SM County Universal Preschool Feasibility Study -- Phase I. · UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY San Mateo County is a small

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE II – Key Informant Study i

...specializing in service systems for children and families.

Health & Human Services Consultants of Southern California

8662 Robles San Diego, CA Phone: (619) - 0436 Fax: (619) - 0436 [email protected]

San Mateo County

Universal Preschool Feasibility Study

Phase III: Environmental Scan

Report Prepared by: Health and Human Services Consultants of Southern California August 2002 Betty Z. Bassoff, D.S.W. Jennif er Tucker - Tatlow, MSW James Tatlow, MSW, MPH Brian Kuck, MSW, MPH

A Report from the Center for Health Improvement For the San Mateo County Children and Families First Commission Funded by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan i

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary…………………....……………………………………………............. ii

I. Introduction………………………………………………………………….….................. 1

II. Geography……………………………………………………………………….….......... 2

III. Population……………………………………………………………………….….......... 3

IV. Income….……………………………………………………………………….….......... 5

V. Employment…………………………………………………………………….…........... 7

VI. Housing………. ………………………………………………………….…................... 8

VII. Transportation………………………………………………………………….….......... 9

VIII. Early Care and Education..…………………………………………………………….. 10

VIX. County Resources.…………………………………………………………….….......... 13

X. Health Care…………………………………………………………………….…............. 15

XI. Child Care Access……………………………………………………………….…......... 16

XII. Child Care Costs……………………...……………………………………….…........... 18

XIII. Quality of Care………………………….…………………………………….….......... 19

XIV. Special Needs.………………………….…………………………………….…........... 21

XV. Workforce Resources………………………….…………………………………….…. 22

Endnotes….………………………………………………………………………….…. …... 24

Appendix A: Child Development Permit Matrix...……………………………………….…. 30

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

San Mateo County is a small (449 square miles), densely populated region of the Bay Area, bordered by the counties of San Francisco, Alameda and Santa Clara. Over the last several decades, San Mateo has been experiencing a change in population which is now very diverse in ethnic/cultural make-up. Many of these newer residents have migrated from other countries including Mexico, the Pacific Islands, and East Asia. Almost half of the children speak languages other than English. This makes for a rich cultural environment in which to raise children, fully representative of California’s reputation as the most diverse population in the country.

San Mateo County has a long history of concern for children’s services and for funding initiatives to improve the lives of its youngest citizens. The county is also known for its collaborative outlook and close working relationships. These are all strong precedents for the venture at hand, to create a voluntary preschool system which will help prepare all young children to succeed in school.

The flip side of this dense environment is competition for needed resources and the resulting high cost of living, particularly severe in the area of housing, among the highest in the state. Families who were surveyed for the Children and Families First Commission Strategic Plan confirm that housing and child care are their greatest costs. Our data show that the current median price cost of a house in the county is now $600,600, and the average rental cost for a two bedroom apartment is $1,909. The median cost for preschool-age early care and education was $649 a month in 2001. These figures are substantially higher than the costs in 1999 when the data were gathered for the Strategic Plan. The high costs for housing and care for children in turn have made San Mateo the second highest working population in the state, 66% of all parents with children under the age of six while the state average is approximately 55%.

It is under these constraints that the Environmental Scan was conducted, to identify the barriers and how they can be overcome to achieve an equitable distribution of early care and education at a time when school readiness has become a national goal. In the following section, we will share the highlights from the Environmental Scan, and the suggestions for action that were suggested by the data.

A final world of caution: The word “preschool” is generally applied to the three to five year old age group, up to the time of entry into kindergarten. We are using this meaning in the report, although there is current discussion taking place about focusing the Universal Preschool initiative on four year olds, at least at the outset. No firm decision has been reached at this time. Other terms which need to be clarified at the outset are the following:

State Preschool. State preschools are usually a part-day, comprehensive developmental program for three to five-year old children from low-income families. The program emphasizes parent education and encourages parent involvement. In addition to basic preschool education activities, components include health, nutrition, social services, and staff development.

General Child Care (GCC). This term is used to describe programs that utilize centers and networks of family child care homes, operated by either a public or private agency, to provide child care and development services from infancy through age fourteen for state programs, and through thirteen for federal programs.

Head Start. These programs use center and in-home services operated by grantees or their delegate agencies that contract directly with the Federal Administration for Children and Families to provide

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan iii

educational, health, medical, dental, nutritional and mental health services to infants, toddlers, and preschool- age children.

Family Child Care Homes (FCCH). Care is provided for children in a family setting. Small homes are licensed to care for up to eight children; large FCCH's are licensed to serve as many as 14 children.

Resource and Referral (R & R). R & R programs provide information to all parents and the community about the availability of child care, assist providers in a number of ways including training, and coordinate community resources.

Geography In addition to the facts reviewed above, San Mateo County is divided into an east and west region by the coastal mountains. One third of the county is protected land; most development has taken place in the eastern part (90%). The upper part of the western region is an expanding suburb adjoining Daly City, while the lower region is a sparsely populated area across mountains and other difficult terrain. The largest and oldest of the cities follow the El Camino Real corridor. Child care resources are clustered in these areas, and are only sparsely available in the rural areas of the western half. Suggestions for Action: Access in less developed areas needs further study to determine best solutions. Development of Universal Preschool needs to reflect population diversity. Geographic limitations may require a network of family child care homes or school-sited programs

in outlying areas. Accommodations are needed to respond to commuter delays in retrieving children at sites. Planning for expansion of Universal Preschool facilities in low-and medium-income communities

should be linked to easy transportation access. The continuous, dense population demands a Regional planning perspective for Universal Preschool.

Population While the total number of residents in the county has increased by 9% since 1990, the population of children ages zero through four is now 2% (963) lower than it was at that time, according to the latest census updates. However, parent caregivers are working (66%), reflecting the ever-rising cost of living. Families have increased substantially in ethnic/cultural diversity within the county, the two largest minority populations composed of persons of Hispanic and Asian background. The White population has decreased by 11% since 1990. Almost half of the county’s children now speak another language besides English. Suggestions for Action: Planning should assume that the child population is stable and probably will remain so, or decrease,

as the cost of housing continues to rise. A comprehensive system to ensure that all families can have access to quality early education and

care is critically needed. Active recruitment and training of culturally and ethnically diverse teachers and child care providers

would need to be undertaken for a Universal Preschool initiative. All early childhood settings should foster dual-language learning, ultimately to make every

California child bi-lingual and bi-literate.

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan iii

Income In 2001, the median income of four-person households in San Mateo County was $80,100. This far exceeds the state-wide average of $55,209 at the time. However, one quarter of all children in the county live in relative poverty at less than 75% of State Median Income (SMI), and 9% live below the federal poverty level. Housing and child care are claimed by parents to be their greatest expenses. In 2001, there were 3,645 participants in San Mateo County’s CalWORKs program, 82% (2,989) of whom were children. As these families transition off public assistance, they will require continuing subsidized child care. Suggestions for Action: The distribution of child care and early education facilities needs to reflect the geographic

distribution of the population for a Universal Preschool initiative, i.e. increase facilities for low-income communities. Child care subsidies should be available to all low-and middle-income families (adopt a sliding-scale

fee structure). All working poor residents will require subsidized care. Linkages need to be continued between CalWORKs program representatives and a Universal

Preschool governance body in order to ensure that families transitioning off public assistance have access to quality care for their children.

Employment San Mateo County enjoys a low unemployment rate of 4.3%, and also has the highest percentage of children in the state who live in families with working parents (66%). While management, professional, and related occupations made up 41% of jobs, 31% were in the low-paid service sector which grew at a 13% rate in 2000. Eighty-one percent were private wage and salary workers who are most vulnerable to the upturns and downturns of the economy. Suggestions for Action: Planning to create a comprehensive system to meet the needs of all sectors of the county should

continue. Large and medium-sized employers should be targeted and recruited in a campaign to support

expansion of child care access (SAMCEDA). Early care and education services should be offered in non-traditional hours in a variety of settings. The business sector should be engaged in creative options to support child care services for their

workers e.g. “Adopt-A-Center.” Universal Preschool services receiving subsidy funds of any kind need to adopt a sliding-scale fee

structure. Efforts should be made to attract and retain a quality family home workforce through benefits such

as assistance with purchase of health insurance and business counseling.

