Transcript Early Learning Challenge Opportunity Board of Early Education and Care September 13, 2011

Early Learning Challenge Opportunity
Board of Early Education and Care
September 13, 2011
0
Overview of Early Learning Challenge
1
Race to the Top – Early Learning
Challenge (RTT-ELC) Overview
OBAMA ADMINISTRATION RELEASES FINAL
APPLICATION FOR RACE TO THE TOP-EARLY
LEARNING CHALLENGE

On August 23rd, the Obama Administration released the application for the Race to the Top
Early Learning Challenge (RTT-ELC), which will provide $500 million in state-level
competitive grants to improve early learning and development programs.

The goal of the RTT-ELC is to better prepare more children with high needs for
kindergarten because children from birth to age 5, including those from low-income
families, need a strong foundation for success in school and beyond.


2
“Investing in the health and educational development of our youngest children is
critical to ensuring America’s long-term strength and competitiveness. With this Early
Learning Challenge, we are spurring innovation in the early education field and putting
more children on a path to learning, opportunity and lifelong success.”
- Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
RTT-ELC will set a high bar and reward states with the strongest plans to improve
the quality of early learning and development programs. In their applications, states
must demonstrate a commitment to building coordinated systems, aligning resources and
policies, and increasing access to high-quality early learning and development programs for
children who need them most.
RTT-ELC will focus on five key areas
of reform:
3

Establishing Successful State Systems by building on the State’s
existing strengths, ambitiously moving forward the state’s early
learning and development agenda, and carefully coordinating
programs across agencies to ensure consistency and sustainability
beyond the grant;

Defining High-Quality, Accountable Programs by creating a
common tiered quality rating and improvement system that is used
across the state to evaluate and improve program performance and to
inform families about program quality;

Promoting Early Learning and Development Outcomes for
Children to develop common standards within the state and
assessments that measure child outcomes, address behavioral and
health needs, as well as inform, engage and support families;

Supporting A Great Early Childhood Education Workforce by
providing professional development, career advancement
opportunities, appropriate compensation, and a common set of
standards for workforce knowledge and competencies; and

Measuring Outcomes and Progress so that data can be used to
inform early learning instruction and services and to assess whether
children are entering kindergarten ready to succeed in elementary
school.
Overview of Program: Selection
Criteria Core Areas
4

(A) Successful State Systems (65 points)
 (A)(1) Demonstrating past commitment to early learning and
development (20 points)
 (A)(2) Articulating the State’s rationale for its early learning and
development reform agenda and goals (20 points)
 (A)(3) Aligning and coordinating early learning and development across
the State (10 points)
 (A)(4) Developing a budget to implement and sustain the work of this
grant (15 points)

(B) High-Quality, Accountable Programs (75 points)
 (B)(1) Developing and adopting a common, statewide Tired Quality Rating
and Improvement System (10 points)
 (B)(2) Promoting Participation in the State’s Tiered Quality Rating and
Improvement System (15 points)
 (B)(3) Rating and monitoring Early Learning and Development Programs
(15 points)
 (B)(4) Validating the effectiveness of the State Tiered Quality Rating and
Improvement System(15 points)
Overview of Program: Selection
Criteria Focused Investment Areas
The State must address in its application:
(1) Two or more of selection criteria in Area (C)
(2) One or more of the selection criteria in Area (B)
(3) One or more of the selection criteria in Area (E)
(C) Promoting Early Learning and Development Outcomes for Children
(60 points)
 (C)(1) Developing and using statewide, high-quality Early Learning and
Development Standards
 (C)(2) Supporting effective uses of Comprehensive Assessment Systems
 (C)(3) Identifying and addressing the health, behavioral, and developmental
needs of Children with High Needs to improve school readiness.
 (C)(4) Engaging and supporting families

5

(D) A Great Early Childhood Education Workforce (40 points)
 (D)(1) Developing a Workforce Knowledge and Competency Framework and a
progression of credentials
 (D)(2) Supporting Early Childhood Educators in improving their
knowledge, skills, and abilities

(E) Measuring Outcomes and Progress (40 points)
 (E)(1) Understanding the status of children’s learning and development at
kindergarten entry
 (E)(2) Building or enhancing an early learning data system to improve
instruction, practices, services, and policies
Signatures and Assurances
(1) The application must be signed by the State’s governor
and by an authorized representative from every Participating
State Agency.

