and Improvement Systems, as well as by the Federal Head Start Program as part of the ongoing quality monitoring system .
The main contribution that this analysis makes to the overall understanding of the availability of quality early childhood care and education services for vulnerable children and families that use the SR Program is a more nuanced perspective of the challenges that families face, particularly when some measure of quality is applied to restrict the calculation of available supply . While the findings from the 2013 study of child care capacity in the state of Florida revealed that there are many more “slots” than there are children and families seeking care, once the quality of services are accounted for, we learn that many families throughout Florida do not have reasonable access to high-quality services that will support the PDG aims of supporting children’s development and learning . One of the primary focuses moving forward should be to identify strategies to increase the supply of quality services . Due to the magnitude of the problem, approaches to be considered should include professional development for the personnel working in early care and education settings, incentives for providers to participate in the SR Program, and contracted SR providers being reimbursed at the rate necessary to provide high-quality services .
Current Initiatives to Inform Parents about What Constitutes High-Quality Early Care and Education Services Florida has a number of early childhood services consumer education and referral entities working to support families in matching their needs with services . There are two primary programs providing comprehensive consumer education and referral services: Child Care Resource and Referral (CCR&R) and Help Me Grow (HMG) .
CCR&R is provided through the 30 early learning coalitions (ELCs) and RCMA, with services provided to all 67 counties . Local CCR&R specialists work with families to support them with understanding ECE availability and quality, provide resources that are aligned with their needs, and provide access to community resources . CCR&R supports families and ECE providers across the full range of the B-5 system, including Head Start and other programs, with approximately 450,000 referrals provided annually . The ELCsand RCMA work closely to collaborate and coordinate CCR&R services with the other supports they offer, such as SR subsidies to offset low-income working parents’ ECE costs and VPK services . This assists families in accessing the most appropriate programs for their current needs . The OEL and early learning coalitions offer information on quality child care services, VPK, financial assistance for child care, and information on other resources and assistance for families through a number of different outlets, including websites, brochures, flyers and other printed materials . Early learning coalitionsand RCMA participate in outreach events to offer assistance and information on locating and paying for high-quality child care . Local CCR&R organizations actively give families and providers information on other available human services at community meetings, provider meetings, provider trainings and technical assistance meetings . Consumer education resources and information on research and best practices in early childhood development, social and emotional development, behavioral health, developmental screenings, meaningful parent and family engagement, and physical and mental health and development, including
27 healthy eating and physical activity are made available to parents, providers and the general public
Stakeholder focus groups were implemented around the state to shed light on specific challenges families experience related to understanding consumer education regarding what constitutes high-quality early care and education, accessing local services and resources, and to describe successful practices currently being implemented throughout the state to help families access resources and services . Findings from these interviews focused on the need to follow up with families that expressed need for multiple resources but do not have the skills or knowledge to navigate the landscape .
GAPS IN DATA AND RESEARCH TO SUPPORT COLLABORATION Florida is home to more than 4 million children younger than 18 with 1 .3 million children ages birth-5 . Families with children receive some form of public assistance (e .g ., Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), child care/ECE subsidy) make up nearly 1/3 of families with children younger than 18 . Florida’s diverse B-5 mixed-delivery early care and education (ECE) system, has programs tailored to meet the needs of families and children with special needs, while offering intra-agency connections to health, mental health, and other early childhood services that support working parents and the needs of children .
Florida’s PDG B-5 State Advisory Council (SAC) is charged to develop a unified Early Childhood Strategic Plan for early childhood services with extensive input from stakeholders throughout the state who are committed to establishing a streamlined mechanism for meeting the needs of all special needs families . The strategic plan will be particularly robust with respect to the plans for using data across agencies to triangulate need and offer the most comprehensive set of available services, and when applicable, build capacity across geographic areas .
ECCE System Service Use by Families with Children At this point, aggregate data has been pooled statewide for children being served across all arms of the ECCE system, health care, social service supports, SR, VPK, and school-based programs . With the early childhood education data, we have calculated, by county, the number of children being served in each program and every combination of the three possible programs, which resulted in six possible combinations of service . This type of delimitation across geographic areas has allowed us to see the impact of each of the programs at the county level as well as how the programs work in conjunction with one another to meet the needs of families .
More specifically, we have obtained child-level data for families whose children are enrolled in SR and VPK . This has allowed for a more in-depth look at how SR and VPK use vary at the local level (i .e ., a narrower view than the county level) because we know the specific providers they attended . Moreover, we have obtained, from DCF, the capacities of providers who are able to serve children receiving the SR subsidy, as well as whether the provider has been deemed high-quality based on the state’s Gold Seal designation . Using the FLICCA, for zip codes in which a child was served, we have geographically pinpointed areas that fall into one of four categories . These four designations are determined based on whether a zip code has a positive or negative number for each of the two indices--(1) infrastructure; and (2) selection . A positive infrastructure indicates that there are more Gold Seal slots in a zip code than children using SR subsidies, while a negative infrastructure indicates that there are more children using SR than Gold seal slots in the zip code . A positive selection indicates that there are more children receiving Gold Seal care than not Gold Seal care, relative to the provider capacities of each of those designations . Taken together, these indices, which have four possibilities, allow stakeholders to concisely evaluate the state of affairs in a local child care market . Furthermore, the FLICCA functions as a diagnostic tool whereby local administrators can determine whether a particular area needs more Gold Seal capacity to serve children, parents need more support in making use of available Gold Seal care, or if existing efforts need to be maintained because an area has a well-established child care market for serving SR recipients .
Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve Based on stakeholder input and direction from the Strategic Planning Committee, efforts have been made to amass a data repository that spans the breadth of economic, health, and educational outcomes for families in Florida . These efforts have resulted in the successful execution of data sharing agreements with the Florida Office of Early Learning (OEL), the Department of Children and Families (DCF), the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA), and the Florida Center (TFC) .
28 Furthermore, data sharing agreements with the following agencies are either under review, in routing, or executed, pending DOH-IRB approval: the Florida Department of Education, the Florida Head Start Association, Substance Abuse and Mental Health (SAMH), the Florida Department of Health (Vital Statistics), and the Early Steps Program .
The first important gap in data about programs for families and children is related to the inability to obtain child-level records for all services related to children and families . We currently have a flag indicating whether students receiving SR or VPK are enrolled in Head Start . However, this flag is available for less than 10% of students receiving Head Start services who are also in SR or VPK, which means we cannot draw child- and family-specific conclusions about the impacts of other services for more than 90% of Head Start attendees . Obtaining child- and family-level records will be imperative for accurately describing the current state of publicly available resources for families in the ECCE system .
The second important gap in data about programs and supports for families and children is related to local licensing . The Florida Index of Child Care Access (FLICCA), a robust measurement approach to identifying local child care infrastructure and selection from administrative data requires local capacity for all providers able to serve families receiving SR vouchers . However, due to localchild care licensing in several Early Learning Coalitions' counties that are not connected to the state child care licensing agency, there is a current barrier to calculating the bivariate FLICCA .
Limitations of the Data to Support Collaboration and Strategies to Improve The objective of coordinating and integrating services involves coalescing early childhood services around supporting positive physical, cognitive, and social-emotional development for young children and implementing two-generational strategies to end intergenerational poverty to result in family self-sufficiency . The use of needs assessment data to inform stakeholder decision-making necessitates improving data system coordination and streamlining policies and practices . Both of these priorities require that all agencies take interest in and support construction of the Early Childhood Data Repository . The Early Childhood Data Repository, which is the culmination of all intra-agency collaboration around uniting and creating a comprehensive child- and family-level data system for services related to early childhood services, has the support of all agencies . It is only a matter of time before all data sharing agreements will be fully executed .
Once all data sharing agreements are fully executed, a streamlined process for curating the data will be finalized . This data repository will then be used to systematically triangulate need based on all spatiotemporally relevant available administrative data . Furthermore, scalfi and policy analyses will be appraised considering service impact to determine where eligibility phase-outs occur and how to lessen the cliffs that families experience as they move toward economic self-sufficiency . Developing two-generational opportunities for cross-sector partnerships focusing on support for not only the needs of young children, but their families as well is fully supported by the SAC . The policy, in conjunction with the continued partnerships throughout the business community will use the ECCE data repository to implement the necessary interventions .
PROGRAMS/SERVICES AND MAXIMIZING PARENTAL CHOICE
Input from Families In order to assess the most important gaps related to maximizing parental choice, Florida collected survey responses from a total of 1,936 families from across the state . Respondents representedthe racial demographics of Florida: 44% of the respondents were Caucasian; 34% were of a Black or African-American racial identity; and about 20% were Latino . The economic breakdown of the sample was as such--23 .41% of respondents claimed a yearly household income less than $15,000; 36% indicated a yearly household income falling between $15,000 and $24,999; and approximately 24% of the families’ incomes fell between $25,000 to $39,999 . Nearly 64% of the families reported having at least one child age birth to five . Furthermore, 74% of families sent children to an early learning program at an early care and education center or at an elementary school, while approximately 10% indicated their children stayed at home with a parent or guardian during the day .
Most Needed Services Across all the 25 family service categories included in the survey, families indicated the greatest needs as being (1) help paying for early care and education, and (2) ongoing food assistance . Among other basic family needs, help with rent/ mortgage, and help finding housing were also frequently mentioned . These ndingsfi were consistent with previous Florida studies that highlighted the need for a two-generational approach to social services for families with young children in poverty . The United Way of Florida,which analyzed the economic realities of the Asset Limited, Income
29 Constrained, Employed (ALICE) population noted that the cost of early care and education exceeded the cost of housing to some extent in nearly all 67 counties in Florida .
Beyond early care and education, results from the survey indicated that the most frequently utilized health services included the following: 1) medical care for children (53%); 2) health insurance (32%); and 3) counseling (15%) . Related to parenting education and family services, three services were most important to families: 1) help paying for early care and education; 2) help finding early care and education; and 3) behavioral/emotional health evaluation and services . Specifically, 66 .58% of families indicated successes in being helped with paying for early care and education, and about 10% were not able to use this service . Over half of the families (50 .81%) were able to receive help with finding early care and education programs, and 15 .83% received behavioral/emotional health evaluation or services for their children . The greatest barriers were the cost of early care and education (50 .16%) and finding early care and education available during parents’ hours of work (36 .91%) . These findings indicate both the need and opportunity for enhanced consumer education to better connect families with needed services, as well as increased coordination efforts to help families navigate the birth-5 system of early childhood services .
Stakeholder Focus Groups and Community Case Studies In total, more than 100 stakeholder participants informed the focus groups and case studies . The twelve focus groups, including eight with ECE organizational leaders and four with ECE programs, and six community case studies reflected different geographic locations, rural/urban communities, and diverse ECE provider and community leader perspectives .
The following themes were common across all stakeholder groups: ▶ Financial support for families and ECE providers is critical . ▶ Financial incentives must be increased for ECE providers to obtain and sustain quality . ▶ Families need help navigating ECE services . ▶ High-quality ECE infrastructure must increase ▶ Identification and referral of children with special needs must become streamlined . ▶ Families need more options to find special needs services ▶ ECE practitioners need training programs to support children with special needs . ▶ Access to ECE services connecting quality initiatives, funding, and real-time implementation must be streamlined
In addition to the gaps noted in the family survey, stakeholder focus groups, and the community case studies, it has been noted from ongoing administrative data related to providers across geographic areas that parental choice in early education and care is constrained by a lack of high-quality care capacity . This gap is exacerbated by lack of access to data captured from a direct measure of child-teacher interactions across the state . However, the state of Florida has begun directly observing SR classrooms using the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) . Although these data are not yet available, we will use these CLASS results, which are common across school-based programs (i .e ., Head Start, Early Head Start, and Migrant Head Start)—as a common metric across agencies providing early care and education services .
Current and Future Initiatives to Maximize Parental Choice As described in the Preschool Development Grant Birth-5 application, new federal and state requirements will be implemented to address gaps in parent selection of early childhood care and education services in Florida . These include CCDF requirements, and requirements from the recently passed HB 1091 . Florida will leverage existing partnerships with state and local early care and education agencies to inform critical infrastructure elements . Specifically, partnerships between OEL and DCF will provide the infrastructure for implementing: ▶ federal regulations ▶ statewide Professional Development (PD) Registry; ▶ child screening data collection resulting in child referrals; ▶ workforce supports to facilitate child screening and data collection; ▶ program assessment, child assessment, and PD, resulting in improved child outcomes; ▶ an aligned PD system, to include development of career pathways, articulation, and investments in T .E .A .C .H . scholarships; ▶ aligned local QRIS efforts with Program Assessment through the Association of ELCs (AELC); ▶ high-quality online training and education that improves program quality, teacher skills, and child outcomes through OEL, DCF, Early Learning Florida and others; ▶ early childhood coaching certification;
30 ▶ coordinating a statewide program with over two dozen local Grade Level Reading Campaigns that support diverse partnerships to support language and literacy, invest in the early years, reduce absenteeism, and address summer learning loss; and partnerships with the full range of provider associations (i .e ., representing public, private, faith-based, and family child care) in planning and implementation efforts .