Housing In San Mateo County, only 17% of the population can afford to purchase the median priced home which was $600,600 in 2001. The average cost of a two-bedroom rental was $1,909 during the same period. It is increasingly difficult for families to find affordable housing; reports of families doubling up to share housing costs are escalating. As the costs of housing climb, the amount a family can spend on preschool services declines. Preschool teachers and family home providers, who themselves are relatively low-

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan iv

paid workers, must seek work elsewhere or in other fields in order to keep up with rising costs. Further, the high cost of construction has become a serious barrier to new child care facility development. Suggestions for Action: Create a universal system for preschool access which ties cost to parents’ earnings, i.e. a sliding-

scale fee for all provider settings included in the network to be created. Loans funded by the state and by local sources for new construction of centers should be expanded

and offered at the lowest possible cost to borrowers (see State of Connecticut Child Care Facilities Fund). All new housing developments for low and middle-income housing should include a tax for child

care facility development. Cities should review and adjust ordinances which act as a barrier to development of child care

facilities. Teachers must receive incentives in salary and benefits in order to be able to remain in San Mateo

and in the child care field (e.g., SaMCARES; subsidizing health insurance as in San Francisco).

Transportation San Mateo County is in a region represented by extensive commuting across county lines for employment purposes. This trend, which is already very heavy along the eastern corridor, is predicted to grow substantially in the coming years. As family members spend longer times on commutes, child care facilities will need to create flexible solutions to their hours of operation. Public transportation routes will increase in importance. Suggestions for Action: Universal Preschool programs must build in time flexibility to accommodate families commuting by

car or public transportation. New facilities should be located close to major transportation corridors and hubs. More attention should be directed to developing wraparound support services (such as extended

child care and health services) for working families. The Association of Bay Area Governments, or similar business groups, should be invited to

participate in Universal Preschool planning. Business(es) should be encouraged to provide flexible work hours and telecommuting wherever

possible.

Early Care and Education The School Readiness movement and Universal Preschool are overlapping concepts, and should be brought together in all planning forums for purposes of creating a more holistic and integrated system. While access to good quality preschool experiences for all children is the desired outcome, it would be reasonable to use a phased-in approach, targeting those with the most to gain first. The public school system is a significant and long-term player in the county’s early care and education infrastructure. The County Office of Education contracts with community agencies and school districts for state preschool services and has provided long-term and consistent leadership to early care and education services. Suggestions for Action: All children should have access to good quality and developmentally appropriate preschool

programs that help prepare them for school.

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan v

Quality standards should be promoted by setting criteria for programs which are funded to participate in preparing children for school. “Ready to Learn” initiatives should be joined with Universal Preschool initiatives in county

planning. The 18 state-funded preschools operated by school districts and by community non-profit agencies

could form the core of a county-wide preschool system to which community agencies could be added. Issues of collaboration and common standards would need to be addressed. Explore the potential role of the County Office of Education as a lead agency/contractor for a

Universal Preschool initiative. Two groups are suggested in the Peninsula Partnership report, “Assessing School Readiness in San

Mateo County”, for first priority in phasing in a Universal Preschool initiative: Children who are not primary English speakers and children who have not had prior preschool experience (e.g., see North Carolina’s new More-At-Four preschool initiative). Another option, in the collaborative model, would be to allow local communities to select their priorities from a list of eligibility criteria created by the governance structure. The findings of the San Mateo County School Readiness Assessment Pilot Initiative study should be

reviewed for inclusion in the implementation of a Universal Preschool initiative for San Mateo County. Deficient skill areas needed for school success e.g. speech and communication, should be highlighted in the curriculum of Universal Preschool providers. Early intervention assessment and treatment services must be included in a holistic Universal

Preschool program. Universal Preschool should be promoted by publicizing the gains, documented in the literature, to be

made in school readiness for young children.

County Resources San Mateo County is rich in public and private investments in children’s well-being, and demonstrates strong commitment in many sectors to expanding access for quality preschool to children who, for one reason or other, are currently shut out. Of special interest, from an implementation viewpoint, are the nine Peninsula Partnership Community collaboratives in the county that are in direct contact with families in the local communities and who can help shape Universal Preschool initiatives to serve the particular needs in each region. Suggestions for Action: Educators and parents are encouraging the use of Children and Families First Commission (CFFC)

funds to expand financial resources for current child care programs. The talent of the many county resources should be brought to bear on the creation of solutions.

These would include: local colleges and universities, United Way, healthcare organizations, business organizations, the faith community, neighborhood organizations, etc. Every stakeholder, including collaboratives should be represented in the planning and governance

structure for a county-wide Universal Preschool initiative. County resources (e.g., Peninsula Quality Fund for Early Childhood Facilities, Childcare Facilities

Expansion Fund, SaMCARES, Prop 10 funds) should be utilized to improve quality and availability of child care, to raise preschool teachers’ salaries/benefits, and to provide training and coaching to attract and retain quality staff. Businesses and unions should be included in the planning process. The Council forum can be used as a testing ground for Universal Preschool proposals.

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan vi

Health Care The common interests shared by the fields of early care and education, and health, have been emerging over the last few decades. The only accredited performance standards and guidelines for out-of-home care were published by the American Public Health Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics in 1992. Training in preventive health practices and ongoing consultation are core support services to be included in a Universal Preschool program. Suggestions for Action: All network providers must have basic training in disease prevention, safety control and

management of mildly ill children. A child care health consultant support service should be created for the county (see adjacent models

in San Francisco and Alameda). Promote wraparound services in which health services are linked to child care facilities. Distribute a child care provider guide to needed health and human services to all network providers. Collaborate with the Health Services Agency in continually offering training and consultation to

providers on required immunizations and maintaining up-to-date records. Require that all one-family exempt providers also maintain these records. Partner with the American Lung Association to train network providers in asthma management

through their new Childhood Asthma Initiative. Review lessons learned from the Healthy Kids for School project, a collaboration between the

Peninsula Partnership, Health Services Agency, and coastside groups.

Child Care Access There are currently 259 child care centers and 736 family child care homes providing a total of 16,622 spaces (in theory) for children of all ages in San Mateo County. Sixty-eight percent of these spaces are in centers. However, the subsidized spaces which exist do not begin to meet the need in the county, as demonstrated by the 2,300 children on the county’s Consolidated Eligibility List (awaiting subsidized spaces). There are eight eligible children for every subsidized space; CalWORKS families receive first priority for spaces. Suggestions for Action: Public/private strategies need to be created to increase the supply of quality child care to meet

demand. The business community needs to be urged to participate actively. All providers in the core network of child care centers and family child care homes must meet the

criteria set by the governance structure. The Child Care Action Campaign designed to fund the improvement and availability of quality child

care should continue to be actively supported. The number of available subsidized slots must be expanded for Universal Preschool programs. Subsidy eligibility criteria should be based on the cost of living in San Mateo County, not on the

state median income. Subsidy funds must reflect the real cost of providing quality care on a per diem basis. Low-income families needing child care services are working parents; full-day care is a necessity. The outcomes of the current initiative of the San Mateo Children and Families First Commission to

provide one million dollars in subsidies to families who are not currently receiving subsidies should be documented carefully. Review the outcomes of a similar initiative employed in Seattle, Washington.

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan vii

Every effort should be made to pool the funding sources for a Universal Preschool program in order to serve all families who want their children to participate. In order to accommodate the various work schedules of parents, changes need to be made in the

hours preschools remain open. Transitioning children from one site to another should be viewed as unsuited to meet a young child’s need for continuity of care. Expand hours by contracting for wrap-around services.

Child Care Costs The cost of child care in San Mateo county is the third highest in the state, currently at an average of $649 a month or $7,788 a year for preschool-age children. Families with one infant and one preschool age child can spend over $2,000 a month for care given the regional market rates. For working parents earning low wages, good quality licensed child care is unattainable if they cannot obtain a subsidized slot. Suggestions for Action: A sliding fee structure (already mentioned) for Universal Preschool programs should be

implemented to ensure that more families could access preschool education. Public/private funds should be used to expand access for families who cannot afford high quality

preschool and who need full-day services. All non-profit programs should create a standing fund-raising committee to expand needed subsidies

for families from private sources. The business community must be included in the planning for Universal Preschool, recognizing that

child care has become an essential service for the worker in all fields. In Florida, businesses employing low-paid, unskilled or semi-skilled workers are taxed a small percentage to subsidize care for their workers’ children. Encourage unions to explore work and family funds as part of collective bargaining agreements (e.g.