6
Participating State Agency defined as: ”a State agency that administers
public funds related to early learning and development and is participating
in the State Plan. The following State agencies must be Participating State
Agencies: the agencies that administer or supervise the administration of
the Child Care Development Fund (CCDF), the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act Part C and Part B Section 619, State-funded preschool,
Home Visiting, Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (ESEA), the Head Start State Collaboration Grant, the State Advisory
Council on Early Care and Education, and Title V Maternal and Child Health
Block Grant; and the State’s Child Care Licensing Agency and the State’s
Education Agency. Other State agencies, such as the agencies that
administer or supervise the administration of Child Welfare, Mental Health,
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Community-Based Child Abuse
Prevention, the Child and Adult Care Food Program, and the Adult
Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA), are encouraged to participate
in the State Plan.”
(2) The State also must submit a certification from the State’s
Attorney General that the State’s descriptions of, and
statements and conclusions regarding, State laws, and
regulations contained in the State’s application are complete
and accurate and are reasonable interpretations of those
State laws and regulations.
Eligibility Requirements

7
The State must meet the following requirements to be eligible to compete for
funding under this program:
 (a) The Lead Agency must have executed with each Participating State
Agency an MOU or other binding agreement that the State must attach to
its application, describing the Participating State Agency’s level of
participation in the grant. (See Appendix C of the notice.) At a minimum,
the MOU or other binding agreement must include an assurance that the
Participating State Agency agrees to use, to the extent applicable-• (1) A set of statewide Early Learning and Development Standards;
• (2) A set of statewide Program Standards;
• (3) A statewide Tiered Quality Rating and Improvement System; and
• (4) A statewide Workforce Knowledge and Competency Framework
and progression of credentials.

(b) The State must have an operational State Advisory Council on Early
Care and Education that meets the requirements described in section
642B(b) of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9837b).

(c) The State must have submitted in FY 2010 an updated MIECHV State
plan and FY 2011 Application for formula funding under the Maternal,
Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting program (see section 511 of
Title V of the Social Security Act, as added by section 2951 of the
Affordable Care Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-148)).
Massachusetts Award Information
Every State was ranked according to its share of the
national population of children ages birth through five
years old from low-income families – based on those
populations, budget caps were developed.
8

Massachusetts is a “Category 4” state and is eligible
to apply for up to $50M

Selection of grantees may consider the need to
ensure that systems are developed in States with
large, high-poverty, rural communities (including
States with high percentages of high-poverty
populations in rural areas, as well as States with high
absolute numbers of high-poverty individuals in rural
areas), and awards may be granted to high-quality
applications out of rank order to meet this need.
Overview of Five Priorities
9
Overview of Program Priorities
10

Priority 1: Absolute Priority–Promoting School
Readiness for Children with High Needs.

Priority 2: Competitive Preference Priority–Including
all Early Learning and Development Programs in the
Tiered Quality Rating and Improvement System. (10
points)

Priority 3: Competitive Preference Priority–
Understanding the Status of Children’s Learning and
Development at Kindergarten Entry. (10 points)

Priority 4: Priority 4: Invitational Priority–Sustaining
Program Effects in the Early Elementary Grades.

Priority 5: Invitational Priority–Encouraging PrivateSector Support.
One Absolute Priority
Must be addressed
Priority 1: Absolute Priority–Promoting School Readiness for Children with
High Needs.
11

To meet this priority, the State’s application must comprehensively and
coherently address how the State will build a system that increases the quality
of Early Learning and Development Programs for Children with High Needs so
that they enter kindergarten ready to succeed.

The State’s application must demonstrate how it will improve the quality of
Early Learning and Development Programs by
 Integrating and aligning resources and policies across Participating State
Agencies and by designing and implementing a common, statewide Tiered
Quality Rating and Improvement System.
 In addition, to achieve the necessary reforms, the State must make
strategic improvements in those specific reform areas that will most
significantly improve program quality and outcomes for Children with High
Needs.

Therefore, the State must address those criteria from within each of the
Focused Investment Areas (sections (C) Promoting Early Learning and
Development Outcomes for Children, (D) A Great Early Childhood
Education Workforce, and (E) Measuring Outcomes and Progress) that it
believes will best prepare its Children with High Needs for kindergarten
success.
Competitive Preference Priority
Area of particular interest for which an applicant
may earn additional points
Priority 2: Competitive Preference Priority–Including all Early
Learning and Development Programs in the Tiered Quality
Rating and Improvement System. (10 points)

12
Priority 2 is designed to increase the number of children from birth to
kindergarten entry who are participating in programs that are
governed by the State’s licensing system and quality standards, with
the goal that all licensed or State-regulated programs will participate.
The State will receive points for this priority based on the extent to
which the State has in place, or has a High-Quality Plan to implement
no later than June 30, 2015–