Furthermore, quality consumer education will provide families with information on selecting the most appropriate high- quality early care and finding ECE programs and services . Supporting parents as decision makers and advocates for their children is the cornerstone of Florida’s PDG efforts . Therefore, consumer education and referral specialists must be knowledgeable of local programs and resources to effectively advise families on available services and connect families to the services they need most . This work, which can only be achieved through partnerships with local stakeholders and service providers, will serve as a bridge between families and needed services . Specifically, referral efforts will be enhanced through the following: (1) strategies that empower families during the referral and intake process; (2) offering and providing family engagement resources that increase parent access to knowledge on developmental milestones and activities that support learning and development at home; (3) specialized training and support to implement trauma- sensitive strategies .
Finally, the FLICCA will be used to develop an overall understanding of the availability of high-quality early childhood care and education services for vulnerable children and families that use SR . The FLICCA is a more nuanced perspective of the challenges that families face, particularly when some measure of quality (i .e ., Gold SEAL or CLASS) is applied to restrict the calculation of available supply . While the findings from the 2013 study of child care capacity in the state of Florida revealed that there are many more “slots” than there are children and families seeking care, once the quality of services is accounted for (i .e ., Gold Seal representing high-quality care), we learn that many families throughout Florida do not have reasonable access to services that will support the PDG aims of supporting children’s development and learning . The primary focus moving forward will be to identify strategies to increase the supply of quality services in areas that the FLICCA identifies as having negative high-quality infrastructure to serve SR recipients . Due to the magnitude of the problem, approaches to be considered should include professional development for the personnel working in early care and education settings, incentives for providers to participate in the SR program, and contracted SR providers should be reimbursed at a rate necessary to provide high-quality services .
QUALITY AND AVAILABILITY OF PROGRAMS AND SUPPORTS There are two primary programs providing comprehensive consumer education and referral services to help families connect to appropriate high-quality care and education services, Child Care Resource and Referral (CCR&R) and Help Me Grow (HMG) .
CCR&R services are provided through the 30 Early Learning Coalitions (ELCs) and RCMA, to ensure that the services are available to families in all 67 counties . Local CCR&R specialists work with families to educate them on the importance of quality early childhood experiences, characteristics of high-quality early care and education services, and provide resources regarding the availability and quality of services to meet their child care needs . In addition, CCR&R specialists are trained to provide parents additional information and resources about other community resources that could support needs not met through access to early childhood care and education services . CCR&R supports families and ECE providers across the full range of the B-5 system, including Head Start and other programs, with approximately 450,000 referrals provided annually . The ELCsand RCMA work closely to collaborate and coordinate CCR&R services with the other supports they offer, such as early care and education subsidies and VPK services .
Beginning in 2012 Florida began providing HMG services to strengthen connections between children and families and community-based developmental and behavioral services . HMG provides specialized referrals according to research- based protocols and helps families with more complicated needs connect to the resources necessary . To date, HMG is operating in 32 counties in Florida with approximately 15,000 families being served through referral services . In order to help identify children and families that might need specialized developmental services, all children enrolled in the SR Program are screened for developmental delays using the Ages & Stages Questionnaire-3 (Squires & Bricker, 2009) . Following the completion of the screening tool by the families, specialists within each of the Early Learning Coalitions review the results and communicate back with the parent and provider whether or not referral for diagnostic evaluation is warranted to help support the connection of children and families with IDEA Part C and IDEA Part B 619 service agencies for eligibility determination and if indicated, developmental services .
31 Stakeholder focus groups were implemented around the state to shed light on specific challenges families experience related to understanding and accessing local services and resources and to describe successful practices currently being implemented throughout the state to help families access resources and services . Findings from these interviews highlighted the need to develop systems to keep track of and follow up with families that expressed need for multiple resources but do not have the skills or knowledge to navigate the landscape .
Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve The existing programs that are operating within the more traditional early childhood system (CCR&R and HMG) are functioning as intended within the frame of their service mission . Unfortunately, this mode of operating is not maximizing the potential impact that these dedicated community support organizations could have through a more comprehensive and coordinated system of Early Childhood Care and Education . As indicated in the PDG Birth-5 application Florida is exploring the development of a single point of entry, an integrated early childhood referral and application system that would provide the ability for families to go to one organization (i .e ., website) to apply for multiple services depending on their individualized needs, preferences and eligibility . Critical partners for this initiative have begun communication through the State Advisory Council and the Florida Office of Early Learning has commissioned an independent research and technology firm to conduct a feasibility study .
BUILDING MEASURABLE INDICATORS OF PROGRESS Florida will build on its robust, existing infrastructure to accomplish two targeted outcomes through its needs assessment . The rstfi targeted outcome--expand capacity to regularly assess needs comprehensively through a re- design of Early Childhood Education Needs Assessment (ECENA) to establish the more comprehensive Sunshine State Early Childhood Information Portal . This is an ongoing effort to document ECCE capacity and quality within communities throughout the state . This will provide stakeholders with a real-time understanding of access for underserved communities and populations and develop a system to provide an unduplicated count of children accessing publicly funded programs . The University of Florida (UF) is currently integrating data from various entities across the state with the support of OEL . This partnership has resulted in executed data sharing agreements that have allowed UF to obtain comprehensive child- and family-level data from the Florida OEL, DCF, the Florida AHCA, and the Florida Center (TFC) . Furthermore, data sharing agreements with the following agencies are either under review, in routing, or executed, pending DOH-IRB approval: the Florida Department of Education, the Florida Head Start Association, Substance Abuse and Mental Health (SAMH), the Florida Department of Health (Vital Statistics), and the Early Steps Program . A detailed description of each of the variables that have been requested through the data sharing agreements is shown in Appendix G . Once these data have been included in the Early Childhood Data Repository, curated by the data custodian, and ported into the Sunshine State Early Childhood Information Portal, the research team will construct indicators of eligibility, availability, service use, and impact, all of which will be analyzed to identify spatiotemporal change over time . Attending to the diverse geographic and economic differences across the state, the Sunshine State Early Childhood Information Portal will share results of analyses that make use of mapping to show concentrations of need/services . These data will be used to construct measurable indicators that address the primary indicators of a successfully implemented comprehensive early childhood system as defined by the SAC: ▶ Families access user-friendly information that increases awareness and promotes participation in early childhood services ▶ Families access information regarding experiences and engagements that support early childhood development ▶ Families access services that meet their needs ▶ Children with developmental delays and unique learning needs achieve positive learning and developmental outcomes ▶ Children, families, teachers and communities are prepared to support early grade success ▶ Gaps in health and academic achievement by socioeconomic status, race and other demographic characteristics are reduced ▶ Children throughout the state have improved physical and mental health ▶ Participation in the comprehensive early childhood system of support results in increased self-sufficiency among families ▶ System evaluation of impact and progress is guided by data-driven decision making
32 ISSUES INVOLVING ECCE FACILITIES The provision of Early Care and Education services that protect the health and safety of children while in care is monitored by DCF through the child care regulatory process, with the exception of 5 counties, Broward, Hillsborough, Palm Beach, Pinellas, and Sarasota which have local licensing agencies that set and monitor health and safety standards . Through the inspection process providers are informed of any instances when their practices and procedures fail to meet the expectations set forth in state or local licensing regulations and are then cited for violations . Violations are coded by class depending on the severity and risk to child harm or endangerment . Recent policy changes within the state SR program have provided guidance to coalitions to use discretion when issuing annual contracts with prospective SR providers, and the provider’s history of compliance with licensing regulations is to be considered . Providers that have a history of non-compliance can lose their ability to serve children through the SR and VPK programs . At the present time early care and education facilities have not been prioritized as an urgent state need . Early Learning Coalitions, using information gathered through the provision of technical assistance and coaching services and through feedback provided by providers and families, have identified needs of programs, and at times have provided funding through small grants to providers to support repair of facilities, and the procurement of resources necessary to provide healthy and safe environments for children . One example of this practice is drawn from an Early Learning Coalition, recognizing they did not have an adequate supply of infant classrooms to meet the expressed demand of families applying for subsidy, provided grants to contracted SR providers to equip classrooms with cribs and other necessary equipment to care for infants .
Limitations of the Data and Strategies to Improve At the present time, the state of Florida has limited information about the status of early childhood care and education facilities . Current information infrastructure is not in place to systematically collect and analyze data drawn from direct observation of the physical facilities where early childhood care and education services are provided .
BARRIERS TO THE FUNDING AND PROVISION OF HIGH-QUALITY EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION SERVICES AND SUP- PORTS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE EFFICIENT USE OF RE- SOURCES Lack of adequate funding to support the provision of high-quality early childhood care and education services is a nationally recognized issue facing the field . The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) commissioned a study to examine the costs associated with providing high-quality early care and education services, the affordability of those services to the typical consumer, and make recommendations regarding a redesigned funding structure that would bring high-quality early care and education services into reach of families (NASEM, 2018) .
In Florida, the funding mechanisms are like those of other states . The majority of early childhood care and education services are funded directly by parents through tuition and fees charged by providers . Families below the Federal Poverty Line are eligible for Head Start, Early Head Start, Migrant Early Head Start and Migrant Head Start . The majority of these publicly funded programs (57 .2%) do not provide full day services to meet the needs of working families and only 26% provide services for the full calendar year . Families whose income is below 85% of the State Median Income and are working or in school can apply for subsidized child care . Florida’s average School Readiness payment rate puts Florida among the lowest payment rates in the nation for infants and toddlers and preschoolers . Payment rates vary by county and coalition; while some communities have increased rates in recent years to come closer to providing subsidy at 75th percentile of the 2017 market rate, many others are well below the 75th percentile .
While increasing payment rates would be helpful, it would not necessarily result in the availability of higher quality care throughout the state . Therefore, to maximize limited funding, Florida codified in law the ability for School Readiness providers to earn differential payments based on attaining and maintaining quality standards . Each Early Learning Coalition, through its OEL-approved payment rate reimbursement schedule, has set a minimum base payment rate for each type and level of care . Beyond the base rate, a School Readiness provider has the ability to earn up to 20% more per child (i .e ., minimize the differential between cost of care and reimbursement) if they have been recognized as a Gold Seal-accredited program . Beginning in the 2019-2020 fiscal year, programs have the ability to earn up to an additional 10% increase in reimbursement if they have achieved high CLASS scores, and an additional 5% if they conduct observational child assessments reliably and provide data to OEL . The purpose of these increased reimbursements is to provide multiple paths for programs to support quality improvement and build on local strengths .
33 As Florida continues to review and refine its School Readiness payment rate policies, it is necessary to help ensure equity among rates across counties to provide equitable access to quality ECE opportunities . In addition to the review of School Readiness payment rates, Florida OEL and the ELCs will be able to use findings from the Florida Index of Child Care Access to identify areas where infrastructure and/or parent selection practices are resulting in children enrolling in low-quality care to target interventions and resources to change accessibility of high- quality Programs . Interventions that could be implemented range from targeted professional development informed by the results of CLASS assessments to more targeted messaging and parent education strategies to help families better understand the importance of quality early childhood care and education experiences .
TRANSITION SUPPORTS AND GAPS The Florida Department of Education recently released kindergarten readiness rates for 2017-2018 that indicate 41% of children who participated in the VPK program we not ready for kindergarten . In a May 15 press release Governor DeSantis said, “A 41% failure rate is simply not defendable and certainly not good enough for Florida’s youngest learners . I have asked Commissioner Corcoran to prioritize this issue and direct available funding to make enhancements . Nearly three-quarters of Florida parents rely on VPK programs to lay the academic and social foundation necessary for their children to succeed in kindergarten and beyond .” This is an important acknowledgement that highlights the need for Florida to attend to the supports and services that relate to a successful transition into Kindergarten .
In order to support children as they transition to kindergarten, the OEL, the DOE/Title I Bureau, the Head Start State Collaboration Office, and the Florida Children’s Forum have partnered with ELCs and school districts to streamline the transition to kindergarten . Kindergarten transition focus groups were conducted with stakeholders representing diverse regions--public and private sectors, program administration, program support, academia and philanthropy . Stakeholders from the focus groups reached a consensus that the statewide plan for the PDG is essential to meeting the kindergarten transition needs in Florida .
In order to showcase kindergarten transition efforts developed both nationally and in Florida, the http://www . floridaearlylearning .com/vpk/families/transition-to-kindergarten website went live in the fall of 2018, showcasing national and Florida-developed transition to kindergarten resources . Building on this, eightT ransition to Kindergarten Pilot Regional Summits were offered to share best practices regarding transitions and to promote community conversations to leverage resources . Stakeholder focus groups and family access surveys were conducted around the state to pinpoint existing practices that improve transition outcomes and understand barriers . Families expressed two resounding barriers to kindergarten transition: (1) lack of knowledge related to characteristics of being “kindergarten ready,” and (2) the inability to attend kindergarten registration or informational sessions due to inconvenient times, locations, and lack of transportation .
Results from a statewide Family Access Survey to help inform the needs assessment and strategic plan revealed a discrepancy between parents’ appraisals of their children’s kindergarten readiness and current Florida state readiness rates measured by the Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screener (FLKRS) . While 88% of parents believe their children to be ready for kindergarten, current readiness rates, estimated by the FLKRS show less than 50% of children are in fact ready for kindergarten . These results support the focus group findings .
Kindergarten teachers and school leaders also voiced concern over the difficulty associated with the student evaluation and intake process regarding the measurement of a child’s school readiness level . Teachers did not think they had adequate access to or understanding of pre-k assessments . Furthermore, teachers also expressed concern that the computer-based mode of administration might not be appropriate, resulting in compromised reliability and validity of the FLKRS .