SEIU Local 2).

Quality of Care Nearly three quarters of children in San Mateo County are estimated to be in some form of unregulated care. Staff turnover, a factor which critically affects quality of care for young children, is very high in licensed and license-exempt centers, estimated at 30% of teachers and 43% of assistant teachers between 2000 and 2001. The primary cause of this turnover is the high cost of living and the low salaries in child care which drive child development staff to seek higher paid positions in a booming economy. New teaching staff is significantly less well-educated than those they replace, according to a recent study. Suggestions for Action: Utilize public/private funds (e.g., Peninsula Quality Fund for Early Childhood Facilities, Childcare

Facilities Expansion Fund, Prop 10 funds, Title I funds, Child Care and Development Funds, and TANF incentive funds when available) to improve quality and availability of child care, to raise preschool teachers’ salaries/benefits and to provide training and coaching to attract and retain quality staff. Set clear standards to include licensing, for providers who can qualify to be part of a Universal

Preschool network. Specify a time period in which they will need to meet standards set. San Mateo is currently implementing SaMCARES, the local version of the state-wide CARES

(Compensation and Retention Enhance Stability) program to incentivize child care providers to

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan viii

upgrade their education, thereby improving staff quality and reducing turnover. Every effort should be made to continue these incentive funds into the future. Basic training requirements of staff should be attached to the standards for a provider network, and

no-cost training should be offered to network provider staff as a benefit. Educational upgrading must be coupled with increases in wages and benefits to which there are

currently severe market barriers. One source of incentive is SaMCARES; all network providers should be urged to participate; CFFC funds should continue. Seek opportunities in media and through public awards/recognitions to show-case the achievements

of programs and model providers. Use the recommendations of the California Department of Education’s “Desired Results for Children

and Families” as the guidelines for setting criteria for network providers. Provide technical assistance, training, targeted financial assistance, and regular programmatic

monitoring in order to upgrade the quality of care. Publicize the child outcomes to be achieved by a Universal Preschool program during the public

education phase of implementation.

Special Needs Parents of children who have special needs frequently struggle to find a child care provider who will accept their child. Providers are concerned about liability issues and about their own perceived lack of competency in caring for such a child. The recent report of The California Children and Families Commission on Diversity supports the inclusion of all children in community-based settings and recommends strategies for achieving these ends. A Universal Preschool program must pay special attention to expanding access for children with special needs. Suggestions for Action: School district funds for inclusion programs should be used to support children in existing

community-based programs, in line with the new California Developmental Services policies regarding service to children with special needs. More information should be gathered about current availability and access for families who have

children with special needs. California SB 1703 funds should be used to promote most effective strategies for inclusion of

children with special needs in early care and education facilities. Parent referral services need to be more fully developed in order to match the needs of individual

children with providers in the community. Training on serving children with special needs should be a requirement for all network providers in

a Universal Preschool program. A system of supports should be built, which include assessment, on-site mentoring, funded aides and

consultation. Reinforce the public service mandates for child care of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Workforce Resources The average net income for San Mateo County’s child care providers is $21,955, while the self-sufficiency wage for a family of three (average size child care provider family) is $61,984. Overall, providers are well educated; 37% of teachers and 28% of home providers holding a B.A. or higher degree. Almost all have completed some college courses. Unfortunately, many have taken courses for which they have received no college credit.

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan ix

Suggestions for Action: Promote ongoing education and staff retention by expansion and continued funding of the

SaMCARES initiative. Early care and education salaries should be linked to those salaries provided to their colleagues in K-

12 education, which are significantly higher. Active recruitment should be undertaken to attract more family home providers, including exempt

providers, and technical assistance offered to help them identify funding options and available resources. Pooled funding and a per-child rate, which is based on the cost of providing quality care, will

contribute to higher salaries and reduce turnover. Partner with Child Development programs in Community Colleges to recruit enrollees among high

school seniors to increase worker supply for Universal Preschool. Colleges offering child development courses should continue to offer courses in venues accessible to

providers. Colleges must revisit their curriculum offerings in order to provide more college credit for courses

providers take to upgrade their education. The California Child Development Permit Matrix should be used as the standard for the credentials

of Universal Preschool staff (see Appendix A). In San Francisco, county funds have been used to assist child care providers with purchase of health

insurance. This option should be investigated in San Mateo.

UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan 1

I. INTRODUCTION The Environmental Scan is a technique used in strategic planning intended to identify critical

barriers and resources in the environment which can be linked to a particular goal. In this case, that

goal is Universal Preschool. Such a study was undertaken in the spring of 2002 for San Mateo

County as part of the Universal Preschool Feasibility Study, in order to create a selective review of

critical elements in the San Mateo environment which can impact the future potential for such a

movement. In carrying out this study, a number of data sources were reviewed and are listed in the

Endnotes. Efforts were made to update data presented in earlier studies, and to use projected

estimates which attempt to predict future changes, wherever possible.

The context of the study is voluntary preschool services for children between the ages of three and

five years, available to all families who wish to use them. Recent discussions have given

consideration to phasing in four year olds first, but no firm decisions have yet been reached.

The Scan chart was developed in three parts: Relevant data, implications for Universal Preschool,

and suggestions for action. The major environmental elements selected were:

Geography Population Income Employment Housing Transportation Early Care and Education County Resources Health Care Child Care Access Child Care Costs Quality of Care Special Needs Workforce Resources

The last section, suggestions for action, is intended to point out resources which exist and actions

which can or might be taken to address each critical element towards a more holistic plan for

Universal Preschool in the county. Not all elements were considered: Those selected were felt to

hold a particular relationship to early care and education, but others could be added.


II. GEOGRAPHY

Relevant Data Implications for Universal Preschool

Suggestions for Action

• San Mateo County is the second smallest county in the Bay Area in terms of land area, after San Francisco.1

• One third of San Mateo is

permanently protected open space, the second highest proportion in the Bay Area. 2

• At 449 square miles, San

Mateo’s density rate is 1575 persons per square mile, compared with 217.2 per square mile for California as a whole.3

• Access in rural areas (south coast) is difficult, often involving travel across mountain terrain.

• Coastside farming and fishing

communities have minimal child care resources and access.

• High density of working

families along El Camino Real route creates intense competition for affordable child care.

• Access in less developed areas needs further study to determine best solutions.

• Development of Universal

Preschool needs to reflect population diversity.

• The Coast Range divides San Mateo County into two distinct parts: The coastside, which is primarily agricultural (although some residential and office development has appeared in recent years), and the eastern half of the county, where 90 percent of current development occurs. 4

• Most development is centered in the eastern half of the county, providing limited choices for those in the west.

• Rush hour commutes along the

eastern corridor can significantly add to an already long work day.

• Geographic limitations may require a network of family child care homes or school-sited programs in outlying areas.

• Accommodations are needed to

respond to commuter delays in retrieving children at sites.

• The downtowns of most of the county’s cities – South San Francisco, San Bruno, Millbrae, Burlingame, San Mateo, Belmont, San Carlos, Redwood City and Menlo Park – are clustered around El Camino Real and/or the Caltrain tracks. 5

• Families may prefer to place their children in facilities either close to their home community, or close to their work site.

• Planning for expansion of Universal Preschool facilities in low-and medium-income communities should be linked to easy transportation access.

• San Mateo County is bordered by San Francisco, Santa Clara and Alameda Counties, a continuous, dense population.

• Services and workplaces are linked across county lines. This would include child care.

• The continuous, dense population demands a Regional planning perspective for Universal Preschool.


III. POPULATION



• San Mateo County has 707,161 residents, an increase of 9% since 1990.6

• Child care must be available to keep up with the county’s growth.

• Children ages 0-4: 45, 374, or 6.4% of the total population.7 This is 2% (963) lower than the 0-4 population in 1990.

