Early Learning Coalition...2013/11/19 · Melbourne Barnes and Noble store every Friday. Toy Drive for SR Families: The Beach 98.5 Radio Station has partnered with The Avenue Viera

Page 1 of 3 November 2013 Minutes

Early Learning Coalition of Brevard County, Inc.

Minutes: Board of Directors Meeting Date/Time: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 at 4:00 p.m. Location: Early Learning Coalition 1018 Florida Ave, Rockledge, FL 32955 Members Present: Terri Barlow, Susan Bragonje, Mark Broms, Bridget Chiuchiolo, Priscilla DeNino, Lori

Duester, Mike Durante, Ian Golden, Nancy Grzesik, Jeffery Harrison, Paul Hilburn, Mica Layne, Beth Mills, Tom Peer and Myrna Shimei

Excused Absent members: Cathy Beam, Natalie Jackson and Althea Puzio

Unexcused Absent Members: Marci Brilley Staff Present: Sky Beard, Jessica Beecham, Michelle Dockery, Chris Donato, Gwen Hertlein-Haber, Sue

Falcioni, LaShaundra McGhee and Jennifer Shields Guest/Public: N/A

Called to order: Nancy Grzesik called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m. Introductions were conducted and quorum was established.

Agenda Item Summary/Discussion Action/Follow-up Consent Items

a. Minutes: Sept 19, 2013 i. Change to the Executive/Finance Committee

cancellation because the Board retreat was scheduled for the next day.

b. Directors Report

Myrna motioned for the Consent Items to be approved once change is complete. Mike Durante seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by all Board members.

Committee Reports:

Executive/Finance Committee:

Agenda Items included:

Nancy Grzesik reported to the Board that the Executive/Finance Committee met on November 11, 2013.

• Bank accounts: o Signatures for the Committee members were

discussed. o Credit card options were discussed.

• December Board meeting: to be discussed later • Grimaldi’s: to be discussed later • Strategic planning meeting feedback: to be discussed

later • Performance review of Executive Director: to be

completed next meeting

No Action/Follow up Required

Old Business Finance Report and Waiting List/New Enrollment Update:Cathie Odom, Director of Business Operations, reported to the Board the enrollment numbers are still lower than expected. However, Coalition staff is in the process of doing some determination of enrollment, but there is not a good system in place to gather data. Coalition staff is looking to find out why families are leaving the School Readiness program.

Currently there are about 1,700 children on the wait list. On Friday, November 22, 2013, Coalition staff will be hosting a School Readiness round-up in the Melbourne and Rockledge offices. This will be a new approach, using the controlled round-up similar to the VPK round-ups with families being called off the wait list. The families have been notified by



phone and given the details about what documents to bring. There are about 100 families scheduled to come in for this SR round-up. Outcome will be reported to the Board at the January meeting. Strategic Planning Following Up:

The Board members signed up for key area committees. January meeting will be breakout sessions of committees. Next year all committees will speak at each Board meeting.

Nancy reminded the Board of the key areas with the champions.

Provider Visits Follow-up:

Nancy Grzesik inquired if any Board members have any other details they would like to share about their provider visits. There was much discussion regarding the quality piece and how this piece is missing from some centers. The members discussed how parents make the choice to have their children attend centers that may not have as high quality care as others may. Kevin Carraro explained the CCR&R process and the Quality Checklist, no recommendations can be given and that it is the parent’s choice of which center to enroll their children. In the end, it is usually a choice of convenience.

Members inquired who sets the standards of quality for the providers. It was explained that Legislation sets the standards and DCF licensing enforces them. Parents are able to go on to the DCF website to view the providers licensing and if there have been any violations. However, the DCF website has been down since April. LaShaundra McGhee, Director of Quality Assurance, thanked the board for their expressed concerns. Reminded the Board that the visits were for the Board members to see how important quality is in the centers. At an upcoming annual provider meeting there will be a piece on provider education: What does quality look like? Fraud Update:There was no update at this time.

Child Care Provider Concern Follow-up:

Sky informed the Board the Coalition staff meet with the Lawyer. With the changes with the DCF investigation, the Lawyer had a concern that with termination without proof was not something he would recommend. However, a certified letter was sent out to the provider with knowledge of what happened and excerpts from the School Readiness agreement was sent indicating the portions of the agreement that may have been in violation.


November 2013 Board of Directors Minutes Approved: Respectfully Submitted, Approved

__________________________________ _________________________________________

Signature Date Signature Date Executive Coordinator Executive Director

New Business Statewide Priorities:

Coalitions have met and identified top priorities and all Coalitions are discussing the same priorities. The handouts were passed out to the Board. At this time, there is a Quality Bill to be brought to legislative session in 2014. Health and safety are still hot topics.

December Board Meeting:

Nancy reminded the Board that in past years the December meeting has been cancelled. However, a motion needs to be made for the December 17, 2013 meeting to be cancelled.

Chocolate:

Sky explained that a business relationship has developed with the owners of Grimaldi’s Candies. The Coalition will be collaborating with Grimaldi’s for a fundraiser (to go to match) and the Board can participate. The fundraising packets were passed out to all Board members and due back by Monday, December 2, 2013.

Barnes and Noble Holiday Book Drive:

Sky informed the Board that the book drive kick off was on Saturday, November 2, 2013. Coalition staff is continually picking up books from the Melbourne Barnes and Noble store every Friday.

Toy Drive for SR Families:

The Beach 98.5 Radio Station has partnered with The Avenue Viera for the 2013 Toy Drive. Several local businesses will have drop boxes for toys. Board member are welcome to help supply wrapping paper and gifts.

No Action/Follow up Required Ian Golden motioned for the approval to cancel Board of Directors meeting scheduled for December 17, 2013. Tom Peer seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by all Board members.

Board Updates Providers:

The provider representatives had no updates at this time.

Licensing:

Tom Peer the DCF Licensing representative had no updates at this time.


Public Comment

Sky informed the Board members of a LEAD Brevard Getting Governance Right training signup sheet was available to the Board members.


Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 5:35 p.m.

Next Meeting December 17, 2013 meeting cancelled.