34 SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION As described throughout the needs assessment report, the convening of the State Advisory Council, and firm commitments from relevant early childhood and family serving agencies, have positioned Florida to establish a truly integrated comprehensive early childhood system that functions to identify and then address needs of young children and support family self-sufficiency . Each section of the needs assessment includes findings, recommendations, and descriptions of ongoing initiatives that involve interagency collaboration . The processes implemented to support effective collaboration include routine meetings of the State Advisory Council which has produced a unified vision, mission and priorities that will guide the work moving forward .
Vision Increase quality, coordination, alignment and efficiency of Florida’s programs and services to support young children and their families’ needs toward readiness and early grade success, particularly for our most vulnerable and underserved children .
Mission Improve child outcomes through coordinated, strategic investments and appropriate accountability .
Priorities 1 . Equitable access to services for families 2 . Improve quality of early childhood care and education 3 . Improve cross-system collaboration
35 REFERENCES
Florida Department of Education at http://www .fldoe .org/accountability/assessments/k-12-student-assessment/flkrs/ .
University of Florida Lastinger Center for Learning & Family Data Center (2013) . Statewide Needs Assessment on the Demand, Supply and Quality of Early Learning Programs in Florida, Retrieved from http://www .floridaearlylearning .com/ Content/Uploads/floridaearlylearning .com/files/NeedsAssessment_FINAL2013 .pdf .
Hamre, B . K ., La Paro, K . M ., & Pianta, R . C . (2014) . Classroom Assessment Scoring System™: Manual Infant . Baltimore, MD, US: Paul H Brookes Publishing .
La Paro, K . M ., Hamre, B . K ., & Pianta, R . C . (2012) . Classroom Assessment Scoring System™: Manual Toddler (CLASS-T) . Baltimore, MD, US: Paul H Brookes Publishing .
Pianta, R . C ., La Paro, K . M ., & Hamre, B . K . (2008) . Classroom Assessment Scoring System™: Manual K-3 . Baltimore, MD, US: Paul H Brookes Publishing .
Squires, J ., & Bricker, D . (2009) . Ages & Stages Questionnaires, Third Edition (ASQ-3) . Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing .
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2018 . Transforming the Financing of Early Care and Education . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press . https://doi .org/10 .17226/24984 .
36 APPENDIX A Distinct Count of Children by County Enrolled in Medicare and MediKids
Grand County Infants 1 2 3 4 5 Total Alachua 1,811 1,739 1,774 1,779 1,666 1,683 10,452 Baker 248 261 254 276 240 253 1,532 Bay 1,650 1,600 1,551 1,569 1,583 1,493 9,446 Bradford 239 225 232 244 266 228 1,434 Brevard 3,466 3,586 3,647 3,558 3,492 3,387 21,136 Broward 14,989 15,260 15,662 15,605 15,294 14,119 90,929 Calhoun 125 127 138 119 107 113 729 Charlotte 916 923 890 943 919 868 5,459 Citrus 1,008 950 979 1,076 1,011 944 5,968 Clay 1,333 1,491 1,512 1,504 1,427 1,374 8,641 Collier 2,121 2,170 2,165 2,093 2,043 2,009 12,601 Columbia 730 732 741 737 735 662 4,337 Desoto 337 330 340 367 354 325 2,053 Dixie 155 184 138 175 181 141 974 Duval 8,982 9,023 8,894 8,510 8,576 8,157 52,142 Escambia 2,835 2,783 2,781 2,710 2,661 2,573 16,343 Flagler 643 663 646 687 662 670 3,971 Franklin 94 84 111 97 92 85 563 Gadsden 500 522 502 469 481 454 2,928 Gilchrist 162 152 189 160 174 156 993 Glades 27 50 33 52 48 38 248 Gulf 87 98 91 107 96 96 575 Hamilton 152 149 151 145 158 149 904 Hardee 335 335 361 383 347 350 2,111 Hendry 587 631 633 593 589 578 3,611 Hernando 1,429 1,491 1,519 1,457 1,523 1,377 8,796 Highlands 840 847 872 881 865 826 5,131 Hillsborough 12,261 12,188 12,290 11,979 11,973 11,320 72,011 Holmes 177 170 180 167 176 160 1,030 Indian River 924 980 956 1,010 971 910 5,751 Jackson 443 452 430 440 455 394 2,614 Jefferson 113 102 103 128 112 114 672 Lafayette 54 60 49 74 72 66 375
37
Appendix A: Distinct Count of Children by County Enrolled in Medicare and MediKids, 2017 Grand County Infants 1 2 3 4 5 Total Lake 2,482 2,539 2,549 2,546 2,546 2,350 15,012 Lee 5,576 5,631 5,658 5,390 5,525 5,056 32,836 Leon 2,007 1,922 1,898 1,874 1,793 1,696 11,190 Levy 331 363 395 400 363 363 2,215 Liberty 76 68 80 72 66 64 426 Madison 157 171 195 182 194 176 1,075 Manatee 2,551 2,595 2,583 2,545 2,526 2,476 15,276 Marion 3,000 3,006 3,051 3,025 3,020 2,803 17,905 Martin 820 849 875 878 872 783 5,077 Miami Dade 23,182 23,296 23,588 22,975 23,063 21,749 137,853 Monroe 475 451 391 462 410 342 2,531 Nassau 460 531 492 457 494 449 2,883 NULL 2,414 2,220 2,133 1,916 1,932 1,803 12,418 Okaloosa 1,392 1,449 1,540 1,406 1,328 1,289 8,404 Okeechobee 453 456 470 484 459 457 2,779 Orange 12,055 11,756 11,884 11,831 11,814 11,184 70,524 Osceola 3,792 3,998 4,046 3,993 4,120 3,966 23,915 Palm Beach 10,402 10,482 10,344 10,209 10,230 9,462 61,129 Pasco 3,762 3,853 3,839 3,895 3,813 3,538 22,700 Pinellas 5,571 5,597 5,586 5,603 5,637 4,998 32,992 Polk 6,837 6,792 6,819 6,865 6,796 6,334 40,443 Putnam 830 806 839 840 806 799 4920 Santa Rosa 1,072 1,109 1,048 1,069 1,039 1,020 6,357 Sarasota 1,882 1,932 1,902 1,949 1,838 1,830 11,333 Seminole 2,652 2,704 2,680 2,749 2,734 2,516 16,035 St. Johns 835 897 870 886 872 838 5198 St. Lucie 2,587 2,665 2,793 2,861 2,802 2,593 16,301 Sumter 423 419 493 435 457 414 2641 Suwannee 413 466 427 452 462 444 2664 Taylor 186 211 198 208 203 205 1211 Union 105 111 99 133 122 126 696 Volusia 3,914 3,996 4,004 4,016 4,006 3,769 23,705 Wakulla 157 178 215 173 187 163 1,073 Walton 534 523 519 522 536 471 3,105 Washington 256 225 240 256 243 215 1,435 Grand Total 163,414 164,625 165,557 163,651 162,657 152,813 972,717
38
Appendix A: Distinct Count of Children by County Enrolled in Medicare and MediKids, 2017 APPENDIX B Head Start, Early Head Start, and Migrant Head Start Enrollment by Grantee
Grand Head Start Grantee EHS HS MHS Total Agricultural & Labor Program 188 771 959 Alachua County School Board 751 751 Capital Area Community Action Agency, Inc . 433 433 CDI HS/Martin County, FL 63 63 CDI HS/Taylor County 9 44 53 Charlotte County School Board 85 334 419 Children First 307 315 622 Children's Home Society of Florida 264 264 Children's Home Society of Florida - Brevard Division 115 115 Community Action Program Committee, Inc . 114 977 1,091 Community Coordinated Care for Children, Inc . 324 324 Dade County Board of County Commissioners 304 6,988 7,292 Early Education and Care Inc . 264 451 715 Early Learning Coalition Miami/Date/Monroe County 1,021 1,021 Early Learning Coalition of Palm Beach County, Inc . 240 240 East Coast Migrant Head Start Project 80 80 Eckerd Youth Alternatives 91 91 Economic Opportunities Council of Indian River Co . 363 363 Episcopal Children's Services, Inc . 491 1,592 2,083 Florida State University 117 117 Gadsden County School District 292 292 Hillsborough County Head Start 585 3,709 4,294 Jackson County Early Childhood Programs 33 243 276 Kids Incorporated of the Big Bend 331 331 Le Jardin Community Center, Inc . 194 194 Lee County Public School Board 149 860 1,009 Lutheran Services Florida 580 1638 2,218 Lutheran Services Florida, Inc . 625 4,169 4,794 Manatee Community Action Agency 126 126 Martin County School District 298 298 Mid Florida Community Services, Inc . 129 1,146 1,275 Monroe County School District 191 191
39
Appendix B: Head Start, Early Head Start, and Migrant Head Start Enrollment by Grantee for SFY 2017-2018 Grand Head Start Grantee EHS HS MHS Total North Florida Child Development, Inc . 177 202 379 Okaloosa County Comprehensive Head Start Child 85 303 388 Development Orange, County of 1,727 1,727 Pasco County Head Start 175 740 915 Redlands Christian Migrant Association 1,680 1,680 Santa Rosa County School District 50 264 314 School District of Lee County 108 108 St. Johns County School District Head Start 151 151 Step Up Suncoast, Inc . Head Start/Early Head Start 188 538 726 Suwannee Valley Community Coordinated Child Care, Inc . 272 358 630 The Chiles Academy, Inc . 86 86 The School Board of Brevard County 692 692 Tri-County Community Council, Inc . 41 241 282 United Way of Miami-Dade, Inc . 616 616 Grand Total 8,547 30,781 1,760 41,088
Data Source: https://www .acf .hhs .gov/ohs/reports
40
Appendix B: Head Start, Early Head Start, and Migrant Head Start Enrollment by Grantee for SFY 2017-2018 APPENDIX C Early Head Start, Head Start, and Migrant Head Start Enrollment by City
Grand City of Grantee EHS HS MHS Total Bartow 80 80 Belle Glade 184 184 Boynton Beach 240 240 Brooksville 129 1,146 1,275 Clearwater 91 91 Cocoa 115 692 807 Coral Gables 1,021 1,021 Daytona Beach 86 86 Fort Myers 257 860 1,117 Fort Walton Beach 85 303 388 Gainesville 751 751 Homestead 194 194 Immokalee 1,680 1,680 Jacksonville 1,071 3,230 4,301 Key West 191 191 Lake Alfred 188 771 959 Lake City 272 358 630 Land O' Lakes 175 740 915 Largo 253 1,679 1,932 Marianna 33 243 276 Miami 920 6,988 7,908 Milton 50 264 314 Orlando 588 1,727 2,315 Panama City 264 451 715 Pensacola 114 977 1,091 Perry 9 44 53 Punta Gorda 85 334 419 Quincy 117 292 409 Saint Augustine 151 151 Sarasota 621 853 1,474 Stuart 63 298 361 Tallahassee 331 433 764
41
Appendix C: Early Head Start, Head Start, and Migrant head Start Enrollment by City for SFY 2017-2018 Grand City of Grantee EHS HS MHS Total Tampa 585 3,709 4,294 Vero Beach 363 363 West Palm Beach 372 2,306 2,678 Westville 41 241 282 Wewahitchka 177 202 379 Grand Total 8,547 30,781 1,760 41,088
42
Appendix C: Early Head Start, Head Start, and Migrant head Start Enrollment by City for SFY 2017-2018 APPENDIX D Children’s Enrollment in Multiple Early Care and Education Programs by Early Learning Coalition
SR VPK Coalition HS Flag Freq Enrolled Enrolled ELC of Alachua County N Y N 1,645 ELC of Alachua County Y N N 2,740 ELC of Alachua County Y N Y 3 ELC of Alachua County Y Y N 297 ELC of Brevard N Y N 4,180 ELC of Brevard Y N N 4,557 ELC of Brevard Y N Y 5 ELC of Brevard Y Y N 706 ELC of Brevard Y Y Y 3 ELC of Broward County N Y N 16,137 ELC of Broward County N Y Y 2 ELC of Broward County Y N N 12,634 ELC of Broward County Y N Y 36 ELC of Broward County Y Y N 1283 ELC of Broward County Y Y Y 3 ELC of Duval N Y N 8,498 ELC of Duval N Y Y 89 ELC of Duval Y N N 10,150 ELC of Duval Y N Y 121 ELC of Duval Y Y N 1,325 ELC of Duval Y Y Y 33 ELC of Escambia County N Y N 1,882 ELC of Escambia County N Y Y 1 ELC of Escambia County Y N N 4,253 ELC of Escambia County Y N Y 46 ELC of Escambia County Y Y N 342 ELC of Escambia County Y Y Y 7 ELC of Flagler and Volusia Counties N Y N 4,015 ELC of Flagler and Volusia Counties Y N N 4,648 ELC of Flagler and Volusia Counties Y N Y 2 ELC of Flagler and Volusia Counties Y Y N 732
43