• The number of families8 with

their own or related children under the age of 6 is 22,089 (or 12.9% of total families). Of these 22,089 families, 17.3% are single parent families.9

• While total population is increasing, child population declines slightly.

• Planning should assume that the child population is stable and probably will remain so, or decrease, as the cost of housing continues to rise.

• Sixty-three percent of children under the age of 6 have two working parents or a single parent who works. This is the highest percentage in the state.10

• This highlights the need for access to affordable quality child care for San Mateo County families.

• A comprehensive system to ensure that all families can have access to quality early education and care is critically needed.

• The distribution of non-white residents has increased substantially since 1990: - Hispanic by 35% - Asian by 33% - White population decreased

by 11%.11

Other, 4.0%

Asian/ Pacific

Islander, 21.0%

Black or African American, 3.0%

Hispanic or

Latino, 22.0%

White, 50.0%

General Population, San Mateo County12

• Universal Preschool in San Mateo County must be culturally and linguistically appropriate.

• Active recruitment and training of culturally and ethnically diverse teachers and child care providers would need to be undertaken for a Universal Preschool initiative.


• The child population of San Mateo County is much more diverse than the adult population.

Other, 1.0%

Asian/ Pacific

Islander, 23.0%

Black or African American, 5.0%

Hispanic or

Latino, 30.0%

White, 41.0%

Child Population, San Mateo County13

• Almost half of the county’s

children speak languages other than English.14

• Among school-aged children in

San Mateo County, 21% are classified by the schools as Limited English Proficient (LEP).15

• Children who are Limited English Proficient often come from low-income families with low literacy rates.16

• These children may be isolated

in less affluent schools and at-risk for poor educational outcomes, and they often need special assistance.17

• All early childhood settings should foster dual-language learning, ultimately to make every California child bi-lingual and bi-literate.18

• CFFC has recently provided the County Office of Education with a planning grant to develop a language institute for the purpose of training early care and education teachers and providers in the education of English as a Second Language students.

• Latino and Asian/Pacific Islander providers are somewhat under-represented and Caucasian providers are somewhat over-represented.19 - Seventeen percent of family

home providers and 16% of center providers are Latino while Latino children ages 0-12 are 31% of the total population.

- Fifteen percent of family home providers and 13% of center providers are Asian/Pacific Islander while Asian/Pacific Islander children ages 0-12 are 20% of the total population.

- Sixty-one percent of family home providers and 51% of center providers are Caucasian, while Caucasian children ages 0-12 are only 39% of the total population.20

• There is an ethnic / racial disparity between providers and the child population they service. Parents would expect that their cultural beliefs and practices would be transmitted in child care settings.

• Ensure that Universal Preschool teacher recruitment efforts include strategies to attract and retain teachers of diverse ethnicities and who are bi-lingual.


IV. INCOME



• The median income of 4-person households in San Mateo County was $80,100 in September 2001.21 (This is compared to California’s state median income of $55,209 in 2001.)22

• The Cost of Living for San

Mateo County residents far exceeds the statewide average. The greater Bay Area is the most expensive place in the state to raise a family, requiring an income of at least four times the federal poverty level.23, 24

• While child density is greater in low-income areas, child care capacity is greatest in those areas with middle and high incomes.

• The dollars that low-income

families earn do not “go as far” in San Mateo County as they would in another county, especially for early care and learning services. This discrepancy has serious implications for parental choice, as well as for community. 25

• Distribution of child care and early education facilities needs to reflect the distribution of the geographic distribution of the population for a Universal Preschool initiative, i.e. increase facilities for low-income communities.

• In San Mateo County, the hourly wage that a single wage earner with a preschooler and a school-age child needs in order to be self-sufficient is $29.80 per hour, or $61,984 annually.26

• Even before the current

economic downturn, one in four of the county's children lived in relative poverty at less than 75% of the state median income.27

• The estimated number of San

Mateo County’s children ages 3-4 who live below the federal poverty level is 1,696.28

• Nine percent of children ages

0-4 were below the federal poverty level.29

• Four percent of all families and

6 percent of families with a female head of household had incomes below the federal poverty level. 30

• The actual need for subsidized child care among children of low- income working families is far greater than state poverty standards might indicate due to the exceptionally high cost of living in San Mateo County.

• Families with young children

would be eligible for CalWORKs child care subsidies.

• As of December 2000, the

number of available publicly subsidized child care spaces in San Mateo County remained at less than 5,000 for the estimated 40,076 children eligible, a ratio of one space for every eight eligible children.32

• Child care subsidies should be available to all low-and middle-income families (adopt a sliding-scale fee structure).




• Nearly half of the jobs in the service sector, which will experience the greatest projected growth in the future, will pay less than $10 per hour. This is half of what is needed for family self-sufficiency.31

• All working poor residents will require subsidized care.

• Adopt a sliding scale fee structure with significant subsidies for low income families.

• Total CalWORKs Participants in San Mateo, in 2001: 3,645 (82% of which were children)33

• Over half of those leaving

public assistance who were surveyed are working, and although their earnings tend to be above the federal poverty level, they are well below what it costs to support a family in San Mateo.34

• Many families receiving public

assistance do not receive the supports (e.g., food stamps, child are, Medi-Cal, Earned Income Tax Credit, and CalWORKs) designed to help them make the transition to employment and self-sufficiency.35

• CalWORKs recipients entering the workforce, and thereby transitioning off public assistance, will require continuing subsidized care.

• Linkages need to be continued between CalWORKs program representatives and a Universal Preschool initiative in order to ensure that families transitioning off public assistance have access to quality care for their children.


V. EMPLOYMENT



• San Mateo County, in comparison with the rest of the state, has the highest percentage of children who live in families with working parents (66% vs. 55% for California).36

• Further supports the pressure on affordable child care and the need to create a more comprehensive system.

• Planning should continue to create a comprehensive system to meet the needs of all sectors of the county.

• April 2002 San Mateo Data: Total Labor Force: 403,762; Total Employed: 386,297; Total Unemployed: 17,465; Unemployment Rate: 4.3%37

• Unemployment Rate in

California at Large: 6.3%.38

• Low unemployment (4.3%) and the rising number of single mothers in the workforce have increased the demand for child care.

• Target and engage large and medium-sized employers in a campaign to support expansion of child care access (SAMCEDA).

• Among the most common occupations for San Mateo County in 2000 were: - Management, professional,

and related - 41 % - Sales and office - 29 % - Service - 12 % - Production, transportation,

and material moving - 9 % - Construction and maintenance

- 8 %.39 • Four of the top five occupations

that will experience the fastest growth from 2000 to 2004 are computer-related professions, requiring over 10,250 additional workers.40

• Eighty-one percent of the

people employed were private wage and salary workers; 13 % were federal, state, or municipal government workers; and 6 % were self-employed. 41

• Retail and service trade industries, along with other off-shift industries, have created demand for nontraditional hours of child care.

• An increasingly well-educated, technically trained workforce will demand better benefits and family-friendly environments.

• Private wage and salary

workers are more vulnerable to shifts in the economy, layoffs, reductions, and may have periodic need for subsidized care.

• During economic downturn

periods, applications for family child care home licenses increase, and retreat in better times.

• Early care and education services should be offered in non-traditional hours in a variety of settings.

• Efforts should be made to

attract and retain a quality family home workforce through benefits such as assistance with purchase of health insurance, business counseling.

• Expand creative options to

support child care services (e.g., Adopt-A-Center).

• Universal Preschool services

receiving subsidy funds of any kind need to adopt a sliding-scale fee structure.


VI. HOUSING



• The median home price for 2001 was $600,600.42 The average two-bedroom rental is $1,909.43

• In 2001 in San Mateo County,

only 17% of current residents can afford the median priced home.44

• With one of the least affordable

housing and rental markets in the country, it is increasingly difficulty for families to find housing.45

• The high cost of real estate is becoming a barrier to the construction of new centers in San Mateo County.

• Family child care home

providers cannot afford cost of housing so many close up and move elsewhere.

• The high cost of business

(escalating rents) puts some providers out of work, or keeps others from starting up. This affects teacher-child ratios, turnover rate, and ability to maintain facilities in a tight real estate market.