Board of Directors Meeting Tuesday, November 19, 2013 4:00 pm

AGENDA

I. Call to Order

II. Coalition Roll Call by Self Introduction

III. Consent Items a. Minutes: October 15, 2013 b. Director’s Report

IV. Committee Reports

a. Executive / Finance Committee

V. Old Business a. Finance Report and Waiting List/New Enrollment Update b. Strategic Planning Follow Up

1. Processing of Child Care Provider Visits 2. Meeting Result Summaries 3. Role of the Champions and Committees 4. Next Steps

c. Fraud Update d. Child Care Provider Concern Follow Up

VI. New Business

a. Statewide Priorities b. December Board Meeting c. Chocolate d. Barnes and Noble Holiday Book Drive e. Toy Drive for School Readiness Families

VII. Board Updates

a. Providers b. Licensing

VIII. Public Comment

IX. Adjourn

Next Meeting: TBD

EARLY LEARNING (OALITION

OF BREVARD COUNTY, IN(.Board of Directors Meeting (Annual Meeting)

Tuesday, October t5,2OI3 at 9:00 a.m.

Rockledge Country Club, 1591 S. Fiske Blvd., Rockledge, FL 32955

Terri Barlow, Cathy Beam, Susan Bragonje, Marci Brilley, Mark Broms, Bridget Chiuchiolo,

Lori Duester, Nancy Grzesik, Jeffery Harrison, Paul Hilburn, Natalie Jackson, Mica Layne,

Beth Mills, and Althea Puzio

Mike Durante and Myrna Shimei

Priscilla DeNino, lan Golden, and Tom Peer

Sky Beard, Ann Beecham, Jessica Beecham, Kevin Carraro, Dennise Corder-Sarnese,

Michelle Dockery, Chris Donato, Sue Falcioni, Gwen Hertlein-Haber, LaShaundra McGhee,

Cathie Odom, Jennifer Shields

Miriam (Dr. Mimi) B, Hull, Ph.D.

Nancy Grzesik called the meeting to order at 9:1L a.m. lntroductions were conducted and

quorum was established.

MINUIES:

DATEÆIME.

LO4TION:

MEMBERS PRESENT:

EXCUSEÞ ABSENI METvIBERS:

UNEXCUSEÞ ABSENT METVIBERS :

STAFF PRESENT:

GUESIIPUBLI(:

4LLED TO ORÞER:

ACilDA fÍEil SUlililARY/Þ|S(lJSSlOtl A(TION/FOIIOW.\JP

lntroduction Sky Beard introduced the facilitator of the meeting, Dr. Mimi

Hull. Dr. Mimi reviewed with the Board and the ELC

Leadership team (ELC LST) of the agenda for the strategic

planning part of the meeting:

o To have a shared understanding of what is strategic

planning and the role of the Board

¡ To do a SWOT analysis and Environmental Scan

¡ To determine the Key Result Areas (KRA)

o To decide on "champions" forthe plan

After reviewing the strategic planning piece of the meeting,

the Board members watched a documentary that illustratesbusiness leaders'stake in early education called "The Raising

of America - Are We Crazy About Our Kids?" The video can

been see at the following link:http://www.americaspromise.orglNews-a nd-Events/News-

a n d-Featu res/AP B-201.3/Vo l-19lCra zv-Kids, as px,

Consent ltems a, Minutes: Sept 19, 20L3

b. Directors Report

Lori Duester motioned for theSeptember meeting minutes to be

approved. Marci Brilley secondedthe motion. The motion passed

unanimously by all Board members.

Jeffery Harrison motioned for theDirectors Report to be approved.Natalie Jackson seconded themotion. The motion passed

unanimously by all Board members.

CommitteeReports:

Executive/Finance Committee: Nancy Grzesik reported to theBoard that the Executive/Finance Committee cancelled thescheduled meeting on October 1,4,2013.

No Action Required

Page 1 of 3 october 2013 Minutes

http://www.americaspromise.org/News-and-Events/News-and-Features/APB-2013/Vol-19/Crazy-Kids.aspx�

http://www.americaspromise.org/News-and-Events/News-and-Features/APB-2013/Vol-19/Crazy-Kids.aspx�

New Business Election of Officers: A vote for Executive/Finance Committeemembership was conducted via individual ballot, The resultsindicate that Beth Mills will be the new Secretary; JefferyHarrison will continue as the Vice President and Mark Broms

as Treasurer,

FY 12.13 Year End Financials: Cathie Odom reviewed the

Earmarks/Restriction Test FY 12.13-Final and 20L3 Quality

Budget Graph (see attached) with the Board members. There

was discussion about the allowable administrative percentage

being so close 5%, Cathie explained that the change of OCA's

for fraud could be a large factor in this high percentage, There

was also discussion regarding Gold Seal.

Sky explained that the financial reports would be emailed out

to allthe members.

FY 12.13 Annual Report: Sky Beard reviewed the state

formatted FY 12.13 Annual Report and graphs of years' past

information (see attached). The VPK readiness rates were

discussed do to some questions regarding the report.

FY 12.13 Satisfaction Survev Report: Sky Beard reviewed the

Client Satisfaction Report with the Board.

No Action Required

StrategicPlanning

Dr, Mimi, the strategic planning facilitator, had the Board and

ELC Leadership Team (LST) work together to discuss the

provider visits by using a SWOT analysis, After some discussion

regarding the provider visits, Dr. Mimi moved on to the formal

strategic planning process (see PowerPoint attached).

Environmental Scan:

The Board and ELC LST discussed and recorded different

aspects that affect the coalition currently and in the future(see attached).

SWOT of EIC of Brevard:

The Board and ELC LST d¡d a SWOT analysis of the Coalition

(see attached),

ELC Mission statement:

The Board and ELC LST members divided into four differentgroups to discuss the current ELC of Brevard mission

statement (see attached). After some discussion, a mission

statement committee was formed. The members include Ann

Beecham, Gwen Hertlein-Haber, Terri Barlow, and Althea

Puzio.

Key Result Committees:

The Board and ELC LST established Key Result Areas. These

results are directional statements of intent to do or

accomplish something in the future,

Page 2 of 3 october 2013 M¡nutes

"Champions" were assigned to create goals and keep the key

result areas in front of the Board. See the following list:o Diversified funding - Champion: Mike Duranteo lncrease awareness through community collaboration

-Champion:Mica Layne¡ Parent education - Champion: Beth Mills. lmprove technology - Champion: Jeff Harrisono Quality in¡tiat¡ve - Champion: Althea Puzio. Tap into Board Talent - Champion: Nancy Grzesik

PublicComment

N/A No Action Required

Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.

Next Meeting November L9,2OL3

October 20L3 Board of Directors Minutes Approved

Respectfully Submitted,

r3

DateExecutive Coordinator

Approved

SignatureExecutive Director

?-ì

Date

Page 3 of 3 october 2013 M¡nutes

Director’s Report November 2013

State and Office of Early Learning (OEL) Update:

• Further activity is occurring on the implementation of HB 7165. Florida’s Office of Early Learning has distributed draft documents of health and safety checklists, the statewide School Readiness provider contract, the revised Coalition Plan template, a template for a newly required anti-fraud plan and other supporting documents. Leadership at the Early Learning Coalition is currently reviewing all draft documents and is providing applicable feedback.