Appendix D: Children's Enrollment in Multiple ECE Programs by ELC for SFY 2017-2018 SR VPK Coalition HS Flag Freq Enrolled Enrolled ELC of Florida's Gateway N Y N 977 ELC of Florida's Gateway N Y Y 3 ELC of Florida's Gateway Y N N 2,295 ELC of Florida's Gateway Y N Y 36 ELC of Florida's Gateway Y Y N 270 ELC of Florida's Gateway Y Y Y 5 ELC of Florida's Heartland N Y N 1,645 ELC of Florida's Heartland N Y Y 1 ELC of Florida's Heartland Y N N 2,341 ELC of Florida's Heartland Y N Y 11 ELC of Florida's Heartland Y Y N 257 ELC of Florida's Heartland Y Y Y 1 ELC of Hillsborough County N Y N 12,370 ELC of Hillsborough County N Y Y 6 ELC of Hillsborough County Y N N 14,982 ELC of Hillsborough County Y N Y 64 ELC of Hillsborough County Y Y N 1,334 ELC of Hillsborough County Y Y Y 8 ELC of Indian River, Martin, and Okeechobee Counties N Y N 2,236 ELC of Indian River, Martin, and Okeechobee Counties N Y Y 4 ELC of Indian River, Martin, and Okeechobee Counties Y N N 2,956 ELC of Indian River, Martin, and Okeechobee Counties Y N Y 75 ELC of Indian River, Martin, and Okeechobee Counties Y Y N 346 ELC of Indian River, Martin, and Okeechobee Counties Y Y Y 16 ELC of Lake County N Y N 2,370 ELC of Lake County N Y Y 2 ELC of Lake County Y N N 2,413 ELC of Lake County Y N Y 9 ELC of Lake County Y Y N 345 ELC of Lake County Y Y Y 4 ELC of Manatee County N Y N 2,514 ELC of Manatee County Y N N 3,279 ELC of Manatee County Y Y N 334 ELC of Marion County N Y N 2,311 ELC of Marion County N Y Y 16 ELC of Marion County Y N N 3,852
44
Appendix D: Children's Enrollment in Multiple ECE Programs by ELC for SFY 2017-2018 SR VPK Coalition HS Flag Freq Enrolled Enrolled ELC of Marion County Y N Y 90 ELC of Marion County Y Y N 420 ELC of Marion County Y Y Y 8 ELC of Miami-Dade/Monroe N Y N 19,582 ELC of Miami-Dade/Monroe N Y Y 4 ELC of Miami-Dade/Monroe Y N N 26,722 ELC of Miami-Dade/Monroe Y N Y 25 ELC of Miami-Dade/Monroe Y Y N 3,714 ELC of Miami-Dade/Monroe Y Y Y 3 ELC of North Florida N Y N 5,398 ELC of North Florida N Y Y 3 ELC of North Florida Y N N 5,018 ELC of North Florida Y N Y 75 ELC of North Florida Y Y N 561 ELC of North Florida Y Y Y 14 ELC of Northwest Florida N Y N 1,770 ELC of Northwest Florida Y N N 3,556 ELC of Northwest Florida Y N Y 16 ELC of Northwest Florida Y Y N 364 ELC of Okaloosa and Walton Counties N Y N 2,265 ELC of Okaloosa and Walton Counties Y N N 2,378 ELC of Okaloosa and Walton Counties Y N Y 19 ELC of Okaloosa and Walton Counties Y Y N 241 ELC of Okaloosa and Walton Counties Y Y Y 2 ELC of Orange County N Y N 11,474 ELC of Orange County N Y Y 405 ELC of Orange County Y N N 12,446 ELC of Orange County Y N Y 177 ELC of Orange County Y Y N 1,717 ELC of Orange County Y Y Y 78 ELC of Osceola N Y N 3,363 ELC of Osceola Y N N 2,644 ELC of Osceola Y N Y 4 ELC of Osceola Y Y N 439 ELC of Osceola Y Y Y 1
45
Appendix D: Children's Enrollment in Multiple ECE Programs by ELC for SFY 2017-2018 SR VPK Coalition HS Flag Freq Enrolled Enrolled ELC of Palm Beach County N Y N 10,594 ELC of Palm Beach County N Y Y 6 ELC of Palm Beach County Y N N 12,654 ELC of Palm Beach County Y N Y 89 ELC of Palm Beach County Y Y N 1,175 ELC of Palm Beach County Y Y Y 5 ELC of Pasco and Hernando Counties N Y N 5,254 ELC of Pasco and Hernando Counties N Y Y 58 ELC of Pasco and Hernando Counties Y N N 4,961 ELC of Pasco and Hernando Counties Y N Y 9 ELC of Pasco and Hernando Counties Y Y N 682 ELC of Pinellas N Y N 5,784 ELC of Pinellas N Y Y 4 ELC of Pinellas Y N N 7,934 ELC of Pinellas Y N Y 29 ELC of Pinellas Y Y N 1,059 ELC of Pinellas Y Y Y 19 ELC of Polk County N Y N 4,154 ELC of Polk County N Y Y 82 ELC of Polk County Y N N 6,882 ELC of Polk County Y N Y 25 ELC of Polk County Y Y N 754 ELC of Polk County Y Y Y 15 ELC of Santa Rosa N Y N 1,046 ELC of Santa Rosa N Y Y 30 ELC of Santa Rosa Y N N 1,115 ELC of Santa Rosa Y N Y 35 ELC of Santa Rosa Y Y N 106 ELC of Santa Rosa Y Y Y 10 ELC of Sarasota N Y N 1,837 ELC of Sarasota N Y Y 3 ELC of Sarasota Y N N 1,536 ELC of Sarasota Y N Y 50 ELC of Sarasota Y Y N 209 ELC of Sarasota Y Y Y 5 ELC of Seminole N Y N 4,264 ELC of Seminole Y N N 2,328
46
Appendix D: Children's Enrollment in Multiple ECE Programs by ELC for SFY 2017-2018 SR VPK Coalition HS Flag Freq Enrolled Enrolled ELC of Seminole Y N Y 6 ELC of Seminole Y Y N 277 ELC of Seminole Y Y Y 3 ELC of Southwest Florida N Y N 6,581 ELC of Southwest Florida N Y Y 836 ELC of Southwest Florida Y N N 5,817 ELC of Southwest Florida Y N Y 94 ELC of Southwest Florida Y Y N 680 ELC of Southwest Florida Y Y Y 77 ELC of St . Lucie N Y N 2,232 ELC of St . Lucie N Y Y 4 ELC of St . Lucie Y N N 2,935 ELC of St . Lucie Y N Y 39 ELC of St . Lucie Y Y N 402 ELC of St . Lucie Y Y Y 4 ELC of the Big Bend Region N Y N 2,486 ELC of the Big Bend Region Y N N 6,395 ELC of the Big Bend Region Y N Y 5 ELC of the Big Bend Region Y Y N 569 ELC of the Big Bend Region Y Y Y 1 ELC of the Nature Coast N Y N 1,831 ELC of the Nature Coast Y N N 2,504 ELC of the Nature Coast Y N Y 3 ELC of the Nature Coast Y Y N 296 ELC of the Nature Coast Y Y Y 3 Redlands Christian Migrant Association N Y N 232 Redlands Christian Migrant Association N Y Y 273 Redlands Christian Migrant Association Y N N 1,630 Redlands Christian Migrant Association Y N Y 154 Redlands Christian Migrant Association Y Y N 247 Redlands Christian Migrant Association Y Y Y 31 Total 356,508
47
Appendix D: Children's Enrollment in Multiple ECE Programs by ELC for SFY 2017-2018 APPENDIX E Florida School Readiness Program Waiting List Data
July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June Coalition Avg. Max Min 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 ELC of Alachua County 536 631 709 659 217 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 229 709 0 ELC of the Big Bend Region 274 664 780 684 572 517 447 319 344 242 439 473 480 780 242 ELC of Brevard 959 1,015 974 950 923 877 861 736 775 670 544 532 818 1,015 532 ELC of Broward County 3,559 3,897 3,984 4,034 4,325 4,429 4,614 4,403 4,551 4,470 4,135 3,979 4,198 4,614 3,559 ELC of Duval 2,693 2,969 2,847 2,764 2,872 2,699 2,544 2,657 2,642 2,557 2,573 2,545 2,697 2,969 2,544 ELC of Escambia County 963 888 718 514 326 201 202 138 70 3 59 204 357 963 3 ELC of Flagler and Volusia 147 165 142 125 124 98 109 114 130 145 136 88 127 165 88 Counties ELC of Florida's Gateway 485 550 556 378 275 175 176 172 92 99 48 40 254 556 40 ELC of Florida's Heartland 397 489 501 581 384 318 180 219 310 376 464 577 400 581 180 ELC of Hillsborough County 3,053 3,159 3,302 3,463 3,417 3,342 3,264 3,361 3,100 2,900 2,977 2,441 3,148 3,463 2,441 ELC of Indian River, Martin, and 316 495 576 525 605 558 584 571 522 470 459 456 511 605 316 Okeechobee Counties
ELC of Lake County 273 329 315 364 210 322 404 430 470 569 579 527 399 579 210 ELC of Manatee County 479 419 475 563 504 466 511 527 462 431 458 538 486 563 419 ELC of Marion County 85 455 600 660 653 711 342 187 113 142 66 144 347 711 66 ELC of Miami-Dade/Monroe 616 1,710 758 1,120 1,694 786 985 1,739 2,603 3,191 3,847 4,348 1,950 4,348 616 ELC of the Nature Coast 73 126 161 174 193 188 200 206 218 208 257 302 192 302 73 ELC of North Florida 708 836 651 658 629 573 639 617 655 707 771 867 693 867 573 ELC of Northwest Florida 617 724 697 447 233 219 157 100 44 158 355 523 356 724 44 ELC of Okaloosa and Walton 166 247 207 128 155 86 89 89 79 59 88 140 128 247 59 Counties (Emerald Coast)
ELC of Orange County 1,901 2,738 3,032 3,381 3,369 2,860 2,439 1,960 1,718 0 602 1,650 2,138 3,381 0 ELC of Osceola 689 817 804 827 747 533 367 304 0 0 89 74 438 827 0 ELC of Palm Beach County 3,096 3,433 3,764 4,111 4,193 4,608 5,062 4,643 4,174 3,816 3,938 4,101 4,078 5,062 3,096
48 July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June Coalition Avg. Max Min 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 ELC of Pasco and Hernando 4 6 5 353 632 763 915 1,181 1,333 1,329 1,343 1,474 778 1,474 4 Counties ELC of Pinellas 1,150 1,467 1,542 1,573 1,367 1,332 1,201 1,140 1,087 990 823 834 1,209 1,573 823 ELC of Polk County 1,961 2,031 2,127 1,651 1,391 1,518 1,128 793 845 889 1,099 1,378 1,401 2,127 793 ELC of St . Lucie 768 764 737 624 399 364 398 342 381 374 278 312 478 768 278 ELC of Santa Rosa 42 87 63 42 57 17 63 77 55 85 140 172 75 172 17 ELC of Sarasota 317 383 421 381 396 402 423 411 425 423 483 508 414 508 317 ELC of Seminole County 272 436 570 652 611 586 374 492 296 544 550 662 504 662 272 ELC of Southwest Florida 1,326 1,453 1,438 1,514 1,558 1,536 1,505 1,479 1,408 1,210 1,128 1,245 1,400 1,558 1,128 RCMA 272 210 170 171 163 153 143 146 162 170 211 265 186 272 143 Grand Total 28,197 33,593 33,626 34,071 33,194 31,237 30,326 29,553 29,064 27,227 28,939 31,399 30,869 34,071 27,227
Data as of June 30, 2018
Appendix E: Florida School Readiness Program Waiting List Data SFY 2017-2018
49 APPENDIX F Data Sharing Agreement Status as of September 15, 2019
Data Sharing Data Sources Current Data Florida Data Partner Arrangement Status Requested Sharing Flow (DSA) 1 . Florida Office of Early 1.Subsidized Child Contract Special OEL shares data Executed Learning (OEL) Care and VPK Provisions with UF directly with UF Enrollment
2.Licensed Provider
2 . Florida Department of 1 . Enrollment & Data Request work DOE shares data In Review with DOE Education (DOE) Accessibility (Part B, order granting UF with OEL and OEL HEP and IEP) access to data by the shares data directly 2 . Kindergarten terms and conditions with UF screening of DSA between 3 . School Context DOE and OEL 4 . Parent/Guardian Employment & Workforce (DOR)
3 . Florida Head Start 1 . Enrollment & Data Use Each FHSA Grantee In Review with FHSA Association (FHSA) Accessibility (HS & Agreements with All shares data directly EHS) Participating FHSA with UF after DUA Grantees (N=69) execution
4 . Department of 1 . Maltreatment Data Sharing 1 . UF-FDC transfers Executed Children and Families (Most Serious agreement between DCF infant data (DCF) - Child Finding) & Foster DCF and UF from existing data Care (Victim, Mother, bank to PDG data Father, and Victim bank for PDG Services) activities 2 . DCF shares data for children birth to five in SFY 2017-18 directly with UF-FDC
5 . DCF-Substance 1 . Demographics Data Use agreement DCF-SAMH shares Under final review Abuse and Mental Health 2 . Substance Abuse between DCF-SAMH data directly with with DCF SAMH (SAMH) Admission and UF UF-FDC 3 . Substance Abuse Discharge 4 . Substance Abuse Detox
6 . DCF - Provider 1 . Public licensed N/A DCF shares historical N/A child care provider data directly with UF reports and UF downloads ongoing data from online reports
50
Appendix F: Data Sharing Agreement Status as of September 15, 2019 Data Sharing Data Sources Current Data Florida Data Partner Arrangement Status Requested Sharing Flow (DSA) 7 . Florida Department 1 . Birth Certificate Data Use Agreement 1 . UF-FDC transfers Executed, pending of Health (DOH) – Vital 2 . Death Certificate between DOH-VS data from existing DOH-IRB approval Statistics and UF data bank to PDG data bank for PDG activities 2 . DOH-VS shares 2018 data directly with UF-FDC
8 . Florida Department 1 . Early Steps Data Use Agreement DOH-ESP shares In Review with DOH of Health (DOH) – Early Program Enrollment between DOH-Early data directly with Steps Steps Program and UF-FDC UF
9 . Florida Department 1 . Maltreatment Data Use Agreement DOH-CPT shares UF requesting of Health (DOH) – Child 2 . Connected between DOH-Child data directly with updated data Protection Team services Protection Team and UF-FDC dictionary UF
10 . Florida Agency 1 . Regional Perinatal Amended Data Use 1 . UF-FDC transfers Executed; for Health Care Intensive Care Agreement between AHCA data from Renewal pending Administration (AHCA) Centers UF and AHCA existing data bank for future data use 2 . Medicaid and to PDG databank for CHIP Eligibility PDG activities 3 . Medicaid 2 . AHCA shares Assignment Plan 2018 data directly 4 . Medicaid FFS with UF-FDC for Claims PDG 5 . Encounter
11 . AHCA - The Florida 1 . Hospital Discharge Inter-Agency Staff 1 . UF-FDC transfers Executed Center (TFC) Inpatient Access to Data TFC data from 2 . Hospital between OEL and existing data bank Outpatient The Florida Center to PDG databank for 3 . Hospital PDG activities Emergency 2 . TFC shares 2018 data directly with UF-FDC for PDG