• Create a universal system for preschool access which ties cost to parents’ earnings, i.e. a sliding-scale fee for all provider settings included in the network to be created.

• Loans funded by the state and

by local sources for new construction or expansion of centers should be increased and offered long-term at minimal cost to borrowers (see state of Connecticut Child Care Facilities Fund).

• The county’s homeowner vacancy rate is .5% and the rental vacancy rate is 1.8%.46

• Due to restrictions on land use, the rate at which new housing units are being developed is not adequate to meet the demand in the county.

• Families seeking housing need

to look outside the county, a condition which lends itself to increased mobility.

• The tight homeowner and

rental market affects expansion of family child care homes.

• All new housing developments for low and middle-income housing should include a tax for child care facility development.

• Cities should review and adjust

ordinances which act as a barrier to development of child care facilities.

• In a recent survey of families in San Mateo County, families reported that housing and child care are their two greatest expenditures.47

• As the cost of housing and utilities climb, the amount a family can spend on preschool will decrease.

• A comprehensive plan to offer sliding-scale fees at all income levels should be created to assist families with quality child care access.

• The presence of the Silicon Valley has substantially increased San Mateo County’s transient population, as many people are being forced out of the county due to escalating housing costs.48

• To keep up with the cost of living, preschool teachers need to find better-paid employment and leave the early education field.

• Teachers must receive incentives in salary and benefits in order to remain in the field (e.g., SaMCARES49; subsidizing health insurance as in San Francisco).


VII. TRANSPORTATION



• The average number of San Mateo County daily commuters in 2000 was 382,000, with 154,212 traveling to neighboring counties.50

• Average Bay Area daily

commuters traveling to San Mateo County in 2000: 489,952 daily commuters.51

• Forecasts project 423,000 daily

San Mateo County commuters in 2010, with 173,000 traveling across county lines. 52

• Forecasts project 532,412 Bay

Area daily commuters traveling to San Mateo County in 2010. 53

• Supports the need for regionalized planning for early care education services.

• Time delays caused by

commutes may incur additional fees (late fees) for child care services.

• Periods of commuting time will

increase dependence on public transportation, making it even more difficult for parents to pick up children during mid-day and non-traditional hours.

• Many child care services and

early learning programs do not operate early enough in the morning or late enough at night to allow parents time to travel from work.

• The Association of Bay Area Governments, or similar business groups, should be invited to participate in Universal Preschool planning.

• Business(es) should be

encouraged to provide flexible work hours and telecommuting wherever possible.

• Universal Preschool programs

must build in time flexibility to accommodate families commuting by car or public transportation.

• San Mateo County, developed first as a series of “rail-road suburbs” and Caltrain service, continues that early commute pattern, now also extending south to Silicon Valley.

• The train route parallels El

Camino Real, the first highway and automobile route through the Peninsula.54

• While public transit is better than most metropolitan areas, drop-offs on the way to/from work may prove difficult for many parents.

• New facilities should be located close to major transportation corridors and hubs.

• At least half of urban dwellers, a third of suburban dwellers and a quarter of rural residents do not own a vehicle; according to a federal transportation survey carried out in 1995 and reported in 1998.55 Low-income families are least likely to own personal transportation and will be using public resources.

• Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission, in their Welfare-to-Work Transportation Summit, “Linking People to Success”, cited concerns that many school programs do not have after-school care on-site, requiring children to be transported during the day to another site.56

• More attention should be directed to developing wrap-around support services (such as extended child care and health services) for working families.


VIII. EARLY CARE AND EDUCATION



• In 1990, the President and state Governors established the First National Education Goal: By the year 2000, all children will enter school ready to learn.57

• Research demonstrates that high-quality preschool experiences can boost academic achievement in elementary schools.58

• Early brain development

research highlights the critical role of the early years as precursors for school success.59

• The Children and Families

Commission (State Prop 10) adopted “Ready to Learn” as their vision and has thus far awarded over seven million dollars to 16 early care and education initiatives in San Mateo County towards this end. These initiatives are inseparable from a Universal Preschool movement.60

• Greater demands are being put on child care providers to ensure that children are entering school ready to learn.

• The Cost, Quality and Child

Outcomes in Child Care Centers study found that care in most centers is poor to mediocre. A similar study in family home care again confirmed that finding.61

• These initiatives which address

“Ready to Learn” are inseparable from the effort to construct universal access to quality preschool services for San Mateo County children.

• Continue to expand the school readiness initiatives.

• All children should have access

to high-quality and developmentally appropriate preschool programs that help prepare them for school.62

• Promote quality standards by

setting criteria for programs which are funded to participate in preparing children for school.

• “Ready to Learn” initiatives

should be joined with Universal Preschool initiatives in county planning.

• San Mateo County contains 24 school districts and 175 public schools, of which 110 are elementary schools. Twenty of the 23 districts offer some type of preschool programs at 56 school campuses. Thirty-seven of these programs are located on school sites; 19 are off school sites. These programs currently serve 1,288 preschoolers. Most of these programs are operated by the school itself; some are run by community agencies which may rent school space.

• The public school system is a significant and long-term player in the county’s early care and education infrastructure. While school districts operate preschool programs independently, the potential exists to bring them together as part of a county-wide system.63

• The 18 state-funded preschools operated by school districts and by community non-profit agencies could form the core of a county-wide preschool system to which community agencies could be added. Issues of collaboration and common standards would need to be addressed.




• The County Office of Education contracts with community agencies and school districts for state preschool services to 576 children, and has provided long-term and consistent leadership to early care and education services in the county through the exemplary leadership of Dr. Floyd Gonellla.

• There is growing awareness of the need to interface and link preschool education with the primary grades in public education, and there are benefits to be obtained from existing child-focused curriculum and training services within the education system. Most state preschool programs are funded through the local school districts. The largest State Preschool Service contractor, San Mateo County Office of Education, sub-contracts to both school districts and community agencies.

• Explore the potential role of the County Office of Education as a lead agency/contractor for a Universal Preschool initiative.

• The San Mateo County School Readiness Assessment Pilot Initiative found statistically significant differences in readiness scores among the kindergarten sample population on a scale of 1 (least proficient) to 5 (most proficient) as follows: - Primary English speakers

scored 3.30 compared to non-primary English speakers 3.00

- Those who had preschool experience scored 3.25 to 3.02 for no preschool.

- Those who attended Summer Transitional Program scored 3.25 to no Summer Transitional Program 3.11.

- Participants in Raising a Reader scored 3.20 to 3.03 for those not participating.64

• The lowest school readiness score was documented in the area of communication and language usage.65

• For greatest educational gains, children who scored lowest would benefit most from a Universal Preschool experience, or are who represent the most pressing underserved populations in particular communities.

• Two groups are suggested, in the Peninsula Partnership report, “Assessing School Readiness in San Mateo County”, for first priority in phasing in a Universal Preschool initiative: Children who are not primary English speakers and children who have not had prior preschool experience (e.g., see North Carolina’s new More-At-Four preschool initiative). Another option, in the collaborative model, would be to allow local communities to select their priorities from a list of eligibility criteria created by the governance structure.

• Prioritize areas of needed improvement for curriculum changes in early care and education programs. Train network providers in strategies to achieve improvements.




• The School Readiness Assessment Pilot Initiative funded by the San Mateo Peninsula Partnership for Children, Youth and Families in 2001 made a significant contribution to the creation of linkages between early care and education and the school system.66

• The findings of that study suggest target populations that should receive priority in phasing in a Universal Preschool initiative.

• Review the findings of this study for inclusion in the implementation of a Universal Preschool initiative for San Mateo County.

• Continue to create linkages

between the schools and early care and education.

• A national survey of kindergarten teachers found that 46% of children entering kindergarten have a behavioral or learning problem and one out of thirteen fail kindergarten or first grade.67

• Quality early care and education provides significant long-term gains to children between ages birth to five, especially children at-risk.68,69

• Early intervention, assessment and treatment services must be included in a holistic Universal Preschool program

• Promote Universal Preschool

by publicizing the gains to be made in school readiness for young children.

