Posts filed under ‘Public Policy’
Child care assistance more essential than ever – but less available
When “welfare as we know it” was ended in 1996, replaced by Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, child care financial assistance was accurately seen as an essential support needed for families to get off public assistance. Over the last 15 years this assistance has lifted millions of people out of poverty.
Today, with states struggling with lower tax revenue and a climate where cutting government spending is sometimes seen as a religion, there are far fewer families who are able to benefit from this assistance. One Associated Press story (http://tinyurl.com/7dsu8ht) tells of a mother and father with a four-year-old boy who are losing their child care assistance because their income is too high. The mother is a waitress at a weight-loss resort, the father a tree-cutter. Both make near the minimum wage.
Their story really struck me because, four years ago, they lived in a tent in a dry river bed, strung out on methamphetamines. Today they are both working, paying rent and supporting their child. They played by the rules – welfare reform has worked for them. It’s tough love with serious consequences for those who do not get training and work.
Now exactly why would we force this mother to quit her job and return to welfare? That is, if the family has not already reached its time limits so she can still qualify I often hear politicians and others interviewed saying that they worked hard for their money, and they do not want to prop up lazy people. But what about hard-working people who have worked extraordinarily hard to overcome odds? Count me in as one supporting more child care assistance to working families.
Disappointing decision regarding protection of children in Hamilton County
Hamilton County will have two tax levies on the ballot November 8 – one for health care for uninsured low-income residents (Indigent Care Levy) and the other for victims of child abuse and neglect (Children’s Services Levy). What is most on my mind today is the Children’s Services Levy renewal which will (assuming it passes) bring in $4 million less each year than it currently does to provide protection from child abuse and neglect.
The Hamilton County Commissioners approved the proposed levy amount to be the same millage as we have had for the last 15 years, BUT this will provide $4 million less each year for child welfare services, because $2 million of the funds will have to be used for services for severely handicapped children and property values have gone down, resulting in another $2 million loss. (The services for handicapped children have been paid for by the Indigent Care Levy which is receiving a substantial cut, and now will be paid from the Children’s Services levy.)
Several things bug me about this plan.
- The amount of the levy has not increased in 15 years while demands for service and costs have significantly escalated.
- Children’s Services staff have been reduced from 460 to 240 in the last three years with caseloads going from 12.7 to 20.1 in the last two years. These are people who rescue children from abusive situations, monitor situations where neglected children live with relatives or in foster care, and otherwise work daily to ensure that further harm does not come to these most vulnerable children. The staff are under great stress and carry a huge responsibility on society’s behalf.
- These child welfare services must be provided under federal and state mandates. We have a bare bones operation, meeting only the minimum mandated services. We can’t go any lower.
- The Commissioners’-appointed Tax Levy Review Committee, after studying the needs in great detail, recommended maintaining the current level of services and also using a portion of a County fund reserves as a source of additional funding. They definitely felt we could go no lower.
I suppose the thing that bugs me the most is that tax levies are the one area where voters get to have a say on what they want their tax dollars to support. By reducing the levies and assigning additional obligations to the reduced level of funding, the Commissioners have taken away our ability to give a thumbs up or down to the thoroughly researched Tax Levy Review Committee recommendations.
One Commissioner boasts of his promise to reduce taxes, yet the levies passed with 68% of the vote five years ago. Nearly seven out of 10 Hamilton County voters want to pay taxes for this very purpose. I imagine there are many, many things they would rather not support, but this is clearly one they do care deeply about. So I ask, do you want to save a few dollars on your taxes or spend those few bucks to make certain children do not come to harm because we did not have the resources to respond quickly enough to a bad situation?
Even though the amount of the Children’s Services Levy has been decided, there is a way to make sure that severely handicapped children are served without reducing services to abused and neglected children. (It feels a bit crazy to think our options are to help either handicapped or abused children. Surely there are other things we’d rather see cut. But let’s not go there today with the Bengals Stadium.) There exists a fund set aside to settle possible (but unlikely) state audit findings. Enough resources should be drawn each year from that fund to make up for the loss. Come on, Commissioners. Have a heart.
Top Threats to Early Childhood Programs
Exchange (formerly Child Care Information Exchange) is the definitive journal – in print and daily on-line posts – for administrators of early childhood education programs. The magazine and the on-line resources are wonderful, and there are often gems that I save and savor. One of the services provided by the publishers Roger and Bobbie Neugebauer are surveys of directors on various public policy topics. A recent post reports the top threats perceived by owners and directors of child care centers. Here is the post:
For the past 20 years Exchange magazine has been surveying Exchange readers about threats to their organizations. Historically, there have been five threats that have consistently risen to the top of the list year after year:
- State of the economy
- Competition from Pre-K in the public schools
- Shortage of qualified teachers
- Decreasing public subsidies
- Children with challenging behavior
In the early 1990′s, “competition from Pre-K in the public schools was rated the number one threat year after year. By the late 1990′s and early 2000′s, “shortage of qualified teachers” rose to the top. And, in recent years, not surprisingly, “state of the economy” is the top vote getter followed closely by “competition from Pre-K in the public schools.”