Coalition Update:

• The Coalition’s annual single audit was conducted the week of October 21, 2013 by the firm of Moss, Krusick and Associates. The auditors will likely be providing a report to the Board of Directors at the January 2014 meeting.

• A new trial period has been set for the alleged child care provider fraud case. The new trial period is November 12 - 27, 2013.

• The Coalition’s in-house United Way campaign has exceeded expectations and goals have been exceeded. Through a variety of creative activities, Coalition staff has raised $9,043.60 to support this year’s United Way campaign in Brevard.

• The Coalition is continuing its partnership with United Way to provide additional focus on the importance of early reading proficiency. Through this partnership, private child care providers who feed into Endeavor, Cambridge, Saturn and Riviera Elementary Schools are being provided access to myON technology (myon.com). Children enrolled at the public schools and feeder centers will be provided log in access to an online library of thousands of book titles that they can read with their families. United Way is generously providing funding to the Coalition for training and technical assistance to child care providers to support the myON project.

• Discussions continue regarding the allowable referrals for child care services for homeless children and children residing in domestic violence shelters. Follow up meetings have occurred and a meeting of interested parties who are members of the local Continuum of Care are meeting on November 18 to finalize the details of referrals for homeless families.

ELCB FY 13.14Grant Allocation -

Direct Service Utilization Report

Subsidized Child Care

BillingPeriod

Children SERVED (unduplicated)

Per child Cost 97CF0 97R00 97GTA 97GNW 97G00 97P00 97GSD 97RSP

Total Direct Service

Expenditures

Monthly Direct Service

Allocation Match required** Match obtainedJuly-13 3,220 349.79$ -$ 252,399$ -$ 134,211$ 64,077$ 560,777$ 114,867$ -$ 1,126,331$ 1,195,821$ 33,646.62$ 32,201.66$ August-13 3,206 303.63$ 214,256$ 117,361$ 59,254$ 483,296$ 99,274$ 973,440$ 999,194$ 28,997.73$ 20,359.64$ September-13 3,017 289.34$ 192,313$ 111,876$ 50,591$ 433,680$ 84,478$ 872,938$ 942,689$ 26,020.80$ 20,235.00$ October-13 3,093 309.90$ 212,367$ 116,564$ 56,753$ 475,447$ 97,377$ 958,509$ 1,062,432$ 28,526.84$ 47,215.29$ November-13 -$ -$ December-13 -$ -$ January-14 -$ -$ February-14 -$ -$ March-14 -$ -$ April-14 -$ -$ May-14 -$ -$ June-14 -$ -$ Final Invoice -$ -$

TOTALS 3,134 313.16$ -$ 871,335$ -$ 480,013$ 230,675$ 1,953,200$ 395,996$ -$ 3,931,218$ 4,200,136$ 117,191.98$ 120,011.59$ (2,819.61)$

OCA 97CF097R0097GTA97GNW

97G0097P0097PP097GSD97RSP

Child Care Executive Partnership Program

BillingPeriod

Children SERVED

Per child Cost 97PP0

Monthly Direct Service

AllocationYear to Date

ActualJuly-13 45 144.09$ 6,484$ 9,167$ 6,484$ 30.99% 33.11%August-13 48 124.30$ 5,967$ 9,167$ 12,451$ $268,917.86September-13 36 215.02$ 7,741$ 9,167$ 20,191$ October-13 52 152.02$ 7,905$ 9,167$ 28,097$ 25.54% 33.33%November-13 $8,569.97 9166.666667December-13January-14February-14March-14April-14May-14June-14Final Invoice

TOTALS 45 158.86$ 28,097$ 36,667$

Remaining Match Required

*Match required does not have to be obtained monthly, overall total must be obtained by end of fiscal year and may include in-kind.

YTD Spending Rate (overall) Expected YTD Spending Rate

BG3 - TCA NON-WORKING (Temporary Cash Assistance - Priority 1 - Birth to younger than 13); BG3R - RELATIVE CAREGIVER - At Risk ( Priority 2 - Birth to 9; Priority 5 - ages 9 to younger than 13); BG3W - TANF ONLY (Temporary Assistnace Needy Families - Priority 3: Birth to K eligible - Priority 6: K eligible to younger than 13)

WRC - TCA RESPITE (Temporary Cash Assistance - Priority 1 - Birth to younger than 13)

YTD Surplus / Deficit (overall)

Billing Group

CCEP - Child Care Executive Partnership (Not Prioritized)

SPECIAL NEEDS (Priority 8)BG1 - AT RISK (Protective Services / DCF referrals: Priority 2 - Birth to 9; Priority 5 - ages 9 to younger than 13)

BG3W - TCA WORKING (Temporary Cash Assistance - Priority 1 - Birth to younger than 13); BG5 - TCC (Transitional Child Care - Priority 4: Birth to K eligible - Priority 7: K eligible to younger than 13)

GOLD SEAL DIFFERENTIAL - all priorities & ages (provider qualified)

YTD Surplus / Deficit (overall)

CCEP YTD Spending Rate (overall) Expected YTD Spending Rate

BG8 - ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED (Priority 3 - Birth to K eligible; Priority 7 - K eligible to younger than 13)

BG3AP - TCA APPLICANT (Temporary Cash Assistance: Priority 3 - Birth to K eligible; Priority 7 - K eligible to younger than 13)