51
Appendix F: Data Sharing Agreement Status as of September 15, 2019 APPENDIX G Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency
Florida Office of Early Learning – Child Enrollment and Licensed Child Care
Child File Field Description Field Type COALITION_NAME Name of the Early Learning Coalition . VARCHAR2(100) PRRP_D_START First day of the month when service was provided . Covers the entire DATE month . COALITION_ID Database number . School Readiness and VPK data are on 35 separate NUMBER(5) databases . CHLD_C_SSN Child SSN or system-generated ID . Children are uniquely identified by VARCHAR2(9) the combination of COALITION_ID and CHLD_C_SSN . CHLD_F_SSN Flag to indicate if the Child's ID is an SSN (Y) or not (N) . VARCHAR2(1) CHLD_D_DOB Child Date of Birth . DATE PRNT_C_SSN Parent SSN or system-generated ID . Parents are uniquely identified by VARCHAR2(9) the combination of COALITION_ID and PRNT_C_SSN . PRNT_F_SSN Flag to indicate if the Parent's ID is an SSN (Y) or not (N) . VARCHAR2(1) PRNT_L_RES_STRT Parent's Residence Street Address . VARCHAR2(25) PRNT_L_RES_STRT2 Parent's Residence Street Address - optional second line . VARCHAR2(25) PRNT_L_RES_CITY Parent's Residence City . VARCHAR2(18) PRNT_L_RES_ST Parent's Residence State . VARCHAR2(2) PRNT_L_RES_ZIP Parent's Residence Zip Code . VARCHAR2(10) PRRD_C_CRLV_ABV Child's Care Level . See 'Care Level Codes' Tab . VARCHAR2(4) CHLD_F_HEADSTART Flag to indicate the child is attending Head Start (Y) or not (N or Blank) . VARCHAR2(1)
PROV_C Provider ID (either FEID or SSN for Family Child Care Homes) . NUMBER(9) PROV_C_EXT Provider Extension - Used to uniquely identify providers with multiple NUMBER(3) locations under the same FEIN . Providers are uniquely identified by the combination of COALITION_ID, PROV_C, and PROV_C_EXT . PROV_C_TP Provider Type at the time of the payment calculations . Note that a VARCHAR2(1) provider could change types over time . This is the provider type at the time the service was provided . GOLD_SEAL Y' means the Provider has a Gold Seal Provider Type, 'N' means not Gold VARCHAR2(1) Seal . PROV_GROUP Provider Types grouped into broader categories . VARCHAR2(50) FNDR_C Funder . 1= School Readiness, VPK = Voluntary Prekindergarten . VARCHAR2(8) FDCN_C Billing Group - See the 'School Readiness Billing Groups' Tab and VARCHAR2(5) the 'VPK Billing Groups' Tab . Children were reported for receiving School Readiness or VPK payments at any time between 7/1/2015 and 6/30/2017 . ELIG_C Eligibility is a subdivision of the Billing Group . See the 'School Readiness VARCHAR2(4) Billing Groups' Tab and the 'VPK Billing Groups' Tab for details .
52
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Provider File Field Description Field Type COALITION_ID Database number . NUMBER(5) PROV_C Provider ID (either FEID or SSN for Family Child Care Homes) . NUMBER(9)
PROV_C_EXT Provider Extension - Used to uniquely identify providers with multiple NUMBER(3) locations under the same FEIN . PROV_C_LEGAL_ID Legal ID Number . Field is not required . If absent, use PROV_C_DCF_ID . VARCHAR2(15) PROV_C_DCF_ID DCF ID Number . VARCHAR2(9) PROV_N Provider Name - Payment purposes . VARCHAR2(40) PROV_N_CCRR Provider Name - Public-Facing . VARCHAR2(40) PROV_L_STRT Provider's Physical Street Address . VARCHAR2(30) PROV_L_STRT2 Provider's Physical Street Address - optional second line . VARCHAR2(30) PROV_L_CITY Providers Physical City . VARCHAR2(18) PROV_L_ST Provider's Physical State . VARCHAR2(2) PROV_L_ZIP Providers Physical Zip Code . VARCHAR2(10)
Florida Department of Education, Kindergarten Readiness Kindergarten readiness data is being sought for all children who were screened during state fiscal years 2017-2018 and 2018-19 . These results are based on the first assessment administered to each student . Specific information sought is described below: Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screener School Type District Number
School Number District Name School Name Data requested for the Last Name following State Fiscal Years: First Name 2017-2018 Middle Initial 2018-2019 Student Number Identifier - Florida Child Date of Birth (mm/dd/yyyy) Year Grade Level Gender Race Ethnicity Actual Assessment Score
53
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Education, Individualized Education Program – IDEA Part B Individualized Education Program - IDEA Part B data is being sought for all children age six and under as of September 1, 2018 who participated in IDEA Part B (identified as Students With Disabilities (SWD)) as reported for federal EDFacts files 089 and 002during state fiscal years 2014-2015 through 2017-2018 . Specific information sought is described below:
Bureau of Exceptional Education & Student Services District Number School Number
District Name School Name Last Name First Name Middle Initial Student Number Identifier – Florida Year Data requested for the Grade Level following State Fiscal Years: Gender 2017-2018 Child Date of Birth (mm/dd/yyyy) 2018-2019 Race Ethnicity Exceptional Student, IDEA Educational Environments Exceptionality, Primary Exceptional student placement status Exceptional student referral reason Exceptional student placement date Exceptional student eligibility determination date Time With Non-Disabled Peers (not available for Survey 5) Total Time in School (not available for Survey 5)
54
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Education, Homeless Education Program Title IX: Homeless Education Program (HEP) data is being sought for all children age six and under as of September 1, 2018 who were identified as homeless and participated in Title IX: Homeless Education Program (HEP) anytime during state fiscal years 2014- 2015 through 2017-2018 . Specific information sought is described below:
Title IX: Homeless Education Program (HEP) District Number School Number
District Name School Name Last Name First Name
Data requested for the Middle Initial following Student Number Identifier – Florida State Fiscal Years: 2014-2015 Year 2015-2016 Grade Level 2016-2017 2017-2018 Gender Child Date of Birth (mm/dd/yyyy) Race Ethnicity Homeless Student, PK-12 Homeless Unaccompanied Youth Homelessness Cause Disaster Affected Student
Florida Department of Education, Department of Revenue Data TANF & SNAP (Department of Children & Families) data for all children age six and under as of September 1, 2018 submitted for the Florida Education and Training Placement Information Program (FETPIP) for state fiscal years 2011- 2012 through 2017-2018 . This data is contingent upon a fully executed agreement between FETPIP and DCF .
Table 1 – Employment – FLORIDA OFFICE OF EARLY LEARNING to DOR Short Date Item Name Format Max Req? Description Last Name Alpha 30 Y First Name Alpha 20 Y
Middle Initial Alpha 20 N
Social Security Number Numeric 9 *Y Date of Birth Date 8 Y YYYYMMDD County Code Alpha 2 Y
55
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Table 2 – Reemployment Assistance– FLORIDA OFFICE OF EARLY LEARNING to DEO Short Date Item Name Format Max Req? Description Row Type Alpha 2 Y 01-Header . O2=Data,03=Trailer
Case ID Alpha 10 N Blanks Sent
Consumer ID Alpha 10 N Blanks Sent
Last Name Alpha 25 **Y First Name Alpha 17 **Y Middle Initial Alpha 1 N Social Security Numbers Numeric 9 *Y Date of Birth Date 8 **Y YYYYMMDD
Table 3 – Employment – DOR to FLORIDA OFFICE OF EARLY LEARNING Short Date Item Name Format Max Req? Description RI Alpha 1 N Last Name Alpha 35 N
First Name Alpha 35 N Middle Initial Alpha 1 N Social Security Number Numeric 9 Y DOB Date 8 N County Alpha 2 N ELIS ID Alpha 40 N IP Alpha 1 N *Employer Name Alpha 40 Y Employer UTID Alpha 7 N Employer Address Line 1 Alpha 45 Y Employer City Alpha 40 Y Employer State Alpha 3 Y Employer Zip Code Numeric 10 Y Employer Telephone Numeric 10 N Employment Start Date 8 Y Employment Stop Date 8 N Gross Quarterly Earners Quarter 1 Numeric 1 Y Values = 1, 2, 3, or 4 Year of Quarterly Earnings 1 Numeric 4 Y Values=YYYY
56
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Table 3 – Employment – DOR to FLORIDA OFFICE OF EARLY LEARNING Short Date Item Name Format Max Req? Description Gross Quarterly Earnings Quarter Numeric 15,2 Y 1 Gross Quarterly Earners Quarter 2 Numeric 1 Y Values = 1, 2, 3, or 4 Year of Quarterly Earnings 2 Numeric 4 Y Values = YYYY Gross Quarterly Earnings Quarter Numeric 15,2 Y 2 Gross Quarterly Earners Quarter 3 Numeric 1 Y Values = 1, 2, 3, or 4 Year of Quarterly Earnings 3 Numeric 4 Y Values - YYYY Gross Quarterly Earnings Quarter Numeric 15,2 Y 3 Gross Quarterly Earners Quarter 4 Numeric 1 Y Values = 1, 2, 3, or 4 Year of Quarterly Earnings 4 Numeric 4 Y Values = YYYY Gross Quarterly Earnings Quarter Numeric 15,2 Y 4
Table 4 – Reemployment Assistance– DEO to FLORIDA OFFICE OF EARLY LEARNING Short Date Item Name Format Max Req? Description Case ID Alpha 20 N Consumer ID Alpha 20 N Social Security Number Numeric 9 Y Last Name Alpha 25 N First Name Alpha 17 N Middle Initial Alpha 1 N Date of Birth Date 8 N YYYYMMDD Search Begin Date Date 8 N Search End Date Date 8 N Payment Date Date 8 N Payment Amount Numeric 9,2 N Income Type Alpha 1 N
57
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Head Start Association (FHSA) University of Florida requests the following data elements for all children (Ages Birth to Five) with a date of service at any time during state fiscal years 2011/2018 .
Purpose Data Purpose Data Link Child First Name Research Mental Health Need Link Child Last Name Research Mental Health Service Received Link Child Date of Birth Research ESL Need Link Child Home Address Research ESL Service Received Link Parent First Name Research Adult Education Need Link Parent Last Name Research Adult Education Service Received Link Parent Date of Birth Research Job Training Need Link Parent Home Address Research Job Training Service Received Link Parent Work Address Research Substance Abuse Prevention Need Research Application Date Research Substance Abuse Prevention Service Research Waiting List Status Received Research Substance Abuse Treatment Need Research Enrollment Date Research Substance Abuse Treatment Service Research Dis-Enrollment Date Received Research Dis-Enrollment Reason Research Child Abuse and Neglect Need Research Eligibility Reason Research Child Abuse and Neglect Service Research Eligibility Income Received Research Center-Based/Home Based Research Domestic Violence Need Research IFSP/IEP Research Domestic Violence Service Received Research Pregnant Mother Research Child Support Need Research Homeless Research Child Support Service Received Research Foster Care Research Health Education Need Research Health Insurance Status Research Health Education Service Received Research Medical Home Status Research Incarcerated Need Research Immunization Status Research Incarcerated Service Received Research Dental Home Research Parent Education Need Research Emergency Crisis Need Research Parent Education Service Received Research Emergency Crisis Service Received Research Relationship Education Need Research Housing Assistance Needed Research Relationship Education Service Research Housing Assistance Service Received Received Research Asset Building Need Research Asset Building Service Received
58
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Children and Families, Maltreatment & Foster Care Data University of Florida requests the following data elements for all children (Ages Birth to Five) with a date of service or investigation from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2020 .