The weak state of the economy hits centers in many ways: enrollment is down due to fewer parents being employed, and those who are employed may choose to use family members for child care rather than choose an early learning setting. Government at all levels gives lip service to the importance of high quality early learning, but their budgets are shrinking and therefore, so are subsidy rates. Loans are very difficult to come by, and therefore, so is expansion. I hope that “state of the economy” falls to lower on this list in the near future!
As to competition from Pre-K in public schools, universal Pre-Kindergarten for three and four year olds is sweeping the country – but has yet to appear in Ohio and Kentucky. Universal Pre-K essentially extends Kindergarten – available (but voluntary) to all children regardless of income. Some states have chosen to contract with existing high quality child care centers. Others have expanded the capacity of elementary schools reach all families. In this case I am glad other states are working out the details for Ohio and Kentucky to follow.
Talking Points for Day on the Hill
The National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies gave its 300-plus symposium attendees a great background and briefing to prepare for our visits to our legislators. We met with staff of Representatives Michael Turner, Jean Schmidt, Steve Chabot (and Steve himself), Geoff Davis, House Speaker John Boehner, and Senators Rob Portman and Sherrod Brown. Here are the 2011 issues that we discussed with members of Congress and their staff.
- About the current budget situation: Don’t cut child care! We cannot strengthen this economy without parents working, and working parents need child care. When you work on the budget for the remainder of this fiscal year, don’t cut child care.
- Reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant: This is the legislation that provides funds to help low-income working families pay for child care, and provides for quality improvement. This law has not been reauthorized for 15 years, and many of its requirements are outdated. When reauthorizing:
- Require comprehensive background checks
- Require minimum levels of training for those who work in child care
- Require that centers and family child care homes are inspected on a regular basis
- Increase the quality set-aside from 4% under current law, to 12%, rising over time to 25% like Head Start.
3. For Senators: Cosponsor Senator Richard Burr’s (R-NC) “Child Care Protection Act of 2011” which calls for comprehensive background checks for child care providers to ensure that convicted felons, child abusers and sex offenders are not paid to care for children. In Ohio, child care providers cannot find out if people thay are planning to hire to care for young children have substantiated cases of child abuse. In Kentucky, background checks do not require fingerprinting.
We will follow up with our messages and see if we have had an impact. Since two of our three messages did not involve funding, we feel there is a lot Congress can do right away. I’ll let you know if we made any progress.
Public Policy Effort, Day One
I have just finished day one of a four-day public policy effort in Washington, D.C. There are so many challenges ahead for children and families.
Today we heard from a renowned pollster who has surveyed parents and the public on their views of the role of government in support of child care. (More on that in a future blog.) We also heard from a consultant who advises corporations and organizations on positioning their issues in order to get through all the noise. Finally, we heard from top legislative staffers from the House and Senate, Republicans and Democrats who shared the realities and opportunities before us in the current Congress.
Tomorrow our 4C contingent from Miami Valley, Northern Kentucky and Southwest Ohio (that is, Lorna Chouinard, Julie Wittten, Carolyn Brinkmann, Elaine Ward and myself) will meet with our Senators and Representatives – seven visits in all – to share information about families and children, to ask for their support of specific legislation and to urge them to put kids first. I’ll let you know what we hear from them.
Not the Usual Suspects
Some of the great (usual) suspects
I really like this blog entitled “Not the Usual Suspects” by Laura Bornfreund of the New America Foundation . In the article, Bornfreund talks about the value of non-traditional voices when it comes to advocacy. It makes sense of course that the people who are most knowledgeable about a subject (like child care center directors, child care resource and referral directors and parents when it comes to child care policy) are the most passionate and willing to bend the ear of elected officials about policy and funding issues.
But we are the usual suspects – predictable even. And it may feel to an elected official that we are just trying to protect our turf or ensure our pay checks.
That is why two groups that have been speaking up for a number of years have been so important. Those unusual suspects have been business leaders of every stripe and an organization called Fight Crime-Invest in Kids which is made up of police chiefs, sheriffs and other leaders in law enforcement. I’ve witnessed a panel of state legislators really sit up and take notice when a uniformed officer talks about diverting children away from the justice system – not with midnight basketball programs but by giving very young children the foundation they need for success – through high quality early childhood education.
Ms. Bornfreund writes of new unusual suspects: the College Board and The Society for Human Resource Management. Each has recently issued a report calling for more support of early childhood education. The College Board called for states to ”provide a program of voluntary high-quality, preschool education, universally available to 3- and 4-year-old children from families at or below 200 percent of the poverty line” in order to improve college graduation rates.