(a) A licensing and inspection system that covers all programs
that are not otherwise regulated by the State and that regularly
care for two or more unrelated children for a fee in a provider
setting; provided that if the State exempts programs for reasons
other than the number of children cared for, the State may
exclude those entities and reviewers will score this priority only
on the basis of non-excluded entities; and

(b) A Tiered Quality Rating and Improvement System in which all
licensed or State-regulated Early Learning and Development
Programs participate.
Competitive Preference Priority
Area of particular interest for which an applicant
may earn additional points

Priority 3: Competitive Preference Priority–Understanding the
Status of Children’s Learning and Development at Kindergarten
Entry. (10 points)

To meet this priority, the State must, in its application–
 (a) Demonstrate that it has already implemented a Kindergarten
Entry Assessment that meets selection criterion (E)(1) by indicating
that all elements in Table (A)(1)-12 are met; or

13
(b) Address selection criterion (E)(1) and earn a score of at least 70
percent of the maximum points available for that criterion.
Invitational Priorities I
Areas the Department is particularly interested in;
do not earn extra points and no preference given
Priority 4: Invitational Priority–Sustaining Program Effects in the
Early Elementary Grades.
 The Departments are particularly interested in applications that describe
the State’s High-Quality Plan to sustain and build upon improved early
learning outcomes throughout the early elementary school years,
including by- (a) Enhancing the State’s current standards for kindergarten through
grade 3 to align them with the Early Learning and Development
Standards across all Essential Domains of School Readiness;
(b) Ensuring that transition planning occurs for children moving from
Early Learning and Development Programs to elementary schools;
 (c) Promoting health and family engagement, including in the early
grades;

14

(d) Increasing the percentage of children who are able to read and
do mathematics at grade level by the end of the third grade; and

(e) Leveraging existing Federal, State, and local resources, including
but not limited to funds received under Title I and Title II of ESEA, as
amended, and IDEA.
Two Invitational Priorities II
Areas the Department is particularly interested in;
do not earn extra points and no preference given
Priority 5: Invitational Priority–Encouraging Private-Sector
Support.

15
The Departments are particularly interested in applications that
describe how the private sector will provide financial and other
resources to support the State and its Participating State Agencies or
Participating Programs in the implementation of the State Plan.
Partnering for Healthy Development for
Children Birth through Age 8
State
Partners
Private
Partnerships
Community
Supports
Federal
Partners
•EEC
•ESE
• DHCD
• EI (DPH)
• DCF
• IHEs
• Children’s
Cabinet
•WGBH
• EEA
•United Way
• Hospitals
• Pediatricians
• Dentists
• Nutrition
• Local
Government
•Parks and
Recreation
• WIC
• ACF
• DOE
•Head Start
•Home
visiting
Massachusetts Early Learning
Challenge Leadership Team
BOARD: Eleonora Villegas-Reimers, Ph.D.
AGENCIES
WITH
VENDOR/CONTRACT RELATIONSHIP: Wayne Ysaguirre
LEGISLATORS: Representative Alice Hanlon Peisch
BUSINESS/CIVIC:

Kim Haskins

Peg Sprague
HIGHER EDUCATION: Marta Rosa
STATE ASSOCIATIONS:

Amy O’Leary

Karen Frederick

Nancy Topping Tailby

Greg Nelson
17
K-12 LINKAGES:

Tom Kingston

Jillayne Flanders

Jason Sachs
Alignment of EEC Work with ELC
Priorities
18
Massachusetts Context

The total population in Massachusetts has increased slightly since
the 2000 Census.

In 2010, the total population was 6,547,629.

Of the total population, 1,517,090 or 23% are children birth to age
18.

Families* with their own children under the age of 18, account for
44.9% of families in Massachusetts.

The average family size of all families in Massachusetts is 3.08.
*According to the Census "Families" consist of a householder and one or more other people related to the
householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. They do not include same-sex married couples even if
the marriage was performed in a state issuing marriage certificates for same-sex couples. Same-sex
couples are included in the families category if there is at least one additional person related to the
householder by birth or adoption.
Children Birth to Age 5

There are 442,592 children birth
through age 5 living in Massachusetts.

This accounts for 6.8% of the
population.

Children birth to age 5 are living in
10.4% (167,026) of the families in
Massachusetts.
EEC System Components and Strategic Directions
EEC Strategic
Directions
Standards,
Assessment
and
Accountability
Informed
Families and
Public
Finance
Quality
Family Support,
Access, and
Affordability
EEC System
Components
Governance
Early Ed &
Care and K12 Linkages
Workforce
Communications
Regulations
21
Workforce &
Professional
Development
Infrastructure
Closing the Achievement Gap:
Accountability for Quality and Outcomes
Teacher
Quality
Program
Quality
(QRIS)
Community
and Family
Context
Child
Outcomes
(formative and
summative
assessment)
22
Community Input Meetings

EEC has engaged in 8 meetings across the state to discuss the
Early Learning Challenge with early education and care providers,
administrators and others in the field.