• Virtually every school district in San Mateo County houses some type of preschool program in its facilities. Many are operated directly by the districts, and others are contracted to non-district licensed preschool providers. In addition, some high school districts are involved in providing child care for school-age parents.70

• The County Office of

Education oversees thirteen subcontracted child development programs to provide State Preschool services to hundreds of children throughout the County.71

• Over 1500 children ages zero to

five are served by the elementary, high school and community college district programs contracted by the CDE Child Development Division.72

• The high level of involvement already demonstrated by the school districts in the provision of early education, indicates an existing focus and core of services that can be cultivated to implement Universal Preschool.

• The school system (K-14) should be a primary partner in the provision and expansion of Universal Preschool services.

• The state mandated local child

care planning council (Child Care Partnership Council) is co-led by the County Board of Supervisors and the County Superintendent of Schools. It has been an important conduit for funding and collaboration. It’s role in county-wide policy and planning for child care makes it a contributor in the Universal Preschool initiative.


VIX. COUNTY RESOURCES



• San Mateo County has successfully involved public and private sectors in children’s issues and includes existing resources such as: - Child Care Coordinating

Council - The San Mateo County Child

Care Partnership Council - County Office of Education - School District Personnel - Human Services Agency - Board of Supervisors (three

out of five members hold policy making positions in relation to child care)

- Redwood City Council (has the only paid City Child Care Coordinator in the county)

- South San Francisco City Council

- San Mateo Mayor and City Coordinator

- Health Services Agency (Pre to Three Program)

- City of San Mateo - Peninsula Community

Foundation - Peninsula Partnership for

Children, Youth and Families - Children and Families First

Commission of San Mateo County

- Institute for Human and Social Development (Head Start contractor)

- Family Services Agency (Burlingame)

- The David and Lucile Packard Foundation

- Early care and education representatives and advocates

- School boards and school districts

- Central Labor Union - Raising a Reader book bag

program

• An extensive and diverse support system for a Universal Preschool initiative exists in the county.

• Funding can be leveraged for

targeted programs with the collaborations of key stakeholders, towards a common goal.

• All of these county resources

have a role to play in identifying community needs for early care and education, and in advocating for expansions and improvements in care.

• Educators and parents are encouraging the use of Children and Families First Commission (CFFC) funds to expand financial resources for current programs.73

• The talents of the many county

resources should be brought to bear on the creation of solutions. These would include: Local colleges and universities, United Way, healthcare organizations, business organizations, the faith community, neighborhood organizations, etc.

• Businesses and unions should

be included in the planning process.

• A long-term plan for

sustainability will ensure continuing access for Universal Preschool.




• The state-funded Child Care Partnership Council brings together different sectors of the child care field, including consumers, providers, public and community agency representatives. It plays an important role in assessing and planning community needs for child care services.

• The Child Care Partnership Council is an important player in the assessment and planning for community child care needs across the county, and in building collaborative relationships among the sectors.

• The Council Forum can be used as a testing ground for Universal Preschool proposals.

• The nine collaboratives which currently exist in the county are a key resource for local preschool development: - Coastside Collaborative - Daly City Collaborative - East Palo Alto Partnership - Menlo Park Collaborative - Pacifica Community

Partnership - Redwood City Partnership - San Mateo Foster City

Partnership - South Coast Collaborative - South San Francisco

Collaborative

• Universal Preschool services should be shaped to meet the needs of each region. The child care needs of these regions have been documented in the Community Voices publication, “Enhancing community involvement in issues affecting families with young children.”74

• Every stakeholder, including collaboratives, should be represented in the planning and governance structure for a countywide Universal Preschool initiative.

• Three San Mateo County initiatives – SaMCARES75, the Child Care Expansion Fund76, and the Peninsula Quality Fund for Early Childhood Facilities77 -- will strive to increase the supply of child care by 10 percent over the next five years.78

• Fifteen million dollars has been

raised for San Mateo County through Prop 10 taxes for new and expanded services for young children and their families in San Mateo County.79

• The Child Care Action Campaign, which is designed to mobilize community support for several initiatives (including the three initiatives listed to the left), aims to increase public and private investments in existing child care solutions that could result in more licensed child care centers, improved physical condition of centers and better quality care for kids.80

• Utilize county resources (e.g., Peninsula Quality Fund for Early Childhood Facilities, Childcare Facilities Expansion Fund, SaMCARES, Prop 10 funds) to improve quality and availability of child care, to raise preschool teachers’ salaries/benefits and to provide training and coaching to attract and retain quality staff.81

• Use existing funds to leverage

additional dollars.


X. HEALTH CARE



• Based on numerous studies demonstrating the increased risk of infectious and communicable diseases in group care of young children, The Healthy Child Care America campaign was launched in 1992 by the American Academy of Pediatrics to promote safe and healthy environments.82

• Parents’ first concern is for the safety and well-being of their children.

• All network providers must have basic training in disease prevention, safety control and management of mildly ill children.

• A child care health consultant

support service, which includes mental health consultation, should be created for the county (see adjacent models in San Francisco and Alameda).

• In San Mateo County, it is estimated that 20% of children (ages 0-5) do not have health insurance.83

• Universal Preschool program staff can help parents locate health services their child may need, at a cost they can afford.

• Promote wraparound services in which health services are linked to child care facilities.

• Distribute a child care provider

guide to needed health and human services to all network providers.

• The percentage of children immunized at age two ranges from 66.2% to 80.6% across San Mateo County. This is well below the Healthy People 2000 and 2010 Objectives of 90%.84

• To ensure children enrolled in Universal Preschool programs remain healthy, providers must be knowledgeable about immunization and the laws which apply to them regarding children in their care.

• Collaborate with the Health Services Agency in continually offering training and consultation to providers on required immunizations and maintaining up-to-date records.

• Require that all one-family

exempt providers also maintain these records.

• The most prevalent chronic disease in child care is asthma.85

• Child care providers must be prepared to deal with chronic diseases of children in care.

• Partner with the American Lung Association to train network providers in asthma management through their new Childhood Asthma Initiative.

• Review lessons learned from

the Healthy Kids for School project, a collaboration between the Peninsula Partnership, Health Services Agency, and coastside groups.


XI. CHILD CARE ACCESS



• Since 1998, there has been a net loss in family child care supply, with approximately 30 fewer providers, which translates into the loss of several hundred child care slots.86

• There are 318 child care centers

(259 serving 3-5 year olds), 686 family child care homes (557 serving 3-5 year olds)87, and 397 license-exempt caregivers providing slots for children of all ages in San Mateo County.88

• The demand for child care and early learning programs in San Mateo County far exceeds the supply.

• The existing licensed and/or

certified child care centers and family child care homes could constitute the core of a Universal Preschool program in San Mateo County.

• Public/private strategies need to be created to increase the supply of quality child care to meet demand. The business community needs to be urged to participate actively.

• All providers in this core

network must meet the quality criteria set by the governance structure.

• Licensed child care supply for children ages 0-5: 16,622 slots (with 68% of all slots being in child care centers; the remaining 32% being in family child care homes). Children ages 0-5 with working parents, and therefore needing child care number 34,237.89

• The licensed child care supply meets only 49% of the estimated needs for child care (demand) for children ages

0-5.90

• Continue to support the Child Care Action Campaign designed to fund the improvement and availability of quality child care.91

• The number of all low-income children needing subsidized child care is 40,07692

• The number of subsidized child

care spaces for all low-income children is 4,94093

• There are 2,100 children on the

County’s Centralized Eligibility List (CEL)94 for child care (278 of which are three-and four-year olds). 95

• Currently waiting lists for

subsidized preschools may be as long as one year.96

• There are eight eligible

children for every subsidized slot in San Mateo County.97

• Since only 12% of low income families receive child care subsidies, access to quality services are virtually nonexistent for most of these children.

• A family can be eligible for

subsidized care (when their income is at or below 75% of the state median income), but never receive an available space. Although everyone on CalWORKs (Stages 2 and 3) receives care, those eligible for non-CalWORKs programs (FAPP, GAPP) may never receive services unless the children are deemed to be at risk (i.e., active CPS case).

• The number of available subsidized slots must be expanded for Universal Preschool programs.

• Subsidy eligibility criteria

should be based on the cost of living in San Mateo County, not on the state median income.

• Subsidy funds must reflect the

real cost of providing quality care.