ELCB FY 13.14Grant Allocation -

Direct Service Utilization Report

MonthTarget

Enrollment

# of Children Served

Avg Daily Rate / Child

# of Days

School Age Notes

Overall Expected Child

CareOverall Actual Child

CareSpending

Rate Surplus / Deficit YTD Expected YTD Actual7/31/2013 3400 3220 $15.21 23 FT (23 days) $1,195,821.26 $1,126,331.11 94.19% $69,490.15 $1,195,821.26 $1,126,331.118/31/2013 3400 3206 $13.80 22 FT (9 days) $999,194.38 $973,439.85 97.42% $25,754.53 $2,195,015.64 $2,099,770.969/30/2013 3400 3017 $13.78 21 FT (2 days) $942,688.79 $872,938.37 92.60% $69,750.42 $3,137,704.43 $2,972,709.3310/31/2013 3400 3093 $13.47 23 FT (1 day) $1,062,431.86 $958,509.10 90.22% $103,922.76 $4,200,136.29 $3,931,218.4311/30/2013 3400 $13.47 21 FT (4 days) $972,010.93 $0.00 $5,172,147.2212/31/2013 3400 $13.47 22 FT (7 days) $1,017,895.85 $0.00 $6,190,043.061/31/2014 3400 $13.47 23 FT (5 days) $1,068,692.86 $0.00 $7,258,735.922/28/2014 3400 $13.47 20 FT (1 day) $1,028,414.58 $0.00 $8,287,150.503/31/2014 3400 $13.47 21 FT (5 days) $1,026,677.21 $0.00 $9,313,827.714/30/2014 3400 $13.47 22 FT (1 day) $1,137,143.45 $0.00 $10,450,971.155/31/2014 3400 $13.47 22 FT (2 days) $1,128,563.14 $0.00 $11,579,534.296/30/2014 3400 $13.47 21 FT (21 days) $1,105,049.67 $0.00 $12,684,583.96Final InvoiceYTD Totals 3134 $13.67 261 $12,684,583.96 $3,931,218.43 93.61% $268,917.86

Early Learning Coalition of Brevard County Inc. Year to Date Comparison – October 2013

Slot Utilization FY 13.14 to FY 12.13

FY 13.14 to FY 12.13 Comparison – Surplus/Deficit

Budgeted Year to Date (YTD)

Actual YTDPercent Actual vs. Budget YTD

FY 13.14 $4,200,136 $3,931,218 94%

FY 12.13 $4,298,006 $4,346,129 101%

$-

$500,000

$1,000,000

$1,500,000

$2,000,000

$2,500,000

$3,000,000

$3,500,000

$4,000,000

$4,500,000

$5,000,000

($60,000.00)

($40,000.00)

($20,000.00)

$0.00

$20,000.00

$40,000.00

$60,000.00

$80,000.00

$100,000.00

$120,000.00

July September November January March May

Surplus

FY 13.14 FY 12.13

Early Learning Coalition of Brevard County Inc. Year to Date Comparison – October 2013

School Readiness Match – Actual to Forecast & Comparison to FY 12.13

Enrollment FY 13.14 Compared to FY 12.13 (Month of October)

Comparison: Prior to Current Month Enrollment

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

$450,000

$500,000

FrcstThs Yr Actual 13.14 Actual 12.13

3,399

3,093

290029503000305031003150320032503300335034003450

FY 13.14 FY 12.13

3,0173,093

October September

11/18/2013

1

ELC Strategic Planning session

results

Swot analysis

strengths

•Committed staff

•Leadership

•Important mission

•Service delivery

•Good Board decision making/support

•Good internal communication across departments

•Presence in the community and collaboration

•Focus on professional development

departments

•Good advocacy processes for clients/providers

•Good reputation

•CCR&R grown tremendously

Swot analysis

weaknesses

• Phone System

• Funding

• Funding Formula

• Locations (via client satisfaction report; BWF location move C t R kl d )

• Silos

• Public awareness

• Internal technology

• Spending all budget for services

• Management of waitlistCocoa to Rockledge)

• Majority of Board members have been by appointments and are mandatory

• Getting “into the weeds”

• 80/20 rule

• Open door/empathy – time and resources (clients or staff)

• EFS (limits reporting)

• Time spent on external and unexpected issues

• Dependency upon grant funding

• Limited local financial support

11/18/2013

2

Swot analysis

opportunities

• Incentivized accreditation for providers

• More family support services (collaborative efforts)

• Need to utilize and educate businesses/community/parents

•Take more of a leadership role in areas like child health, parent education, etc.

•Drum up more local funding/collaboration (limit dependency on grants)

• QRISbusinesses/community/parents

• Reach and educate families that aren’t currently receiving ELC services (target college students)

• Collaborate with hospitals to inform parents of services

• Empower families and providers to reach local, state, and fed legislators

• QRIS–Quality education for providers/directors

–Awareness of true quality – for providers and families

•Parent education •Get children off waiting list quick to limit impact on economy – expend funds

Swot analysis

Threats

• Grant limitations and thresholds

• Legislation changes–Funding formula

–Language removed from legislation for quality and safety

–State and federal expectations

• Decrease funds available in current environment

• Limited education and professional development within providers

• Lack of increase in provider ratesState a d ede a e pectat o sand changes

–Coalition consolidation or elimination

• Changing political landscape

• Self-rated health & safety checklist for non-exempt

• “Sole Source” of funding (State and Federal)

Lack of increase in provider rates

• Poor quality could lead to negative community perception

• Communication/education of DOE on Birth to 5

• Understanding that VPK and SR programs and the program differences

Strategic Planning follow up

Key Result Area #1

Diversified funding g

Champion: Mike Durante

11/18/2013

3


Key Result Area #2

Increase Awareness Through gCommunity Collaboration

Champion: Mica Layne


Key Result Area #3

Parent Education

Champion: Beth Mills


Key Result Area #4

Improve Technologygy

Champion: Jeff Harrison

11/18/2013

4


Key Result Area #5

Quality Initiativesy

Champion: Althea Puzio


Key Result Area #6

Tap Into Board Talent

Champion: Nancy Grzesik

Fraud Referral Report Office of Inspector General, September 2013

250 Marriott Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Telephone: 850-717-8550 Fax: 850-921-0026 Toll Free: 866-FL-Ready (357-3239)

www.FloridaEarlyLearning.com An equal opportunity employer/program. Auxiliary aids and services are available upon request to individuals with disabilities. All voice telephone numbers

on this document may be reached by persons using TTY/TDD equipment via the Florida Relay Service at 711.

FRAUD STATUS REPORT

September 30, 2013

To improve transparency and accountability and eliminate fraud in Florida’s early learning services,

the Office of Early Learning provides monthly reports for early learning stakeholders and the public.

Suspected Fraud Referrals from Early Learning Coalitions (ELCs) and

the Office of Early Learning (OEL) to the Department of Financial Services (DFS)

Fraud referrals for September 2013 93

Fraud referrals year-to-date 205

Average monthly total – prior three years 78

Restitution by Clients or Providers

Restitution orders year-to-date 28

Restitution collected year-to-date $57,750.55

Total restitution ordered year-to-date $234,596.14 *Restitution often not at full fraud value. Amount ordered, collected do not correlate since collections occur retrospectively.

Reemployment Assistance and School Readiness Cases Identified

in 2011 Auditor General Report

Fraud referrals made by ELCs* 631

Cases screened out by DFS 445

Cases referred to state attorney’s offices 73

Ongoing investigations 113

Restitution orders 11

Total restitution ordered $73,262.84** *Figures based on reconciling Fraud Referral System and Auditor General data, performed May 2, 2013 and updated

since.

