Transcript QRIS as a Framework for Quality

Finding Common
Ground: a Quality
Framework for Early
Childhood Care and
Education
Louise Stoney
Alliance for Early Childhood Finance
Dialogue with Minnesota ECE Leaders
January, 2009
Early Care and Education Providers
are public and private
Family
Child Care
Home
Head
Start
Program
Nursery
Schools
Preschools
School-Age
Child Care
Relative,
Neighbor
or Nanny
Non-Profit
Child Care
Center
Nanny
Service
Proprietary
Child Care
Center
Thorny Issues can be
a Win/Win
•
•
•
•
Universal and Targeting “at-risk” children
Cognitive and Social Emotional
College Degrees and on-the-job Training
Funding quality programs and funding
children
The best results come from systems that
draw upon a range of strategies linked by
common goals and vision.
Policy makers and
voters
increasingly
agree that…
High Quality
Early Care and
Education is
Essential
Public Investment in ECE
typically linked to
Accountability for Early Learning
 Tremendous national focus on highquality, research-based interventions
that produce good child outcomes
 Increasing focus on teacher quality
 Increasing demand for aligned curricula
& child assessment
ECE Revenue
Consumer tuition is the largest source of revenue,
roughly 57% of total industry receipts
Private sector revenue has increased dramatically but
still less than 4% of total
Private
Government funding
@ 39% of total, and
is primarily portable
Families
$ (vouchers
or tax benefits)
Sector
Gov't
Higher Standards = Higher Costs
Higher Costs = Higher Prices
When consumers pay most of the bill
and third party funding is targeted to a
select few
the result is CONFLICT
ECE Has Multiple Sub-Systems
(or “silos”)
Head
Start
Program
Family
Child Care
Home
Silos typically have their own:
•Standards
•Procedures
•Forms
School-Age
•Rate Policies, etc.
Child Care
And each silo fights
for it’s own $$
Relative,
Neighbor
or Nanny
Non-Profit
Child Care
Center
Nanny
Service
Nursery
Schools
Preschools
Proprietary
Child Care
Center
A “Separate Silos” Approach
Limits Results
Separate silos often…
• encourage competition & make
collaboration difficult
• discourage providers from tapping all
available funds.
• result in duplicative administration or
“dueling” standards.
Good results come from a sustained,
collaborative, system-wide approach to ECE.
This requires standards framed as a “big tent”
so that everyone is moving in the same
direction.
High Quality ECE is
possible
in all ECE settings
“…the core concepts of
neuroscience remain
equally valid,
whatever the
program category,
administrative
structure, or funding
mechanism.”
Principal Elements of
Quality
 Highly skilled teachers
 Age-appropriate curricula and
stimulating materials in a safe physical setting
 A language rich environment
 Warm, responsive interactions between staff and
children
 High and consistent levels of child participation
 Small class sizes and high adult-to-child ratios
A New Approach: QRIS
(Quality Rating and Improvement System)
 Voluntary accountability system and
infrastructure to support and sustain
quality in all early learning settings
 Funding to help early learning
settings improve and sustain quality
 Benchmarks to inform parent
consumers about quality early learning
 A national movement, with growing
recognition in DC
Quality Rating & Improvement System
(structured as “steps” to quality)
Standards
for
Programs
Standards
for
Practitioners
Early Learning
Guidelines
(Outcomes for Children)
A Standards-Based ECE System Design
Quality Standards
for Programs and Practitioners
MN QRIS--incorporates standards
from: cc licensing, Head Start,
school readiness, accreditation,
etc.
Engagement &
Outreach
(Selling the Vision)
for Programs,
Practitioners, &
Consumers
Support/Infrastructure to Meet Standards
Programs: Technical Assistance & Support
Practitioners: Professional Development
(based on MN QRIS)
Quality Early
Care &
Education
System
Financing Linked to Standards
For programs, practitioners & consumers
(CCDF, Head Start, School Readiness, United
Way, MELF, tax credits, parent fees, etc.)
Monitoring &
Accountability
(to ensure
compliance with
standards)
for Programs &
Practitioners
Financing Linked to Standards
For programs, practitioners & consumers
(CCDF, Head Start, School Readiness, United
Way, MELF, tax credits, parent fees, etc.)
Total ECE Program
Revenue
linked to standards
Portable Subsidy & Tuition
Direct Program Support
(CCAP, Pre-K Allowances, private
(Head Start, School Readiness,
scholarships, tax credits,
parent fees, and more…)
ECE quality grants, TEACH, and
more…)
Layering Portable & Direct Subsidies
15%
Tuition
65%
Subsidy add-on
52%
Subsidy
PreK
Merit Award
7%
20%
Ed&Retention
21%
Center with 10% Subsidy Enrollment Center with 85% Subsidy Enrollment
A Final Reminder
• Keep your eyes on the prize – shared, system-wide
goals, standards & policies that support high quality ECE.
• Do not get lost in current practice – sometimes we
get so focused on our current experiences we assume that
it defines the future. Remember that Parent Aware is a “test
run”. Learn from it. Be willing to change what doesn’t work
and to build on what does.
• Recognize that QRIS is an incredible
opportunity--to unite the field of ECE, to learn from best
practice, and to make the Minnesota ECE system really
work for children, families and providers. Seize that
opportunity.
Extra Slides
To use if there are questions…
A Standards-Based ECE System Design
Quality Standards
for Programs and Practitioners
MN Parent Aware--incorporates
standards from: cc licensing,
Head Start, school readiness,
accreditation, etc.
Engagement &
Outreach
(Selling the Vision)
for Programs,
Practitioners, &
Consumers
Support/Infrastructure to Meet Standards
Programs: Technical Assistance & Support
Practitioners: Professional Development
(based on MN Parent Aware)
Planning/Oversight
1.
Review, revise, evaluate, update
QRIS standards
2. Create policies to enable all T/TA g
by various entities to focus on
QRIS
Quality Early
Care &
Education
System
Financing Linked to Standards
For programs, practitioners & consumers
(CCDF, Head Start, School Readiness, United
Way, MELF, tax credits, parent fees, etc.)
Family, Friend & Neighbor Providers
(Regulation Exempt)
Can choose to enter above system, via Support/
Infrastructure "door“
Or can choose to remain outside the system -- with
private fees and/or CCAP subsidies at the basic rate
Would be a site for home-visiting services for
targeted children (in addition to the child's home)
Monitoring &
Accountability
(to ensure
compliance with
standards)
for Programs &
Practitioners
3. Create data systems & planning tools
focused on QRIS
4. Establish goals/benchmarks and
track progress
5. Encourage: funding links to QRIS
shared budgeting/rate-setting
strategies, coordinated RFPs, etc.
Additional Supports for Parents
Playgroups, Parent Ed (ECFE)
Home visiting/Family Resource Centers
Early Screening
Workforce Reforms (part-time jobs, flexible
schedules, etc.)
Paid Family Leave
and other supports…