• Document the outcomes of the current initiative of the San Mateo CFFC which will provide one million dollars to subsidize families who are not currently receiving subsidies.




Only 33% of the low-income preschool-age child population is currently receiving subsidized child care.98

• Some of the available State

Preschool slots are not being used as the half-day programs do not meet the needs of working families, and because the contract reimbursement rates are too low to cover the cost of providing quality care.99

• Reimbursement rates do not

reflect the real cost of quality early care and education.

• Some of the valuable subsidy

funds are lost to the County, reducing the potential number of children who could be served.

• Low-income families needing child care services are working parents; full-day care is a necessity.

• As a result of the federal government’s Welfare Reform (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) in 1996, federal and state spending on preschool and early education programs increased with the intent of assisting parents to achieve independence from public assistance.100

• The increase in federal spending on child care has expanded the number of people requesting subsidies, and therefore lengthened the waiting period for subsidized care for low income families.

• Every effort should be made to “pool” the funding sources for a Universal Preschool program in order to serve all families who want their children to participate.

• Nationally, one-third of low income working mothers work on weekends, almost one-tenth work during evenings or nights, and almost half work on rotating schedules.101

• Only one percent of all licensed

and license-exempt centers in San Mateo County provide care during non-traditional hours. Twenty-one percent of family child care homes provide care during non-traditional hours.102

• Flexible hours of operation, including non-standard hours, drop-in availability and year-round care are needed to accommodate different working schedules of parents.103

• In order to accommodate the various work schedules of parents, changes need to be made in the hours preschools remain open. Transitioning children from one site to another should be viewed as unsuited to meet a young child’s need for continuity of care. Expand hours by contracting for wrap-around services and experiment with varied time frames.

• More family child care homes

willing to accommodate non-traditional hours should be recruited.


XII. CHILD CARE COSTS



• In a recent survey in San Mateo County, families reported that housing and child care are their two greatest expenditures.104

• The cost of child care in San

Mateo County is the third highest in the state.105

• San Mateo County has been

ranked as one of the top five most expensive counties for infant and preschool care.106

• The cost per month for child

care for preschool-aged children in San Mateo County was $649 in 2001, up 13% from 1999 ($575).107 This translates to $7,788 per year, which constitutes 27% of a family’s annual income if both parents are working full time at minimum wage ($28,080 per year before taxes). NOTE: These costs are per child. If a family has more than one child in child care, the percentage of the family’s income that goes to cover child care costs raises substantially (e.g., to over 55% for 2 children in care, etc.).

• Families with one infant and

one preschool age child can spend over $2,000 a month for child care in San Mateo County given the Regional Market Rates ($1216 for an infant $892 for a four-year-old).108

• To ensure access to care, preschool program fees must be linked to family’s ability to pay through mechanisms such as sliding-scale fees.

• The high cost of child care

often causes the parents of dual income families to work opposite shifts or choose lower quality care. In the end, this may have the effect of limiting the child’s educational enrichment.

• Continued rise in cost of

housing and child care place increasing pressure on families and force families to use less desirable forms of care for their children.

• In San Mateo County, the low

and middle income working parents are especially burdened with early care and learning costs109.

• A sliding fee structure for preschools should be implemented to ensure more families could access preschool education.

• The use of public/private funds

to expand access for families who cannot afford high quality preschool and who need full-day services should be expanded.

• All non-profit programs should

create a standing fund-raising committee to expand needed subsidies for families.

• The business and labor

communities must be included in the planning for Universal Preschool, recognizing that child care has become an essential service for the worker in all fields. In Florida, businesses employing low-paid, unskilled or semi-skilled workers are taxed a small percentage to subsidize care for their workers’ children.

• Encourage unions to explore

work and family funds as part of collective bargaining agreements (e.g. SEIU Local 2).


XIII. QUALITY OF CARE



• Nearly three-quarters of children in San Mateo County are in unregulated facilities.110

NOTE: Unregulated facilities include those in which children are cared for in their own homes where parents work split shifts, or where children are cared for by relatives.

• Caregivers working in unregulated settings are less likely to have early childhood development training and are less likely to provide the same types of enrichment activities as those providers working in licensed settings.

• Utilize public/private funds (e.g., Peninsula Quality Fund for Early Childhood Facilities, Childcare Facilities Expansion Fund, Prop 10 funds, Title I funds, Child Care and Development funds, and TANF incentive funds) to improve quality and availability of child care, to raise preschool teachers’ salaries/benefits and to provide training and coaching to attract and retain quality staff.111

• Set clear standards to include licensing, for providers who can qualify to be part of a Universal Preschool network. Specify a time period in which they will need to meet standards set.

• Staff turnover is a significant factor impacting the quality of child care. Thirty percent of teachers and 43% of assistant teachers left their centers between spring 2000 and spring 2001.112

• The booming economy of the

late 1990’s and the increase in job opportunities in other sectors has made it increasingly challenging to find and retain qualified teaching staff.113

Funds for SaMCARES are

currently being pooled from several sources, including state and local Prop 10, state AB 212, Federal Early Learning Opportunities Act Grant.

• A well-trained, stable caregiver workforce is the key to guaranteeing high quality, developmentally enhancing services for young children.114

• With turnover rates of 30 -

43%, a child care facility could change one-third to half of its staff each year.115 Continuity is severely affected.

• Frequent turnover results in

centers being staffed largely by people who have relatively little experience.116

• San Mateo is currently implementing SaMCARES, the local version of the state-wide CARES (Compensation and Retention Enhance Stability) program to incentivize child care providers to upgrade their education, thereby improving staff quality and reducing turnover. Every effort should be made to continue these incentive funds into the future.

• Attach basic training

requirements of staff to the standards for a provider network, and offer no-cost training to network provider staff as a benefit.




• Reductions in class size across California schools has decreased the number of qualified and experienced child care staff by creating new employment opportunities for educated child care teaching staff.117

• New teaching staff are

significantly less well-educated that those whom they replace.118

• There is a tremendous shortage of qualified staff for preschool programs due to low salaries and lack of affordable housing.119

• The low wages and lack of

income growth potential have resulted in a lack of interest in entering the child care profession.120

• Educational upgrading must be coupled with increases in wages and benefits to which there are currently severe market barriers.121 One source of incentive is SaMCARES; all network providers should be urged to participate; CFFC funds should continue.

• Seek opportunities in media

and through public awards/recognitions to show-case the achievements of programs and model providers.

• Recent research has indicated that child outcomes are directly related to the quality of care in programs.122

• Research on the effects of good quality Universal Preschool programs on children and families supports the gains to be achieved in school success to include lower grade retention, special education rates, cognitive increases, increased graduation rates, and positive social effects such as reduced welfare dependency and teen pregnancy.123

• Centers that were more heavily

subsidized and more intensely regulated tended to pay higher staff salaries and more frequently offered a structured set of learning activities, two factors associated with positive child development.124

• The recommendations of the California Department of Education’s “Desired Results for Children and Families” should be used as the guidelines for setting criteria for network providers.125

• Provide technical assistance,

training, targeted financial assistance, and regular programmatic monitoring in order to upgrade the quality of care.

• Universal Preschool staff must

receive training, support, resources, and advice on how to properly maintain the quality of their facilities and programs.126 .

• Publicize the child outcomes to

be achieved during the public education phase of implementation.

• Children from poor households stand to benefit most from high quality care, but are less likely to be enrolled in high quality care than are children from affluent families.127

• This is partly due to the uneven access to higher quality care in their neighborhoods.128

• First priority for Universal Preschool should be accorded to four-year-olds from low-income families and Limited English Proficient.


XIV. SPECIAL NEEDS



• There are an estimated 394 children ages birth to three years old in San Mateo County with special needs, and another 1,153 ages three to five- years- old.129

• An important element in planning for Universal Preschool will be ensuring accommodations are made for children with special needs.

• School district funds for inclusion programs should be used to support children in existing community-based programs, in line with the new California Developmental Services policies regarding service to children with special needs.

• More information should be

gathered about current availability and access for families who have children with special needs.

• Child care for children with special needs is scarce as there are few child care programs designed to accommodate these children. 130

• Access to early care and education programs must expand to include all children, including those with special needs.