**Restitution sometimes not at full amount of overpayment.


in Initial Data Match (01/2013)

Data matches 2,417

Fraud referrals made by ELCs 952




Restitution Orders 0

http://www.floridaearlylearning.com/

Fraud Referral Report Office of Inspector General, September 2013

250 Marriott Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Telephone: 850-717-8550 Fax: 850-921-0026 Toll Free: 866-FL-Ready (357-3239)

www.FloridaEarlyLearning.com An equal opportunity employer/program. Auxiliary aids and services are available upon request to individuals with disabilities. All voice telephone numbers

on this document may be reached by persons using TTY/TDD equipment via the Florida Relay Service at 711.


in Second Data Match (03/2013)

Data matches 762





Restitution Orders 0


in Third Data Match (07/2013)*

Data matches 602





Restitution Orders 0 *Deadline for ELCs to complete processing the 07/2013 data match is September 16, 2013.


in Fourth Data Match (08/2013)*

Data matches 218





Restitution Orders 0 *Deadline for ELCs to complete processing the 08/2013 data match is October 18, 2013.

http://www.floridaearlylearning.com/

State Legislative Priorities 2013-14

SUPPORT EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES FOR PREPARING CHILDREN AND THEIR FAMILIES FOR SUCCESS BY ADEQUATELY FUNDING SCHOOL READINESS

Providing School Readiness Services (child care assistance) keeps Florida’s families working and Florida’s children learning! • Children attending quality School Readiness Programs make developmental gains that support their success in

school and productivity in life1

• 48% of Florida’s 1 million plus young children (under the age of 6) live under 200% of poverty and 23% live under 100% of poverty

• Only 225,731 children received child care subsidies in 2011-12 due to funding limitations2

3

• Since 2001-02, the combined federal/state funding for School Readiness services has decreased by approximately $99 million; combined with Consumer Price Index increase in business costs of approximately 25% in the same time period, the result has been a major funding decline for services for Florida’s most vulnerable children.

4, 5

• Child care businesses in FL (primarily small business, representing over 2% of Florida’s small businesses) make significant contributions to local economies: $1.1 billion in wages and $1.8 billion for industries that support child care.

6, 7

SUPPORT HIGH QUALITY EARLY LEARNING PROGRAMS – SCHOOL READINESS AND VOLUNTARY PREKINDERGARTEN PROGRAMS

High quality School Readiness and Voluntary Prekindergarten (VPK) Programs ensure children enter school ready to learn and increase their potential for future productivity!

• Although Florida has strong monitoring protocols for licensed child care facilities, it has a high number of license-exempt providers that do not receive on-site monitoring to ensure the health and safety of children in care.

• Florida is one of only nine states that has not piloted or launched a statewide Quality Rating Improvement System to define program performance standards, provide improvement supports and resources, and inform families

• Florida meets only 3 of 10 national standards for prekindergarten programs8

• Florida can improve the quality of VPK by reducing staff to child ratios back to 1:10 or better and requiring: 15 hours annually of in-service training; lead teachers to have specialized training in prekindergarten; secondary instructors to have a CDA credential; and a vision, hearing, health, and one support service screening.

9

SUPPORT THE EFFICIENT PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS AND LOCAL DECISION MAKING OF EARLY LEARNING FUNDING THROUGH EARLY LEARNING COALITIONS (ELCs)

Local decision-making allows local citizens to make the best decisions for the needs and priorities of local communities, and ELCs work efficiently!

• ELCs leverage over $40 million in local contributions annually for early learning, with $17 million used as state match to draw down federal dollars

• ELCs share resources, best practices, and maximize revenues • ELCs maintain administrative costs at 5% or below for School Readiness services and 4% or below for VPK

services

1Barnett (2008). Preschool education and its lasting effects: Research and policy implications. Boulder and Tempe: Education and the Public Interest Center & Education Policy Research Unit [http://epicpolicy.org/publication/preschool-education]. 2National Center for Children in Poverty. (2013). Florida demographics for low-income children. [www.nccp.org/profiles/]. 3Florida Office of Early Learning. (2013). School readiness funding formula work group, July 26, 2013. Tallahassee, FL: author. 4 Florida Office of Early Learning. (2011). Fact Book. Tallahassee, FL: author. 5InflationData.com. (2012). Cumulative inflation calculator. Available on-line: www.inflationdata.com. 6Office of Small Business Advocate. (2011). Florida small business facts. [www.osba.org; August 8, 2001]. 7AWI Office of Early Learning. (2009). Quality Initiative, July 2009, Vol 1(1). Tallahassee, FL: Florida Office of Early Learning. 8QRIS Network. (2013). State QRIS contact information. [www.qrisnetwork.org]. 9

National Institute for Early Education Research. (2013). The State of Preschool 2012. [www.nieer.org].

Florida’s economic growth strategy starts at birth by investments in early childhood

September 2013 1

Considerations for Adopting a Statewide Quality Rating Improvement System Florida is one of nine states that has not launched or piloted a statewide Quality Rating Improvement System (QRIS). As state policymakers consider issues related to health and safety, quality improvement, and program performance, this paper is provided as an overview of QRIS considerations. What is a Quality Rating and Improvement System? A Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) is an organized way to assess, improve, and communicate the quality of early learning programs that families consider for their children. It creates common standards of excellence that are inclusive and applicable to all types of early learning programs (e.g., center-based, family child care, private, public, faith-based). A QRIS has many benefits. It empowers parents to become savvy consumers of high quality programs that can most benefit their children. It gives early learning providers a roadmap to assess their programs, identify their program’s strengths, and engage in continuous quality improvement activities that are clearly tied to high performance and good outcomes for children. It gives policymakers and program support administrators and staff effective strategies and tools to improve early learning program performance, and it promotes program accountability so that legislators, donors, and taxpayers feel confident investing in early learning. It also brings community awareness to the critical role that the early years play in preparing children for success in school and life. A QRIS is conceptually similar to ratings of restaurants and hotels that are made by various groups (e.g., American Automobile Association, Forbes Travel Guide, Michelin Stars) based on an evidence-based and agreed-upon set of standards. This common sense approach has wide appeal and explains in part why QRISs have spread so rapidly across the United States.1 The common components of QRISs include:

• Quality assurance: Progressive quality standards (usually three to five levels of quality) are identified based on research and best practice evidence. Monitoring and assessment determines their level of quality based on their adherence to the standards.