The Society for Human Resource Management’s report “called for more investments in early childhood programs to ensure a well-educated, globally competitive workforce in the future.”
These reports, and the organizations’ commitment to expanding the availability of quality early learning, are music to my (the usual suspect’s) ears. If these non-traditional advocates get heard, the long-term prospects for young children, for crime reduction, for increased college graduation rates and for a globally competitive workforce are improved. Of course this is an extremely tall order for early childhood programs, but the research is extensive, and the voices are mounting.
Child Care Costs are Rising – But so is the Quality. How will we pay for quality child care?
Today’s news direct from the National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies:
NACCRRA just released its latest report, Parents and the High Cost of Child Care: 2010 Update which reveals that child care prices continue to rise, despite the nation’s economic downturn.
Specifically, the report shows that in 2009:
• The highest statewide average cost of full-time care for an infant in a center was $18,750 a year.
• For a 4-year old in a center, parents paid an average up to $13,150 a year for full-time care.
• Parents of school-age children paid an average up to $10,720 a year for part-time care in a center.
In short, the key findings show that:
• Since 2000, the cost of child care has increased twice as fast as the median income of families with children.
• The cost of care for an infant in a child care center is more than the cost of college tuition and related expenses in 40 states.
• The high cost of child care forces parents to make difficult decisions about where they place their children for care.
• As child care costs rise, parents are shifting their children from licensed programs to informal care that potentially compromises their safety, health, and school readiness.
The report and related materials can be found on NACCRRA’s website.
Here is the pressing dilemma from my point of view: A portion of the higher cost is due to the fact that teachers are getting better educated, obtaining formal credentials and college degrees. This is causing a rise in the salaries. The quality of child care has risen over the past ten years.
All good for children, right? Well, what happens if parents can no longer afford to enroll their children in quality programs? Poor quality and inconsistent care may be the only option for lower wage families.
Early learning sets the foundation for life-long learning, so the importance of having teachers and caregivers with proper education cannot be overstated. To the extent that the more expensive child care is due to having better educated staff, we have a looming child care cost problem. We cannot turn away from improving the quality of care, so what are the solutions to paying for better child care?
WINGS and Public Policy
Citizens who have no personal stake in the outcome, who care so passionately about policy related to young children, are a powerful force. I am grateful they have taken on my favorite cause!
Continue Reading July 27, 2010 at 4:01 pm 4cforchildren Leave a comment
Striving Together
Wow! Our community is making meaningful strides in improving school readiness for all children, and 4C is proud to be playing a significant role in this achievement.
Strive, a partnership involving the communities of Cincinnati, Newport and Covington whose purpose is to “create a world class education system where every child succeeds from birth through college,” just issued its 2010 report card, and progress is everywhere to behold. The single measure used to report on school readiness is the Kindergarten Readiness Assessment-Literacy (KRA-L) in Ohio and the DIAL 3 in Kentucky. Since 2005, the percent of “ready” children in Cincinnati Public Schools has risen from 44% to 53%, using the KRA-L; in Newport the increase has been from 60% to 70% using the DIAL 3.
Strive has created a structure to measure progress system-wide and that has increased the focus on results – a huge improvement. The two strategies where investments have been made, and are paying off, are home visitation of at-risk mothers (with an array of supports), and efforts to improve the quality of child care.
The national and local data is clear – high quality child care results in improved child outcomes, and at-risk children gain the most advantage from high quality early childhood education. 4C is providing coaching and technical assistance to child care centers on both sides of the river, and the improvements are visible everywhere. It is exciting to be a part of a region that is so committed to supporting children and families.
Déjà Vu All Over Again
Yesterday an article appeared in the Wall Street Journal describing how governments all over the world are subsidizing child care in order to bring more women into the workforce, and even to boost sluggish fertility rates. Government investments in child care in Japan and France, for instance, are seen as the means to raise women’s employment rates and income, resulting in a huge increase in consumer spending.
I titled this blog “déjà vu” because I have heard this case over and over during the 30 years I have advocated for investments in quality child care. In the last 10 years or so, all the child care focus has been on the importance of the early years in laying the foundation for school success and lifelong learning. But prior to that, child care was in the public eye primarily as a tool to enable parents to work to support their families.
I don’t think U.S. policy makers are concerned with low fertility rates, as they are in Japan and France, but they are concerned with the economy. The article states, “Japanese economists calculate that raising women’s employment rate from the current 67.5% would boost consumer spending enough to create an additional $70 billion in wealth.”
The Wall Street Journal article concludes that many in America want the government to stay out of child care, leaving the full responsibility to parents. They ask readers to weigh in with their opinions on the issue. It will be no surprise to my readers that I believe that government investment in quality child care pays double dividends – first, as an essential tool for economic development and, second, to close the achievement gap by having all children ready to succeed.
I am delighted to hear the renewed conversation about the link between the economy and child care.