Foster care data elements (Victim, Mother, Father, and Victim Services) Victim data elements
Field Name Description ID_PRSN_VCTM Number Identifying the Child Victim in an Investigation ID_ACCSS_RPT_SEQ Report number Identifying the Investigation FIRST_NAME First Name of the Child Victim in the Investigation MDL_INTL Middle Initial of the Child Victim in the Investigation LAST_NAME Last Name of the Child Victim in the Investigation RACE Race of Child Victim CD_ETHN Ethnicity Code Value of Child Victim ETHNICITY Ethnicity Description Value of Child Victim TX_GENDER Gender of Child Victim DT_BIRTH Date of Birth of Child Victim VCOUNTY Count of Residence for Child Victim
Note: This victim extract table has one record per child victim per child investigation .
All available investigation data has been provided for child victims included in the population .
Race is determined as follows: If a child's only race selected in FSFN is black, then the child is considered black; if the child's only race selected in FSFN is white, then the child is considered white; if the child's race selected is both black and white, then the child is considered multi-racial; or children with more than one race selected other than black and white in FSFN are considered other .
All primary residence addresses have been provided for child victims in FSFN (where data is available) .
Mother data elements Field Name Description ID_VCTM_RLTN Number Identifying the Child Victim in an Investigation ID_MOM_RLTN Number Identifying the Mother in the Investigation FIRST_NAME First Name of the Mother in the Investigation MDL_INTL Middle Initial of the Mother in the Investigation LAST_NAME Last Name of the Mother in the Investigation RACE Race of Mother CD_ETHN Ethnicity Code Value of Mother TX_GENDER Gender of Mother DT_BIRTH Date of Birth of Mother ID_SSN SSN of Mother
59
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Note: Race is determined as follows: If a child's only race selected in FSFN is black, then the child is considered black; if the child's only race selected in FSFN is white, then the child is considered white; if the child's race selected is both black and white, then the child is considered multi-racial; or children with more than one race selected other than black and white in FSFN are considered other .
Father data elements Field Name Description ID_VCTM_RLTN Number Identifying the Child Victim in an Investigation ID_DAD_RLTN Number Identifying the Father in the Investigation FIRST_NAME First Name of the Father in the Investigation MDL_INTL Middle Initial of the Father in the Investigation LAST_NAME Last Name of the Father in the Investigation RACE Race of Father CD_ETHN Ethnicity Code Value of Father TX_GENDER Gender of Father DT_BIRTH Date of Birth of Father ID_SSN SSN of Father
Note: Race is determined as follows: If a child's only race selected in FSFN is black, then the child is considered black; if the child's only race selected in FSFN is white, then the child is considered white; if the child's race selected is both black and white, then the child is considered multi-racial; or children with more than one race selected other than black and white in FSFN are considered other .
If ID_PRSN_VCTM is populated in the victim extract but there is no matching ID_VCTM_RLTN in the father extract, then there is no mother relationship data entered into FSFN for that child .
Victim Service data elements Field Name Description ID_PRSN Unique person identifier for child (Number Identifying the Child Victim in an Investigation) ID_CASE Unique case identifier DT_RMVL Removal date for the removal episode . DT_BGN Date and Time at which the placement began . DT_END Date and time at which the placement ends . If null, the placement was still active when the extract was produced . CD_SRVC_CTGRY Standard service category code for reporting purposes . TX_SRVC_CTGRY Standard service category value for reporting purposes . CD_END_RSN Code for the end reason of a placement . TX_END_RSN Text value for the end reason of a placement . CD_PLCM_DSCH_RSN Code for the discharge reason from the removal . TX_PLCM_DSCH_RSN Text value for the discharge reason from the removal .
60
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Note: This contains 1 record per out-of-home or in-home care placement with information about the removal episode, placement type, and discharges from care and service type date .
There may be multiple placements within a removal episode, and therefore multiple records per removal episode .
A removal episode is uniquely identified by DT_RMVL .
Child Maltreatment data elements Field Name Description MOST SERIOUS FINDING If any allegation for the alleged victim is Verified=Verified; if none are Verified but one or more are Not Substantiated=Not Substantiated; if none are Verified or Not Substantiated, but one or more are No Indicator=No Indicator
Florida Department of Children and Families, Substance Abuse and Mental Health University of Florida requests the following data elements for all women with a date of service from July 1, 2010 to December 31, 2020 .
Chapter 4: Demographics table Field Name Description CONTRACTORID Federal Employer Identification Number of the entity which holds a contract with DCF SSN client Social Security Number CLIENTID client ID LAST client last name FIRST client first name MIDDLE client middle name DOB client date of birth GENDER client gender RACE client race ETHNIC client ethnicity PROVIDERID Federal Employer Identification Number of the entity which provides the service to the client . CONTNPI NPI number associated with contractor PROVNPI NPI number associated with provider
61
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Chapter 6A: Substance Abuse Admission Data Set Field Name Description SSN Client’s Social Security Number CLIENTID Client ID CNTYRESID Client's Florida county of residence GRADE Client's highest educational level MARITAL Client's current marital PREGTRIM client’s pregnancy status at admission ADMITTYPE client’s type of admission DRUGCRT client was Drug Court ordered to attend substance abuse treatment CHILDWEL client was involved in the child welfare system at admission RESIDSTAT residential status DEPCRIMS dependency/delinquency (children); criminal/competency (adults) PURPOSE Purpose code for admission record EVALDATE Date evaluation is conducted CHILDPREV child is involved in a prevention program LEGGUARD child's legal guardian EMPL client's employment status INCPERS annual personal income FAMINC annual family (gross) income WAITDAYS number of days the client waited to enter treatment POSTPART client has given birth with the last 91 days DEPND number of dependents DEVELOP client disability PHYSICAL client physical disability AMBULAT client is ambulatory VISUAL client visual impairment HEARING client hearing impairment ENGLISH client's English language is severely impaired REFERRAL referring agency CRIMJUST client is involved with criminal justice system at admission PRIORADM number of previous admissions to any substance abuse treatment ZIP client's home/residence Zip code TSTAT client's TANF status FAMSIZE number of persons living in the house SAPROB client is at risk of abusing alcohol or other substances SADIAG client's primary substance abuse diagnosis code MHDIAG client's mental health diagnosis MARCHMAN type of Marchman Act admission
62
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Field Name Description COLLATERAL client receiving services due to another person's substance abuse OPIOIDREPLAC client is on opioid replacement at time of admission VETSTATUS client is a veteran of the U .S . armed forces MHDIAGNOSIS client has a psychiatric problem in addition to substance abuse SOCIAL number of times client attended a self-help program in las 30 days SCHOOL client was suspended or expelled from school in last 30 days ARREST number of times client was arrested in last 30 days SADIAG10 substance abuse diagnosis code from ICD-10-CM MHDIAG10 mental health diagnosis code from ICD-10-CM
6B: Substance Abuse Discharge Data Set Field Name Description SSN Client Social Security Number CNTYRESID client's Florida county of residence GRADE client's highest educational level completed prior to evaluation MARITAL client’s current marital status PREGTRIM client’s pregnancy status at admission ADMITTYPE client’s type of admission DRUGCRT client was Drug Court ordered to attend substance abuse treatment CHILDWEL client was involved in the child welfare system at admission RESIDSTAT residential status DEPCRIMS dependency/delinquency (children); criminal/competency (adults) PURPOSE Purpose code for admission record EVALDATE Date evaluation is conducted CHILDPREV child is involved in a prevention program EMPL client's employment status DREASON Reason for discharge DOUTCOME birth outcome for a client pregnant between admission and discharge SRVCHILD client received child care services SRVCRIME client's services coordinated with criminal justice or juvenile justice SRVEDUC client received educational services SRVFAMI client's services included counseling with family member(s) SRVHIVAISRV client received HIV services SRVHIVED client received HIV education services SRVHIVEI client received HIV Early Intervention Project service SRVHIVTE client received HIV testing SRVHOUSE client provided special housing services SRVIMMUN client received any immunization
63
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Field Name Description SRVINTER client received interim services within 48 hours of request SRVMEDIC client received services rendered by a medical professional SRVMENTA client received mental health counseling SRVPEDIA client's minor children received mental health counseling SRVPRENA client received pre-natal or postpartum health care SRVPUBLI client's eligibility for TANF, Social Security, food stamps, etc . SRVPUBRE client received government services in SRVPUBLI SRVTB client received TB services SRVBTES client received TB test SRVTRANS client's dependent children received transportation services SRVTXPLA client's treatment plan monitored by a staff person SRVTRAIN client received domestic violence/sexual abuse counseling SRVVOCAT client received vocational training DRUGFREE client was drug-free at time of delivery SADIAG client's substance abuse diagnosis from ICD-9 MHDIAG client's mental health diagnosis from ICD-9 SOCIAL number of times client attended self-help program in 30 days before discharge SCHOOL client was suspended or expelled from school in last 30 days ARREST number of times client was arrested in last 30 days SADIAG10 substance abuse diagnosis code from ICD-10-CM MHDIAG10 mental health diagnosis code from ICD-10-CM
6C: Substance Abuse Detox Data Set Field Name Description SITEID The physical location of the provider where services will be provided SSN Client Social Security Number CLIENTID Client ID CNTYRESID Florida county in which the client resides at the time of admission . GRADE Highest educational level completed by the client prior to this evaluation . MARITAL client’s current marital status HLTHSTAT client’s health status at evaluation PREGTRIM client’s pregnancy status at admission ADMITYPE client’s type of admission DRUGCRT whether or not the client was Drug Court ordered to attend substance abuse treatment CHILDWEL whether or not client was involved in the child welfare system at admission RESIDSTAT residential status DEPCRIMS client’s dependency/delinquency (for children) or criminal/competency status (for adults)
64
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Field Name Description PROBPRIM primary substance problem PROBSEC secondary substance problem PROBTER tertiary substance problem PURPOSE Indication of detox record BEGINDATE date on which the detoxification episode began ENDDATE date on which the detoxification episode ended DREASON reason for discharge ZIP Client’s home/residence US Postal Zip code PROVIDERID Federal Employer Identification Number of the entity which provides the service to the client REFERRAL referring agency SADIAG client’s substance abuse diagnosis MHDIAG client’s mental health diagnosis MARCHMAN type of Marchman Act admission MHDIAGNOSIS whether or not the client has a psychiatric problem in addition to his or her alcohol or drug use problem VETSTATUS whether or not the client is a veteran of the U .S . Armed Services EMPL client’s employment status at evaluation SOCIAL number of times the client has attended a self-help program in the 30 days preceding the date of admission