Over 200 participants attended these meetings.

EEC partnered with the Bessie Tartt Wilson Initiative for Children,
Inc. and the United Way in convening these meetings.

Meeting Schedule:
 August 17th - for YMCAs
 August 24th at UMass Boston (with United Way)
 Six meetings (with Bessie Tartt Wilson Initiative for Children):
The Regional Meeting Schedule:
Monday, July 11, 1:30-3:00pm
Hampden Cty Regional
Employment Board
1441 Main Street, Suite 111
Springfield, MA 01103
Tuesday, July 26, 1:30-3:00pm
James A. Houlares Early Learning
Center
Community Teamwork, Inc.
126 Phoenix Avenue
Lowell, MA 01852
23
Friday, July 29, 10:00-11:30am
Bessie Tartt Wilson Initiative for
Children
142 Berkeley Street
Boston, MA 02116
Monday, August 8, 10:00-11:30am
Worcester YWCA- Founder's room, 1st
Fl
One Salem Square
Worcester, MA 01608
Thursday, August 4, 10:00-11:30am
Bessie Tartt Wilson Initiative for
Children
142 Berkeley Street
Boston, MA 02116
Wednesday, August 10, 10:00-11:30am
Bridgewater State University
Dunn Conference Suite, in Crimson Hall
200 East Campus Drive
Bridgewater, MA 02035
Discussion Question:
Comprehensive Assessment Systems
What is the state strategy for answering the basic
question: how are our children doing?
24

Given the tools of screenings (ASQ and ASQ: SE),
assessments (formative in QRIS), and norm-referenced
assessments (PVT, EVT, Executive functioning), when
and where in the birth through eight continuum should
these tools be used?

How do we ensure the workforce is trained in applying
results and collecting data?
Discussion Question:
Linking Schools and Communities to Promote Healthy
Child Development and Family Engagement
The role the state (EEC and other agencies, including DESE)
play in improving linkages among public schools and
community based supports – including early childhood
programs, birth-5 family support, out of school time, health,
child welfare.
25

How can sectors, which support child development, align under
a single frame of child development and family engagement?

What specific ideas, resources, activities, operations, and tools
could help these linkages take root and foster?
Discussion Question:
Family Engagement and Strengthening
Using the Strengthening Families framework as a foundation for discussion
26

What is the optimal state (or EEC in concert with other state agencies?)
role in ensuring that the needs of all families, with a focus on high needs
families, have supports as articulated in the framework?

What are innovative ideas for approaching the challenge of meeting
families needs for
a) Social networks
b) Understanding children’s Growth/development
c) Understanding and meeting Social emotional needs of children
d) Building resiliency. What are the gaps, how can they be filled
from state systems perspective?
Discussion Question:
Quality Rating and Improvement System
How can EEC ensure that programs participate in and move
up the QRIS system?
27

What is the appropriate time frame for meeting all
requirements?

What are the obstacles that prevent programs from
moving forward and how can they be overcome?

What do small providers need to succeed in
entering/moving up the system?

What is the appropriate EEC role in providing support for
participation and what support should be localized?
Discussion Question:
Supporting the early educator workforce through
practice-based support
Respecting the goal of building leadership and developing
expertise within the scope of the each program, how
does the state provide support?
28

How do we build a system of real time practice based
supports for educators?

What should be the standards/rubrics around effective
coaching that adequately address the goal of building
capacity within the program and educators themselves
and how can we design a system that achieves results
but is economically sustainable?
Discussion Question:
Compensation
Given that the state cannot increase compensation for all
early educators, what are innovative ideas for;
29

How can the state leverage its limited resources to
create progress in improving compensation?

How we can expand the definition of compensation to
include non financial benefits like professional
development?

How can programs reward and incent professionals in
ways that are not financial?
Opportunities

Opportunities
Governance
 All Children of high
need
 QRIS including:

• Formative
• Environmental
• Adult Child
Interactions
Interagency
relationships
 Higher Education
Strategy
 Early Childhood
Information
Structure
 Private sector
commitments

Obstacles






30

Integrated Practice
across health, Child
welfare and TANF
Funding QRIS
KRA
Retail Local district
practice
Lack of wholesale
early childhood
policies for Pre-k to
3 alignment
Data infrastructure
for early learning
childhood
information