• Supply-side interventions: Early learning programs receive support. Support often includes professional development to increase the knowledge and skills of staff, technical assistance on completing a self-assessment and developing and implementing a quality improvement plan, and financial incentives to encourage participation and to maintain quality standards.

• Demand-side interventions: Easy-to-understand symbols (most use star ratings) for the ratings are provided to the public. Financial incentives are often offered to reward consumers who choose higher quality programs.2

1 American Academy of Pediatrics. (2013). Quality rating and improvement systems, www.aap.org. 2 Ibid.

September 2013 2

QRIS Nationwide The Federal Child Care Development Block Grant (CCDF) Plan includes several questions for states to address relative to quality improvement for early learning programs. In addition to early learning standards and professional development system building, states must answer questions relative to a quality rating improvement system. Thirty-nine states and the District of Columbia have developed a statewide quality rating improvement system and three more are piloting one. 3 Furthermore, recent proposed CCDF rule changes included additional requirements relative to QRIS. Recently, the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services jointly released Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge Funds. This state-based competitive grant awarded over $700 million to 14 states during phases 1 and 2 of round one (Florida was not a recipient). A second round is anticipated this Fall. The grant highlights federal priorities that encourage states to move toward policies and efforts with the most promise, including:

o Using early learning and development standards and kindergarten entry assessments to promote school readiness

o Using tiered quality rating and improvement systems to promote school readiness. QRIS in Florida During Governor Jeb Bush’s administration, Lieutenant Governor Toni Jennings led a statewide effort to develop a QRIS in Florida. Regional meetings were held across the state to gather input, and a draft proposal for the Sunshine State Stars was developed. Although there was insufficient support from legislators for the proposal to move forward at the state level, local partners continued meeting and a number of local QRIS efforts were launched (often through partnerships between early learning coalitions and local children’s services councils). Several of these efforts have been in operation for five or more years and have assisted thousands of providers in improving the quality of the services they deliver to children and families. Local QRIS participation is voluntary, and there is often a focus on programs that serve Florida’s most vulnerable children (those receiving School Readiness services). Although there are variations across local communities, common standards include:

• Learning Environment • Curriculum • Teacher-child Ratio and Group Size • Staff Qualifications and Professional Development • Family Engagement • Administration

As QRIS matures, both at the state and national levels, it is increasingly informed by evaluation and research. Several of the local efforts have recently undergone major reassessments of standards and processes. National data collaboratives have been formed to ensure that evaluation and research efforts are coordinated, lessons learned are shared, and investments are wise. Considerations for Moving to a Statewide QRIS Three sets of standards typically serve as the foundation of a QRIS. These include:

• Learning and developmental standards for children – These describe what children should know and be able to do across all developmental domains and content areas.

3 QRIS Network. (August, 2013). State QRIS Contact Information [www.qrisnetwork.org].

September 2013 3

Florida has developed the standards, the Florida Performance Standards for Birth through Three and for Four-Year-Olds, but still has work to do to incorporate the standards into early learning specialized training and education options.

• Practitioner standards – Often called core knowledge and content areas, these standards describe what practitioners in the field should know and be able to do. Frequently these standards are aligned to credentials and are presented in a career lattice. Florida has completed part of this work, developing the Florida Core Competencies for Early Care and Education Practitioners and Directors. Additional work is needed to align the competencies to credentials in Florida and finalize a career lattice.

• Program standards – These standards include criteria that permit programs to operate (licensing rules) or receive certain funding (e.g., VPK Program requirements, SR Program requirements, Head Start/Early Head Start Performance Standards) and standards that define levels of quality practice, such as national accreditation and QRIS. Although Florida has some of these standards in place, there is no alignment or coordination across program standards.

QRIS has the potential to link all of these standards into practice and to promote good business practices of continuous quality improvement in all types of early learning programs. Anne Mitchell, a national expert in QRIS sums up the system building considerations by stating, “A QRIS is an intentionally transparent definition of the progression of program quality from basic to excellent. The challenge is to clearly state the progression of quality (the continuum of quality improvement), while keeping documentation efficient and manageable for all types of participating programs, and for the state and others operating the system.” 4 She notes that efficiency is tied to the number of criteria, the ease or degree of difficulty in verifying them, the number of on-site assessments, the duration of the rating, and linkages between criteria across other accountability systems (e.g., Head Start, accreditation, state-funded prekindergarten). Florida has the capacity to move toward a statewide QRIS, utilizing existing local efforts as pilot sites. Important steps to incorporate into the system building strategy include:

• Identification of a lead entity (e.g., Florida Office of Early Learning, State Early Childhood Advisory Council) to oversee development of the system

• Careful review of current standards (learning and development, practitioner, and program), identifying their potential linkages and development needs

• Development of a system-building plan, utilizing lessons learned from other states through the QRIS Network as well as Implementation Science strategies

• Stakeholder engagement opportunities to garner input on criteria and processes • Plan for validation of system and ongoing evaluation

The Association of Early Learning Coalitions (AELC) is an organization consisting of the Executive Directors of the 30 Early Learning Coalitions, providing services in all counties and communities across Florida. AELC provides leadership for the early learning community, sharing best practices, strengthening early learning management systems, and advising the Florida Office of Early Learning regarding early learning issues and policies from a local perspective. AELC supports the development and implementation of a statewide Quality Rating Improvement System in Florida.

4 Mitchell, A. (2012). Considerations for an efficient, inclusive and implementable quality rating and improvement system. BUILD Initiative, www.build.org.

September 2013 1

Considerations for Health and Safety in Early Learning Programs Basic assurances of health and safety must be provided in settings where young children are grouped and receive care. Child care licensing is designed for this purpose, to ensure that children in child care settings are safe and healthy. Risk of harm for children in child care arrangements originates from four primary sources: the spread of disease, building safety hazards, risk of injury, and risk of developmental impairment (Colbert, 2005). Key components of effective licensure include established standards and compliance monitoring protocols. Licensure establishes a minimum standard of health and safety, and mechanisms to support practices and policies that exceed minimum standards should be available to programs providing care of young children, particularly young children at risk. Background Child care regulatory systems typically encompass two broad components: health and safety standards and oversight protocols. Typically, health and safety standards address immunizations, background screening, space requirements, fire drills, medication administration, diapering and hand-washing, incident reporting, safe sleep, hazardous materials, emergency and disaster preparedness, playground safety, food service, physical activity, child-to-staff ratios, group size, materials and activities to promote development, family communications, and staff qualifications and specialized training. Oversight protocols typically address definitions of who must be licensed, frequency of monitoring and inspections, regulatory staff qualifications and training, program support and technical assistance, consumer education, and sanctions. The Florida Department of Children and Families Child Care Program Office is statutorily charged with the administration of child care licensure and training throughout Florida and regulates approximately 7,700 child care arrangements serving close to 500,000 children in 62 of 67 counties in Florida (five counties have adopted licensure standards that meet or exceed state regulations and complete licensure activities in their counties). At least three onsite inspections are conducted annually for facilities and two onsite inspections annually for licensed family child care homes. In addition, there are complaint inspections, re-inspections, and/or technical assistance visits. The Office is also responsible for child care training activities, overseeing mandated training delivery, competency testing, course tracking, and credential issuance for all child care personnel.