SCHOOL Indicate if the client was suspended or expelled from school within the last 30 days ARREST Indicate the number of times the client was arrested within the last 30 days SADIAG10 substance abuse diagnosis code for the client using the code from the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10-CM) MHDIAG10 mental health diagnosis code for the client using the code from the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10-CM)
65
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Children and Families, Child Care Provider Licensure Public licensed child care provider reports Field Date Circuit County ID Provider Name Physical Address City State Zip Phone Email Program Director Gold Seal SR Status Capacity Fee Origination Date Approval Date
Florida Department of Health, Vital Statistics Florida Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics, Birth Certificate EVENT_YEAR FATHER_OLD_EDCODE FATHER_EDCODE CertNumber MOTHER_SSN DEATH_SFN FOUNDLING FATHER_SSN DATE_OF_DEATH NAME_FIRST HOME_BIRTH_PLANNED DATE_OF_DEATH_MONTH NAME_MIDDLE FACILITY_NAME DATE_OF_DEATH_DAY NAME_LAST FACILITY_CODE DATE_OF_DEATH_YEAR NAME_SUFFIX FACILITY_TYPE_NAME DEATH_COUNTY MOTHER_NAME_FIRST FACILITY_TYPE_CODE DEATH_COUNTY_CODE MOTHER_NAME_MIDDLE CHDCountyOfBirth DEATH_COUNTRY MOTHER_NAME_LAST BSTATE DEATH_COUNTRY_CODE MOTHER_NAME_LAST_P BIRTH_STATE MODIFY_DATE MOTHER_REFUSE_INFO BCOUNTRY MODIFY_USER_NAME MOTHER_RES_ADDR1 BCOUNTRY_CODE CREATE_DATE MOTHER_RES_APT BCITY CREATE_USER
66
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics, Birth Certificate MOTHER_RES_MUN BCITY_CODE SCREEN_CONSENT MOTHER_RES_CITY_CODE BCOUNTY PROGRAM_CONSENT MOTHER_RES_COUNTY BCOUNTY_CODE INFO_RELEASE MOTHER_RES_COUNTY_CODE SEX MR_DIAB MOTHER_RES_CHDCOUNTY_CODE DATE_OF_BIRTH_MONTH MR_DIAB_GEST MOTHER_RES_STATE DATE_OF_BIRTH_DAY MR_HYPERT_CHRONIC MOTHER_RES_STATE_CODE DATE_OF_BIRTH_YEAR MR_HYPERT_PREG MOTHER_RES_ZIP DATE_OF_BIRTH MR_HYPERT_ECLAMPSIA MOTHER_RES_INCITY TIME_OF_BIRTH MR_PREV_PRETERM MOTHER_RES_COUNTRY TIME_OF_BIRTH_UNIT MR_OTHER MOTHER_RES_COUNTRY_CODE BIRTH_WEIGHT_UNITS MR_NONE MOTHER_MAIL_ADDR1 BIRTH_WEIGHT_GRAMS MR_UNKNOWN MOTHER_MAIL_APT GESTATION_WEEKS MR_PREV_POOR_OUTCOME MOTHER_MAIL_CITY PLURALITY_CODE MR_PREG_FROM_TREATMENT MOTHER_MAIL_STATE BIRTH_ORDER_CODE MR_PREG_FROM_TREATMENT_FED MOTHER_MAIL_STATE_CODE TRANS_INFANT MR_PREG_FROM_TREATMENT_ART MOTHER_MAIL_ZIP TRANS_INFANT_FAC MR_PREV_CESAREAN_YESNO MOTHER_MAIL_COUNTRY TRANS_INFANT_FAC_CODE MR_PREV_CES_NUMBER MOTHER_MAIL_COUNTRY_CODE MOTHER_WIC_YESNO MR_OTHER_LIT MOTHER_BIRTH_COUNTRY MOTHER_HEIGHT_FEET CLD_PRECIP_LABOR MOTHER_BIRTH_COUNTRY_CODE MOTHER_HEIGHT_INCH CLD_PREMATURE_ROM MOTHER_DOB MOTHER_PRE_PREG_WT CLD_PROLONG_LABOR MOTHER_DOB_MONTH MOTHER_WT_AT_DELIV CLD_NONE MOTHER_DOB_DAY WEIGHTGAIN CLD_OTHER MOTHER_DOB_YEAR FATHER_BIRTH_COUNTRY CLD_OTHER_LIT MOTHER_AGE FATHER_BIRTH_COUNTRY_CODE CLD_UNKNOWN MOTHER_BIRTH_STATE FATHER_RES_SAME_MOTHER INF_OTHER MOTHER_BIRTH_STATE_CODE FATHER_RES_ZIP INF_OTHER_LIT MOTHER_ED FATHER_RES_STATE_CODE INF_GONORRHEA MOTHER_EDCODE FATHER_RES_STATE INF_SYPHILIS MOTHER_OLD_EDCODE FATHER_RES_CITY INF_CHLAMYDIA MOTHER_MARRIED FATHER_RES_CITY_CODE INF_HEPATITIS_B FATHER_NAME_FIRST FATHER_RES_ADDR1 INF_HEPATITIS_C FATHER_NAME_MIDDLE FATHER_RES_APT INF_NONE FATHER_NAME_LAST FATHER_RES_COUNTRY INF_UNKNOWN FATHER_NAME_SUFFIX FATHER_RES_COUNTRY_CODE OB_CERCLAGE FATHER_DOB SSN_CHILD_REQUESTED OB_CEPHALIC_SUCCESS
67
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics, Birth Certificate FATHER_DOB_MONTH PRINCIPAL_SRCPAY_CODE OB_CEPHALIC_FAILED FATHER_DOB_DAY PRINCIPAL_SOURCE_PAY OB_TOCOLYSIS FATHER_DOB_YEAR TRANS_MOTHER OB_NONE FATHER_AGE TRANS_MOTHER_FAC OB_OTHER FATHER_BIRTH_STATE TRANS_MOTHER_FAC_CODE OB_OTHER_LIT FATHER_BIRTH_STATE_CODE INFANT_LIVING OB_UNKNOWN FATHER_ED INFANT_BREASTFED CHAR_INDUCTION DEATH_OCCURRED MRN_MOTHER MOTHER_RACE_KOREAN DSTATE MRN_CHILD MOTHER_RACE_VIETNAMESE DSTATE_CODE ATTENDANT_NAME_LFM MOTHER_RACE_ASIAN_IND CHAR_AUGMENT ATTENDANT_CODE MOTHER_RACE_ASIAN_OTH CHAR_NON_VERTEX ATTENDANT_TITLE MOTHER_RACE_ASIAN_LIT CHAR_STEROID ATTENDANT_TITLE_CODE MOTHER_RACE_HAWAIIAN CHAR_ANTIBIOTIC ATTENDANT_NCHS_CODE MOTHER_RACE_GUAM CHAR_CHORIOAMNIO CERTIFIER_TITLE MOTHER_RACE_SAMOAN CHAR_MECONIUM CERTIFIER_TITLE_CODE MOTHER_RACE_PAC_OTHER CHAR_FETAL_INTOLERANCE CERTIFIER_DATE_COMP MOTHER_RACE_PAC_LIT CHAR_EPIDURAL TOBACCO_USE_YESNO MOTHER_RACE_OTHER CHAR_NONE TOBACCO_AVG MOTHER_RACE_OTHER_LIT CHAR_OTHER SMOKING_PRIOR MOTHER_RACE_UNKNOWN CHAR_OTHER_LIT CIGS_PRIOR FATHER_ETHNIC_YES CHAR_UNKNOWN CIGS_1TRI FATHER_ETHNIC_UNKNOWN MD_VAGINAL_FORCEPS CIGS_2TRI FATHER_MEXICAN MD_VAGINAL_VACUUM CIGS_3TRI FATHER_PR MD_CES_LABOR_ATTEMPT ALCOHOL_USE FATHER_CUBAN MM_TRANSFUSION BIRROUTE_DESC FATHER_CENT_SOUTH_AMR MM_PERINEAL_LACERAT BIRROUTE_CODE FATHER_HAITIAN MM_RUPTURED_UTERUS BIRPRESENT_DESC FATHER_ETHNIC_OTHER MM_HYSTERECTOMY BIRPRESENT_CODE FATHER_ETHNIC MM_ICU PRENATAL_YESNO FATHER_RACE_WHITE MM_OR_PROC PRENATAL_DATE_BEGIN FATHER_RACE_BLACK MM_NONE PRENATAL_DATE_BEGIN_MONTH FATHER_RACE_AM_INDIAN
MM_UNKNOWN PRENATAL_DATE_BEGIN_DAY FATHER_RACE_AM_IND_LIT MM_OTHER PRENATAL_DATE_BEGIN_YEAR FATHER_RACE_ASIAN MM_OTHER_LIT PRENATAL_DATE_END FATHER_RACE_CHINESE AC_VENT_IMMED PRENATAL_DATE_END_MONTH FATHER_RACE_FILIPINO
68
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics, Birth Certificate AC_VENT_30MIN PRENATAL_DATE_END_DAY FATHER_RACE_KOREAN AC_VENT_MORE_6HOUR PRENATAL_DATE_END_YEAR FATHER_RACE_VIETNAMESE AC_NICU PREG_OUTCOME_NUMBER FATHER_RACE_ASIAN_OTH AC_SURFACTANT PREG_OUTCOME_DATE_MONTH FATHER_RACE_ASIAN_LIT AC_ANTIBIOTIC_SEPSIS PREG_OUTCOME_DATE_DAY FATHER_RACE_HAWAIIAN AC_SEIZURE PREG_OUTCOME_DATE_YEAR FATHER_RACE_GUAM AC_OTHER PRENAT_TOT_VISITS FATHER_RACE_SAMOAN AC_OTHER_LIT MENSES_DATE FATHER_RACE_PAC AC_HYALINE_MEM MENSES_DATE_MONTH FATHER_RACE_PAC_LIT AC_BIRTH_INJURY MENSES_DATE_DAY FATHER_RACE_OTHER ANOM_SPINA MENSES_DATE_YEAR FATHER_RACE_OTHER_LIT AC_NONE LIVE_BIRTHS_LIVING FATHER_RACE_UNKNOWN ANOM_OMPHAL LIVE_BIRTHS_DEAD APGAR_5 AC_UNKNOWN LIVE_BIRTHS_DATE_MONTH APGAR_10 ANOM_CLEFT_LIP LIVE_BIRTHS_DATE_DAY NO_10_APGAR ANOM_ANENCEP LIVE_BIRTHS_DATE_YEAR CalculatedGestationalAge ANOM_DIAPH_HERNIA MOTHER_ETHNIC_YES HSInfantScore ANOM_DOWNS MOTHER_ETHNIC_UNKNOWN PrePregnancy_BMI ANOM_CHROM MOTHER_MEXICAN Calc_MonthOfPrenatalBegan ANOM_NONE MOTHER_PR Birth_Interval ANOM_HEART MOTHER_CUBAN Mother_CalculatedHisp ANOM_CLEFT_PALATE MOTHER_CENT_SOUTH_AMR Father_CalculatedHisp ANOM_GASTRO MOTHER_HAITIAN HsinfantscoreAmended ANOM_LIMB_REDUCT MOTHER_ETHNIC_OTHER Father_CalculatedRace ANOM_DOW_KARYO_TYPE MOTHER_ETHNIC Mother_CalculatedRace ANOM_DOW_KARYO_TYPE_CODE MOTHER_RACE_WHITE Kotelchuck_Indexfafa ANOM_CHR_KARYO_TYPE MOTHER_RACE_BLACK FATHER_PRESENT ANOM_CHR_KARYO_TYPE_CODE MOTHER_RACE_AM_INDIAN Longitude ANOM_HYPOSPADIAS MOTHER_RACE_AM_IND_LIT Latitude ANOM_OTHER MOTHER_RACE_CHINESE tractkey_2010 ANOM_OTHER_LIT MOTHER_RACE_FILIPINO ANOM_UNKNOWN MOTHER_RACE_JAPANESE
69
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics, Death Certificate EVENT_YEAR ETHNIC_CENT_SOUTH_AMR ME_ACTION_COD CertNumber ETHNIC_UNKNOWN ME_APPROVAL STATE_FILE_NUMBER ETHNIC_HAITIAN ME_APPROVE_NUMB DATE_OF_DEATH ACME_CODE ME_CASE_NUMB DATE_OF_DEATH_MONTH ICD_CODE MANNER_DEATH DATE_OF_DEATH_DAY DEATHGROUP_MONTHLY MANNER_DEATH_CODE DATE_OF_DEATH_YEAR DEATHGROUP_INFANT AUTOPSY_DONE TIME_OF_DEATH DEATHGROUP_ANNUAL SURGERY_DATE NAME_FIRST BIRTH_CITY SURGERY_DATE_MONTH NAME_MIDDLE BIRTH_COUNTRY SURGERY_DATE_DAY NAME_LAST BIRTH_COUNTRY_CODE SURGERY_DATE_YEAR NAME_SUFFIX BIRTH_SFN SURGERY_REASON NAME_ALIAS BIRTH_STATE TOBACCO_CODE SEX BIRTH_STATE_CODE TOBACCO_LIT SSN BIRTH_YEAR FEM_PREG_YN AGE DATE_OF_BIRTH INJURY_APT AGE_CODE DATE_OF_BIRTH_MONTH INJURY_AT_WORK AGE_TYPE DATE_OF_BIRTH_DAY INJURY_CITY PLACE_DEATH DATE_OF_BIRTH_YEAR INJURY_COUNTRY PLACE_DEATH_CD ARMY_YESNO INJURY_COUNTRY_CODE MARITAL FATHER_NAME_FIRST INJURY_DATE MARITAL_CODE FATHER_NAME_MIDDLE INJURY_DATE_MONTH RESID_ADDRESS FATHER_NAME_LAST INJURY_DATE_DAY RESID_APT_NO FATHER_NAME_SUFFIX INJURY_DATE_YEAR RESID_CITY MOTHER_NAME_F INJURY_TIME RES_CITY_CODE MOTHER_NAME_M INJURY_HOW_OCCUR RESID_COUNTRY MOTHER_NAME_L INJURY_LOCAT RESID_COUNTRY_CODE SPOUSE_NAME_F INJURY_PLACE RESID_COUNTY SPOUSE_NAME_M INJURY_PLACE_CODE RESID_COUNTY_CODE SPOUSE_NAME_L INJURY_STATE RESID_STATE SPOUSE_NAME_SUF INJURY_STATE_CODE RESID_STATE_CODE DISPOSITION INJURY_TRANSPL RESID_ZIP FAC_CITY INJURY_TRANSPL_CODE RESID_IN_CITY FAC_CITY_CODE INJURY_VEHICLE EDUCATION FAC_CODE INJURY_VEHICLE_CODE EDUCATION_CODE FAC_COUNTY INJURY_ZIP RACE_WHITE FAC_IN_CITY BODY_FOUND RACE_BLACK FAC_NAME CERT_LICENSE
70
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics, Death Certificate RACE_AM_INDIAN FAC_STATE CERT_NAME_FML RACE_ASIAN FAC_STATE_CODE CERT_SIGN_DATE RACE_CHINESE FAC_COUNTRY CERT_TITLE RACE_FILIPINO FAC_COUNTRY_CODE CERT_TITLE_CD RACE_JAPANESE FAC_COUNTY_CODE ATTEND_NAME_FML RACE_KOREAN FUN_ADDRESS CORONER_CONTACTED RACE_VIETNAMESE FUN_CITY DIRECTOR_FLAG RACE_OTH_ASIAN FUN_NAME FINDINGS_USED RACE_HAWAIIAN FUNDIR_LICENSE INFORMANT_REL_CODE RACE_GUAM FUN_SIGN_DATE INFORMANT_RELATION RACE_SAMOAN FUN_STATE LINK_BIR_COUNTRY RACE_OTH_PAC_ISL FUN_ZIP LINK_BIR_COUNTRY_CODE RACE_OTHER ME_ACTION_COD FUN_ZIP RACE_AM_IND_LIT ME_APPROVAL LINK_BIR_DOB RACE_OTH_ASIAN_LIT ME_APPROVE_NUMB LINK_BIR_DOB_MONTH RACE_OTH_PAC_ISL_LIT ME_CASE_NUMB LINK_BIR_DOB_DAY RACE_OTHER_LIT MANNER_DEATH LINK_BIR_DOB_YEAR RACE_UNKNOWN MANNER_DEATH_CODE LINK_BIR_STATE ETHNIC_YESNO AUTOPSY_DONE LINK_BIR_STATE_CODE ETHNIC_MEXICAN SURGERY_DATE CREATE_DATE ETHNIC_PR SURGERY_DATE_MONTH MODIFY_DATE ETHNIC_CUBAN FUNDIR_LICENSE REGISTRAR_DATE ETHNIC_OTHER FUN_SIGN_DATE COMPUTED_AGE ETHNIC_OTHER_LIT FUN_STATE INFANT_DEATH_TYPE RECODE_DEATH_GROUP ACME17 TRANSAX14 ACME1 ACME18 TRANSAX15 ACME2 ACME19 TRANSAX16 ACME3 ACME20 TRANSAX17 ACME4 TRANSAX1 TRANSAX18 ACME5 TRANSAX2 TRANSAX19 ACME6 TRANSAX3 TRANSAX20 ACME7 TRANSAX4 CALCULATEDRACE ACME8 TRANSAX5 CALCULATEDHISP ACME9 TRANSAX6 TRACTKEY_2010 ACME10 TRANSAX7 LONGITUDE ACME11 TRANSAX8 LATTITUDE ACME12 TRANSAX9 ACME13 TRANSAX10
71
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics, Death Certificate ACME14 TRANSAX11 ACME15 TRANSAX12 ACME16 TRANSAX13
Florida Department of Health, Early Steps Program Field Field Status *Child (Last, First) Required at record creation *Child’s DOB Required at record creation Child’s AKA Not Required Child's SSN Required if available Birth Weight (grams) Required if available *Sex Required at Birth County Not Required Birth Country Not Required Birth Hospital Not Required Discharge date Required if available *Child’s Race/Ethnicity Required if initial IFSP is on or after 07/01/09 *Primary Caregiver (Last, First) Required at record creation *Relation of Child to Caregiver Required at record creation Caregiver Marital Status Not Required Caregiver Ed Level Not Required Language in Home Not Required Interpreter Needed Not Required *County Required at record creation *Street Address Required at record creation *City Required at record creation *State Required (FL is the default) at record creation *Zip Code Required at record creation Family Adults Required if an IFSP has been entered Family Children Required if an IFSP has been entered Medicaid Active Now? (Y/N) Not Required Medicaid ID Required if available Primary Health Care Provider (PHCP) Required if available Medicaid Type Not Required Medicaid Start Date Not Required Medicaid End Date Not Required Title XXI? (Y/N) Not Required CMS? (Y/N) Not Required
72
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Field Field Status *Referral Date Required at record creation Initial Contact Date Not Required *Referral Source Required at record creation *Primary Reason for Referral Required at record creation PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY FLAGS REQUIRED if child is served by ES (Participating)
*DEI? (Y/N) Required if available *Part C? (Y/N) Required if available Healthy Start? (Y/N) Required if available ESE? (Y/N) Required if available Primary Eligibility Category/Other Required if available Eligibility Categories (type in codes):
Current ICD9/10 codes At least one ICD9/10 is required for Medicaid billing Notification to LEA Required if available DISPOSITION CODE Required for closure Disposition Date: Required for Closure
Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, Regional Perinatal Intensive Care Centers Regional Perinatal Intensive Care Center (RPICC) Dates: 01/01/2010 through 06/30/2018, filtered by expected delivery date [XDAT] for OB and NE program admission date [Date] for NEO .
