First 5 and Developmental Services
Download
Report
Transcript First 5 and Developmental Services
FIRST 5 AND DEVELOPMENTAL
SERVICES
Building Partnerships for Our Youngest
Children
GOAL OF DISCUSSION
TWO CALIFORNIA SYSTEMS CHARGED WITH MEETING
CHILDREN’S NEEDS
First 5 Commissions
What they look like and how they function
Regional Centers
What they look like and how they function
WHERE DO THEY MEET AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN
THEY DO?
BACKGROUND ON FIRST 5
COMMISSIONS
County entities
Difference between state and county commissions
Role of Board of Supervisers
Autonomy of commissions
Required to address health, early learning, family
functioning, systems change
58 learning laboratories
Traditional focus on school readiness
High need target neighborhoods
Family literacy
Access to preschool and high quality ECE
Full inclusion
BACKGROUND, cont.
Constraints on First 5 Commissions
Non-supplantion provision
Can only serve children 0 – 5 and their families
County commission funds must serve children in their
own counties
Unusual structure, compared to other major servicedeliver systems
Constraints on Regional Centers
Entitlement without commensurate funding
Need to manage demand
Unusual structure, compared to other major service-
deliver systems
COUNTY FIRST 5 COMMISSIONS AND CHILDREN
WITH SPECIAL NEEDS
Most commissions address behavioral and
social/emotional issues – what regional centers do not
address – through various programs.
Commissions are increasingly funding screening in
settings such as pediatricians offices and ECE settings.
Commissions aim to reduce pressure on regional
center system by promoting healthy births.
Many commissions are trying to absorb children not
eligible for services from regional centers.
QUESTIONS ON BACKGROUND,
STRUCTURE, OR ACTIVITIES OF
FIRST 5?
IMPACT OF BUDET CRISIS
First 5 commissions’ response
State First 5 commission
County First 5 commissions
Poll #1
The state budget crisis started three years ago. In your
experience, are families having a harder time getting
services now? NO--I haven't seen any change; YES--harder
to get agencies to answer the phone; YES--longer wait
times; YES--families are paying more out of pocket now;
YES--families aren't qualifying for as many services
RECENT BUDGET HISTORY
Last year’s interim budget agreement pitted the Regional Center
system against First 5 by placing Prop 1D on the May ballot.
Prop 1D called for diversion of more than 50% of First 5 funds
for 5 years.
In the Governor’s proposed 2009-10 budget, the diverted funds
were directed toward several programs, but most significantly,
the DDS budget.
Prop 1D failed passage statewide by a margin of 65% - 35%.
RECENT HISTORY, cont.
When the Legislature passed the final budget-related bills in July,
2009, the Governor vetoed $50 million for the Early Start Program with
this message:
“I am reducing Regional Center Purchase of Services by $50,000,000 for
services to children up to age five, as these services are due to program
growth and thus eligible for funding from the California Children and
Families Commission. I am directing the Secretary for the Health and
Human Services Agency, the Department of Developmental Services, and
the Department of Finance to immediately request funds from the
Commission for this purpose.
I do not intend to pursue separate legislation changing eligibility or
services for these children for purposes of achieving these savings. I urge
the Commission to provide supplemental funding for the growth in these
services.”
CURRENT STATUS
Last month, First 5 CA approved contribution of $50
million to DDS for current year.
This does not address the previous reduction that
resulted in a higher bar to entry into Early Start
(Prevention Program) or next year’s need.
Poll #2
Since eligibility for Early Start has changed, are families
less likely to be referred to Early Start program? YES/NO
GOVERNOR’S JANUARY BUDGET
PROPOSAL
First 5 Account
State Dept to which funds are allocated
Counties account (account from which funds are
transferred to county Children and Families Trust
Funds)
DDS
$
194.0
Mass Media account
DDS
$
6.0
Mass Media account
DSS
$
87.0
Education account
DSS
$
97.0
Child Care account
DSS
$
52.0
R&D account
DSS
$
68.0
Admin. account
DSS
$
22.0
Unallocated account
DSS
$
24.0
$
550.0
TOTAL
Amount
CHALLENGE: MEETING ALL
CHILDREN’S NEEDS
How can we resist pitting some children’s programs against
others?
Example: CWS advocates response
Bringing DD and First 5 advocates together
Importance of Early Intervention: Collaborating for Our
Children’s Future – Principles of Agreement
Principles of Agreement:
Regional centers – through the Early Start program and the
Lanterman Act – provide critical services to children born with
developmental needs and/or experiencing developmental
delays, with the goal of linking them to needed services and
optimizing their development.
First 5 commissions provide critical services to children whose
needs are not otherwise met by state-funded/state-mandated
services, with the goal of promoting child health, school
readiness (including social, emotional, and cognitive
development), and improved family functioning.
Principles of Agreement:
The earliest and most targeted interventions are the
most effective.
Early screening and assessment are critical to ensure
access to the most appropriate services.
Families and children frequently have multiple needs
and require services from multiple programs or
agencies.
Principles of Agreement:
Regional centers are statutorily responsible for only a
segment of the child population that experiences
developmental and/or health problems.
First 5 commissions are statutorily responsible for
identifying and addressing needs of children that are not
addressed by other state- or locally-funded programs.
Principles of Agreement:
No single agency can meet the wide range of child and
family needs in California; therefore, it benefits all agencies
and the children they serve to collaborate and coordinate
so as to maximize available assistance to all children with
health, development, social-emotional, and cognitive
needs.
California’s children are ill-served when programs that
meet the needs of different groups are pitted against one
another.
Is there an upside?
Can the struggle to meet children’s early needs lead to any
new models of collaboration? What are model
approaches?
Poll #3
Are there new partnerships in local service delivery
systems that are helping to assist families in light of
budget cuts? YES/NO
Follow-up survey question: What new partnerships in local
service delivery systems do you know of that are helping
families get access to needed services?
QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION
Discussion of local experience and protection of
children’s programs.
Questions about controversy and/or attacks on First
5?
Anything else.....