September 2013 2

In addition to establishing definitions for licensed child care programs, Florida Statutes define license-exempt and registered family child care programs. The standards for these programs are not as comprehensive as those for licensed programs, and neither license-exempt nor registered programs are required to have on-site compliance monitoring of established standards. Furthermore, there is no submission and review by a governmental or government representative oversight agency of background screening data of individuals in these settings that have contact with young children. This means that large numbers of Florida’s young children are cared for in environments without any public assurances of health and safety. Families are left with the responsibility of ensuring health and safety standards and often do not have the knowledge or skill to assess all aspects of health and safety. For children at risk due to poverty, special needs, or being in the child welfare system, specialized knowledge and skill for caregivers is even more imperative in order to provide care and learning environments that will support their health, safety, and development. Florida Statutes, 1002.81-1002.96, delineates the requirements for Florida’s School Readiness Program. These requirements incorporate important standards that exceed licensure requirements in recognition of the importance of preparing children at risk for school success. Federal and state funding is provided to support these standards, and it is important to ensure that there is compliance with these standards as well as licensure standards. Recommendations Improve Florida’s Licensure Standards

• In order to ensure protection of health and safety of children in out-of-home care, national recommendations for regulatory oversight are to require licensure of all child care arrangements in which care is provided for more than one unrelated child (Caring for Our Children, 2011; NACCRRA, 2011; NARA, 2011). This includes licensure of all types of child care facilities and family child care homes and a prohibition of self-certification of compliance with health and safety standards, including background screening.

• Florida licensure standards related to child-to-staff ratios and group size are also areas that need improvement. Overall, smaller child-to-staff ratios and group sizes are associated with improved program quality and more positive outcomes for children (Caring for Our Children, 2011; NARA, 2011). Of particular concern in Florida are ratios for toddlers and the absence of any group size requirements.

• Requirements for pre-service specialized training are needed. Currently, child care practitioners have approximately a year to complete 40 clock hours of training, and therefore, may be in charge of large groups of children without any training for quite some time.

• Increase specialized training and education requirements by establishing the Florida Child Care Staff Credential as a minimum standard. Research findings indicate that caregiver specialized training and education is one of the most important components of quality child care and positive child outcomes, with the provision of training having a greater impact on quality than any other

September 2013 3

quality improvement activity (Child Care Aware, 2012b). Caregivers with specialized training and education are more likely to respond positively to children, to use effective teaching practices, and to promote children’s well-being and health and safety than caregivers without specialized training; and the children in their care demonstrate greater developmental benefits (NACCRRA, 2011 & 2010; NARA, 2011; National Research Council and Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, 2000).

• In-service training requirements should be increased. Florida currently requires 10 clock hours of in-service annually for child care practitioners. A minimum of 24 hours of annual in-service is recommended with training corresponding to the age and domains of development of children in the care of the caregiver (Caring for Our Children, 2011; NACCRRA, 2011 & 2010).

Require All School Readiness Programs to Meet and Exceed Licensure Standards

• License-exempt and regulated programs in Florida should be required to become licensed or be monitored for adherence to licensure standards in order to be a School Readiness provider. The receipt of federal and state funds should be accompanied with mechanisms to ensure minimum health and safety standards are met. Proposed changes to Federal Child Care and Development Fund regulations signal that more strict requirements related to the establishment and monitoring of health and safety standards for programs receiving child care subsidy funds are forthcoming.

• In addition to licensure standards, School Readiness Programs should be monitored for adherence to additional standards of the School Readiness Program. Florida should establish clear standards and metrics for the delivery of School Readiness services, including provision of developmentally appropriate curriculum, child screening, and practitioner specialized training.

• Mechanisms should be established to support School Readiness Providers in exceeding the minimum standards of the School Readiness Program. Florida should establish a statewide Quality Rating Improvement System with tiered reimbursement for meeting additional quality standards, such as improved teacher-child interactions and child progress. This system should be linked to Florida’s child care licensure system.

The Association of Early Learning Coalitions (AELC) is an organization consisting of the Executive Directors of the 30 Early Learning Coalitions, providing services in all counties and communities across Florida. AELC provides leadership for the early learning community, sharing best practices, strengthening early learning management systems, and advising the Florida Office of Early Learning regarding early learning issues and policies from a local perspective.

September 2013 1

Child Formative Assessment in Florida’s Early Learning Programs Background Early childhood lays the foundation for future development. It is a time of great opportunity when children learn in leaps and bounds. Compelling research supports the lifelong impact of what happens during early childhood development, and there is hard economic evidence that early childhood investments yield long-term gains. Positive early childhood development depends on good health, nurturing families, and high quality early learning experiences.1 Good policies and programs in these areas help improve the odds that children will receive the supports they need in order to grow and develop to their optimal capacity as Florida citizens. In Florida, state funds support two primary early learning programs – the School Readiness Program and the Voluntary Prekindergarten Program. The School Readiness Program (SR) is funded by federal and state funds (of the total approximate budget of $641 million, $500 million is federal dollars) and is focused on providing child care subsidies to support working low-income families or children in protective services. Approximately 240,000 children are served annually in 11,600 child care provider settings in Florida’s SR Program.2 Until legislative changes in 2013, Florida Statutes required an age appropriate assessment when children entered SR and when they left the program. The choice of assessment varied across Early Learning Coalitions, and in many areas, based on state guidance, a sample of children, rather than every child, in SR received the pre- and post-assessment. The Association of Early Learning Coalitions agreed in 2011 to move toward statewide adoption and implementation of one developmentally appropriate assessment instrument. Prior to legislation, efforts were underway to develop an implementation plan to support training, infrastructure, and funding issues. Legislation enacted in 2013 now prohibits coalitions from requiring School Readiness providers to utilize a child assessment tool. The Voluntary Prekindergarten Program (VPK) is another important early learning program in Florida, designed specifically for four-year-olds. Florida’s VPK is the largest in the nation, serving approximately 83% of four-year-olds (165,000 children) during 2010-11.3 Approximately 73% of VPK providers also serve children participating in the SR Program. The Florida Kindergarten Readiness Screen is administered to all children within the first 30 days of entry to kindergarten. The State Board of Education is required to periodically review and adopt a readiness rate. In addition, readiness rates must be based on scores on both (rather than one) screening instruments included in the Kindergarten Readiness Screen (Florida Assessment in Reading-FAIR and the Early Childhood Observation System-ECHOS). This Kindergarten Readiness Screen is used to identify VPK ‘Providers on Probation’ via a matching process between children and their VPK programs. Scores of children completing a 1 Stebbins & Knitzer (2007). State early childhood policies. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Children in Poverty. 2 Office of Early Learning (2011). Florida’s early learning system (November 2011). Tallahassee, FL: author. 3 AWI Office of Early Learning (2011). Voluntary prekindergarten education funding (3/29/2011). Tallahassee, FL: author.