DEMOGRAPHICS NEON2_D PGM_DATE EXTRAMLOC MODFY_TIME WK1 CDDC_1 PVDAT EXTRAMZIP UNPADM WK2 CDDC_2 PVNO REC_ADD CNTRDM WRK3 CDDC_3 CMSN REC_CHG MHOND MOMAGE CDDC_4 POVSTS T2CONSENT MNAM ADJ_T_AGE CDDC_5 MAREF EXTRAMLOC CHON CHSSC CDDC_6 MCTY EXTRAMZIP CNAM HBTH CDDC_7 MDCS REC_ADD MSSC SERIOUSHOS CDDC_8 DCHDT REC_CHG DATEDM M_AID_KID CDDC_9 LTFU OCTR UPDATED CDDC_10 CMPL_1 INFRE DATETIME CNSG_1 CMPL_2 MMSTAT DMRID CNSG_2 CMPL_3 MEDLVL EXGC CNSG_3 CMPL_4 HHGYI MARE CNSG_4 CMPL_5 HOUSEHOLD HSN CNSG_5 DELTP FDSA REC_ADD FIRST FBALV FDSC REC_CHG LAST PRPR_1
73
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 RACE NEONATAL SURFACTANT PRPR_2 ETHNIC MODIFIED TRH PRPR_3 FMCNO MODFY_TIME ADJ_NCG PRPR_4 MBDAT UNPADM MEDNO PRPR_5 CHDDAT CNTRDM UPDATED PRPR_6 BWGT STATUS UNIQUE_ID PRPR_7 BLEN RCTY DATETIME PRPR_8 BHCIR BCTY FNEID PRPR_9 SEX DATENE REC_ADD PRPR_10 GES_AGE HBTH REC_CHG GRABDATE NUMB DCDAT OB PAYDATE BORD DCWT MODIFIED PAY_AMOUNT CAKA DCDAT2 MODFY_TIME ANTE_DX CHILDRACE DCDDT UNPADM DELV_DX ADDRESS DCOUT CNTRDM POST_DX CITY DAT_1 STATOS UPDATED ST DAT_2 MMGRAV DATETIME ZIPCO DAT_3 MPTRM UNIQUE_ID CN DAT_4 MPREM DELNN PH1 DAT_5 MPABT LMP PH2 NEON2_B MPALV FOBID PHO3 NEON2_C XDAT DELNN
Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, Medicaid and CHIP Eligibility Medicaid Eligibility: 1 . All Females with Aid Category Effective Date 01-01-2010 through 06-30-2018 2 . Children (boys and girls) age 0-6 with Aid Category Effective Date 01-01-2011 through 06-30-2018
Recipient ID Phone Number Race Code 1 Recipient SSN (No Dashes) Curr Addr Street 1 Gender Code Last Name Curr Addr Street 2 ABD Code First Name City Poverty Code Middle Initial State Aid Category Code Recipient Full Name Zip Code + 4 Aid Category Effective Date Date of Birth Current Address County Code Aid Category End Date
74
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, Medicaid Assignment Plan Medicaid Assignment Plan: 1 . All Females with PMP Effective Date 01-01-2010 through 06-30-2018 2 . Children (boys and girls) age 0-6 with Aid Category Effective Date 01-01-2011 through 06-30-2018
Recipient ID Assignment Plan Code PMP Effective Date PMP End Date PMP Provider Medicaid ID PMP Provider NPI ID and Name
Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, Medicaid FFS Claims Medicaid FFS Claims: 1 . All Females with Date of Service [dos] 01-01-2010 through 06-30-2018 . Paid claims not associated with later ‘Void’ records . No ‘Cap’ records . 2 . Children (boys and girls) age 0-6 with Date of Service [dos] 01-01-2011 through 06-30-2018 . Paid claims not associated with later ‘Void’ records . No ‘Cap’ records .
recip10 AGE diag4 QTY_UNITS_BILLED month AGEMOS drg sak_claim bucket revenue dtl_status NUM_DTL_TOTAL dop icn p2prov SAK_RECIP dos num_dtl trprov nhlevel dos_last icn_adj refprov cde_level_of_care amount pos prsprov p2prov_county amt_check procd p2type recip_county PGMCD mod1 p2spec num_prscrip ABD mod2 trtype num_day_supply REFUGEE mod3 trspec qty_dispense POVERTY mod4 amt_billed rsncode cde_pgm_health proc_fl AMT_ALWD rtype clmform ndc AMT_PER_DIEM elig appcd diag1 amt_pat_liab SEX cde_clm_region diag2 amt_tpl_appld - units diag3 amt_co_pay -
75
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Agency for Health Care Administration, Encounter Encounters: 1 . All Females with Date of Service [dos] 01-01-2010 through 06-30-2018 . Paid claims not associated with later ‘Void’ records . No ‘Cap’ records . 2 . Children (boys and girls) age 0-6 with Date of Service [dos] 01-01-2011 through 06-30-2018 . Paid claims not associated with later ‘Void’ records . No ‘Cap’ records .
PLAN_ID3 SURG_PROCD8 DIAG4 DIAG17 POS DUAL REC_ID SURG_PROCD9 POA4 POA17 TPL SEX RECIP10 SURG_PROCD10 DIAG5 DIAG18 BILLED AGE PLAN_ID SURG_PROCD11 POA5 POA18 DTE_BILLED XOVER SURG_PROCD12 DIAG6 DIAG19 PATIENT_RESP ADMIT_DTE SURG_PROCD13 POA6 POA19 AMOUNT DOS SURG_PROCD14 DIAG7 DIAG20 AMT_TYPE DOS_LAST SURG_PROCD15 POA7 POA20 NDC DOP SURG_PROCD16 DIAG8 DIAG21 CLASS DAYS SURG_PROCD17 POA8 POA21 PRESNUM PLAN_DAYS SURG_PROCD18 DIAG9 DIAG22 DAYS_SUP CLAIM_REF SURG_PROCD19 POA9 POA22 PHAR_ID LINE SURG_PROCD20 DIAG10 DIAG23 DISCHARGE PATIENT_NUM SURG_PROCD21 POA10 POA23 BILL_TYPE SUB_SERV_CAT SURG_PROCD22 DIAG11 DIAG24 DRG PROCD SURG_PROCD23 POA11 POA24 SOI MOD1 SURG_PROCD24 DIAG12 DIAG25 ROM MOD2 SURG_PROCD25 POA12 POA25 MONTH MOD3 REV_CODE DIAG13 SUB_TRPROV_TYPE TRPROV MOD4 UOS POA13 SUB_TRNPI TRPROV_TYPE SURG_PROCD2 DIAG1 DIAG14 SUB_TRPROV TRPROV_SPEC SURG_PROCD3 POA1 POA14 SUB_TRPROV_SPEC P2PROV SURG_PROCD4 DIAG2 DIAG15 SUB_P2PROV_TYPE P2PROV_TYPE SURG_PROCD5 POA2 POA15 SUB_P2NPI P2PROV_SPEC SURG_PROCD6 DIAG3 DIAG16 SUB_P2PROV MMA_PLAN SURG_PROCD7 POA3 POA16 SUB_P2PROV_SPEC PGMCD
76
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Agency for Health Care Administration-The Florida Center, Hospital Discharge Inpatient
Table 1: Fields requested for Inpatient data sys_recid dischdate dis_time poa_ext_in medchgs obserchgs year pprocdate payer poa_ext__a oncochgs behavchgs qtr othdate1-30 zipcode poa_ext__b labchgs otherchgs faclnbr sex ptstate prinproc radchgs tchgs mcare_nbr ethnicity ptcounty othproc1-30 oprmchgs atten_phyi pro_code race ptcountry weekday aneschgs atten_phyn mod_code age msdrg daysproc respchgs oper_phyid fac_region type_serv admitdiag days_proc1-30 phythchgs oper_phynp fac_county dischstat prindiag roomchgs occupchgs othoper_ph pt_contnbr losdays othdiag1-30 nur1chgs speechgs othoper__a ssn adm_prior poa_prin_d nur2chgs erchgs agedays admsrc poa1-30 nur3chgs cardiochgs infantlink condtn ecode1 icuchgs traumachgs birthdate edhr_arr ecode2 ccuchgs recovchgs admitdate adm_time ecode3 pharmchgs laborchgs
Florida Agency for Health Care Administration-The Florida Center, Hospital Outpatient Table 2: Fields requested for Outpatient data sys_recid fac_county sex hr_arrival evalcode5 othproc2 pharmchgs traumachgs year pt_contnbr age edhr_disch othcpt1-30 othproc3 medchgs obserchgs qtr ssn losdays pt_status prindiag othproc4 labchgs gastrochgs faclnbr agedays weekday payer othdiag1-9 atten_phyi radchgs lithochgs mcare_nbr birthdate zipcode reason_cde ecode1 atten_phyn cardiochgs othchgs type_serv begindate ptcounty evalcode1 ecode2 oper_phyid oprmchgs tchgs serv_loc enddate ptstate evalcode2 ecode3 oper_phynp aneschgs pro_code ethnicity ptcountry evalcode3 prinproc othoper_ph recovchgs fac_region race admsrc evalcode4 othproc1 othoper__a erchgs
77
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019 Florida Agency for Health Care Administration-The Florida Center, Hospital Emergency Table 3: Fields requested for Emergency Department data sys_recid fac_county sex hr_arrival evalcode5 othproc2 pharmchgs traumachgs year pt_contnbr age edhr_disch othcpt1-30 othproc3 medchgs obserchgs qtr ssn losdays pt_status prindiag othproc4 labchgs gastrochgs faclnbr agedays weekday payer othdiag1-9 atten_phyi radchgs lithochgs mcare_nbr birthdate zipcode reason_cde ecode1 atten_phyn cardiochgs othchgs type_serv begindate ptcounty evalcode1 ecode2 oper_phyid oprmchgs tch serv_loc enddate ptstate evalcode2 ecode3 oper_phynp aneschgs pro_code ethnicity ptcountry evalcode3 prinproc othoper_ph recovchgs fac_region race admsrc evalcode4 othproc1 othoper__a erchgs
78
Appendix G: Data and Variable Descriptions as Defined by Agency as of September 15, 2019