September 2013 2

substantial portion of the VPK program are averaged to determine the overall score and ranking of each VPK provider. Numerous stakeholders raised concerns about the inappropriateness of evaluating VPK providers based on a one-point in time assessment of children. During the 2012 Legislative session, a budget allocation was awarded to the Department of Education to implement a VPK pre- and post-assessment. A child assessment system has been developed, and VPK providers are now required to use it. Validity and reliability of the developed assessment has not been established to date. Importance of Assessment Developmentally appropriate child assessment serves an important role in early learning programs. Ongoing, observational child assessment helps early learning teachers understand where the children in their care are developmentally and guides them in lesson planning and classroom practices. The training required to utilize child assessment appropriately and the accompanying supports for lesson and classroom planning reinforce important specialized knowledge about what children should know and be able to do. Using an assessment instrument as part of one’s classroom practices promotes continuous quality improvement and ongoing teacher professional development. Developmentally appropriate child assessment is not ‘testing’. It is not designed to identify children’s academic performance levels or ‘failing’ programs. Appropriate use of child assessment avoids ‘high stakes’. Developmentally appropriate child assessment includes objective observations of individual children during various times of the day that assists the teacher in intentional teaching to meet individual goals of children while at the same time managing the class as a whole. For example, teachers may note how a baby tracks an object with his or her eyes, a child’s use of language during dramatic play, how a child turns the pages of a book in the book corner, a toddler’s interactions with other children, how a child climbs on the playground, a child’s ability to follow directions, what items in an early learning environment are of most interest to a child, a child’s ability to share, or how a child counts as they put out napkins during snack. This type of information is later added to an assessment file that assists the teacher in identifying areas of focus to help facilitate the child’s continued development. Another very important aspect of child assessment is how it links the early learning environment with home. Child assessment information provides wonderful ways to highlight the family’s role as a child’s first teacher and for teachers and families to work together to promote children’s development. Programs utilizing child assessment often list the family-program coordination opportunities as one of the best aspects of assessment. Assessment Concerns For the SR Program, adoption of a developmentally appropriate ongoing formative assessment for children entering and leaving the program will provide important information about child progress that can inform classroom practices and demonstrate the merit of the SR Program. Moving to statewide use of assessment on every child in the SR Program will require careful planning, training, and coordination. The use of a one time screening (Kindergarten Readiness Screen) at the beginning of the kindergarten year to identify VPK ‘providers on probation’ is an inappropriate use of child screening and assessment data4. This inappropriate use of child screening and assessment data

4 National Research Council. (2008). Early Childhood Assessment: Why, What, and How? Committee on Developmental Outcomes and Assessments for Young Children, Catherine E. Snow and Susan B. Van Hemel, editors. Board on Children, Youth and Families, Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

September 2013 3

unfairly penalizes programs that serve children with the highest needs and may serve as a disincentive to serve children at risk or children who are English-language learners. Children may make significant learning gains during the VPK Program that are not reflected in the results of a one-time test. The implementation during 2012-13 of a VPK pre- and post-assessment improves this process but raises concerns. The chosen assessment tool focuses on a narrow set of language and numeracy knowledge and skills. It does not address the full set of early learning domains that are well supported in the research as being critical to school success. Furthermore, it is likely to lead to instruction that is inappropriate and limited for young children. In addition, the assessment has not been nationally norm-referenced, and the psychometric properties (validity and reliability data) of the instrument have not been published. Recommendations The vision for high-quality early learning programs in Florida should include a coordinated plan for child assessment processes to inform classroom practices and demonstrate the impact of the SR and VPK Programs. These recommendations include:

o Establish a valid and reliable statewide ongoing formative child assessment for the SR Program in order to inform classroom practices.

o Establish a valid and reliable ongoing formative child assessment during the VPK program year to align with the Kindergarten Readiness Screen and to inform classroom practices.

o Utilize the same assessment instrument in SR and VPK Programs as 73% of VPK providers also deliver the SR Program; selection of two different assessment instruments will result in unnecessary duplication, inefficiencies, and costs.

o The assessment process, established to identify learning gains and to inform VPK classroom practices, should also serve as the instrument to demonstrate “substantial and appropriate gains” by VPK Providers with children for whom there are concerns regarding readiness for kindergarten; a separate assessment process for this purpose would add unnecessary expense and demands on providers and children.

o Appropriate ongoing formative assessments should include assessment of all learning domains for children, including measures of early literacy and numeracy as well as social-emotional capabilities, and administration should be appropriate for children with special needs and children who are English-language learners.

o SR and VPK teachers should be trained to administer assessments with validity and reliability, similar to the process of kindergarten teachers administering the Kindergarten Readiness Screen; administration of the assessments by a third-party (unfamiliar with and to the child) are not in line with widely recognized appropriate assessment processes for young children.5

o Appropriate verification processes of teacher-administered assessments (in SR, VPK, and Kindergarten Programs) should be developed, utilizing a representative sample of children.

The Association of Early Learning Coalitions (AELC) is an organization consisting of the Executive Directors of the 30 Early Learning Coalitions, providing services in all counties and communities across Florida. AELC provides leadership for the early learning community, sharing best practices, strengthening early learning management systems, and advising the Florida Office of Early Learning regarding early learning issues and policies from a local perspective.

5 Florida Partnership for School Readiness. (2005). Birth to Three Screening and Assessment Resource Guide. Jacksonville, FL: Florida Institute of Education.

Early Learning Coalition...2013/11/19 · Melbourne Barnes and Noble store every Friday. Toy Drive for SR Families: The Beach 98.5 Radio Station has partnered with The Avenue Viera

Documents