• California SB 1703 funds should be used to promote most effective strategies for inclusion of children with special needs in early care and education facilities.

• Parents often struggle to find any child care provider who will accept his or her child.131

• Parents need assistance in locating appropriate and quality care for their children with special needs.

• Parent referral services need to be more fully developed in order to match the needs of individual children with providers in the community.

• Child care providers are concerned about liability issues and their own competency to respond to a child’s special needs. 132

• Providers state that they need training and support to care for children with special needs.

• Training on serving children with special needs should be a requirement for all network providers in a Universal Preschool program.

• A system of supports should be

built, which include assessment, on-site mentoring, funded aides, and consultation.

• Reinforce the public service

mandates for child care of the Americans with Disabilities Act.


XV. WORKFORCE RESOURCES



• Child care workers cite low wages, poor benefits and working conditions, and limited career advancement as barriers to their careers.133

• The average wage in San

Mateo for child care teachers ranges from $12.58 to $18.00.134

• The overall average net income

for the county’s child care providers is $21,955, while the self-sufficiency wage for a family of three (the average family size for child care providers) is $61,984.135

• Without addressing the need to raise the wages, a Universal Preschool movement will be handicapped in finding quality staff.

• Promote ongoing education and staff retention by expansion and continued funding of the SaMCARES initiative and the development of new strategies to attract and retain quality staff.

• Early care and education

salaries should be linked to those salaries provided to their colleagues in K-12 education, which are significantly higher.

• On average, family child care providers report having been in operation for 10 years.136

• Forty-two percent of family

child care home providers plan to continue offering child care for fewer than three more years.137

• The high cost of housing discourages long-term residency, thereby impacting the number of family child care providers who stay in the business.

• Active recruitment should be undertaken to attract more family home providers, including exempt providers, and technical assistance offered to help them identify funding options and available resources.

• Exempt providers should be

targeted for training and possible recruitment into family child care home licensing.

• Thirty percent of teachers and

43% of assistant teachers left their centers between spring 2000 and spring 2001.138

• Sixty percent of centers

reported taking more than six weeks to find a permanent replacement upon a teacher’s departure.139

• Research shows that retention of staff is essential for quality child care.140

• The use of a series of

substitute teachers for long time periods affects continuity of care for children.

• Pooled funding and a per-child rate which is based on the cost of providing quality care will contribute to higher salaries and reduce turnover.

• Partner with Child

Development programs in Community Colleges to recruit enrollees among high school seniors to increase worker supply for Universal Preschool.

• Thirty-seven percent of child care center teachers and 28% of family child care providers

• Child care providers want to upgrade their knowledge and skills, but must have access to

• Colleges offering child development courses should continue to offer courses in




have achieved a B.A. degree or higher.141

• Ninety-eight percent of child

care center teachers and 79% of family child care providers have completed at least some college education in preparation for their jobs.142

educational resources at times when they are able to attend.

venues and at times accessible to providers.

• Informal training groups should

explore ways to link college credit to their offerings.

• Although 63% of child care center teachers and 30% of family child care providers received 20 or more hours of ongoing training in child development and related subjects in the last year, 68% of child care center teachers and 48% of family child care providers did not receive college credit for ongoing training.143

• The difficulty in receiving college credit for ongoing training points to an ongoing problem in the child care field that limits the opportunities of child care staff for professional development and career mobility. 144

• Colleges must revisit their curriculum offerings in order to provide college credit for courses providers take to upgrade their education.

• The California Child

Development Permit Matrix should be used as the standard for the credentials of Universal Preschool staff (see Appendix A).

• Thirteen percent of San Mateo County child care providers have no health coverage, and of those who do have coverage, 36% must purchase their own insurance.145

• Lack of health coverage is of particular concern to child care providers, who are exposed to illness on a daily basis on-the-job, and many of whom are over 50 years of age.146

• In San Francisco, county Medi-Cal funds have been used to assist child care providers with purchase of health insurance. This option should be investigated in San Mateo.


ENDNOTES

1 Association of Bay Area of Governments. (2001). Smart Growth Strategy: Regional Livability Footprint Project; Shaping the Future of the Nine-County Bay Area- Briefing Book for Public Workshop Participants and Other Bay Area Residents. http://www.abag.ca.gov/planning/smartgrowth/sg_briefing_book.pdf. 2 Ibid. 3 U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Census 2000 Summary File 1, Population, Housing Units, Area, and Density: 2000. http://www.census.gov/c2ss/www/Products/Profiles/2000/index.htm 4 Association of Bay Area of Governments. (2001). Smart Growth Strategy: Regional Livability Footprint Project; Shaping the Future of the Nine-County Bay Area- Briefing Book for Public Workshop Participants and Other Bay Area Residents. http://www.abag.ca.gov/planning/smartgrowth/sg_briefing_book.pdf. 5 Ibid. 6 U.S. Census Bureau. (2002). State and County Quick Facts. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06081.html 7 Ibid. 8 Definition of family includes married couples and single parent households. 9U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). Census 2000 Summary File 1, General Profile 1. http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/dp1/2kh06.pdf 10 San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. (2000). Child Care Partnership Council Strategic Plan for San Mateo County, 2000-2005. 11 U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division. (2001). Comparison of 1990 & 2000 Census Data: Population by Race and Hispanic or Latino Origin: San Mateo County. 12 U.S. Census Bureau. (2002). State and County Quick Facts. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06081.html 13 Healthy Community Collaborative of San Mateo County. (2002). 2001 Community Assessment: Health & Quality of Life in San Mateo County. 14 San Mateo County. (2000). Child Care Needs Assessment for San Mateo County 1999- 2000. San Mateo Child Care Coordinating Council of San Mateo County, Inc. and the San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. 15 Children and Families First Commission of San Mateo County. (2000). Strategic Plan. 16 Ibid. 17 Ibid. 18 Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education – Kindergarten through University. (2002). School Readiness Working Group Final Report: Master Plan for Education. 19 Center for the Child Care Workforce (2002). A Profile of the San Mateo County Child Care Workforce: Findings from the 2001 Survey of Family Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers. 20 Ibid. 21 San Mateo County Human Services Agency, Office of Housing. (September 2001). San Mateo County Housing Indicators. http://www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/hsa.dir/housing.htm 22 U.S. Census Bureau. (2002). Median Income for 4-Person Families, by State. http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/4person.html 23 California Budget Project (September 2001). Making Ends Meet: How Much Does it Cost to Raise a Family in California.


24San Mateo County. (2000). Child Care Needs Assessment for San Mateo County 1999- 2000. San Mateo Child Care Coordinating Council of San Mateo County, Inc. and the San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. 25 San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. (2000). Child Care Partnership Council Strategic Plan for San Mateo County, 2000-2005. 26 Equal Rights Advocates. (2000). Summary of the 2000 Self-Sufficiency Standard for California. http://www.equalrights.org/welfare/ssavg.htm 27 Ibid.. 28 Children Now. (2001). California County Data Book 2001. 29 Ibid. 30 Ibid. 31 San Mateo County, Children's Executive Council (2000). Children in Our Community: A Report on Their Health and Well-Being. 32 San Mateo County, Children's Executive Council (2000). Children in Our Community: A Report on Their Health and Well-Being. 33 Employment Development Department. (2002). Labor Market Information. http://www.calmis.cahwnet.gov/file/demos&e/sanmateo1.htm 34 California Budget Project. (2001). What Do We Know About Former CalWORKs Recipients? http://www.cbp.org/welfare/0107wel6.html 35 Ibid. 36 Healthy Community Collaborative of San Mateo County. (2002). 2001 Community Assessment: Health & Quality of Life in San Mateo County. 37 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2002). Local Area Unemployment Statistics. http://data.bls.gov 38 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2002). State at a Glance. http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.CA.htm 39 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2002). http://data.bls.gov 40 Employment Development Department. (2002). San Mateo County - Occupations With Greatest Growth, 1997-2004. http://www.calmis.cahwnet.gov/FILE/OCCPROJ/sanmaF&G.htm 41 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2002), http://data.bls.gov 42 San Mateo County Association of REALTORS. (2001). San Mateo County Statistics. http://samcar.org/Contents/asp/samcar.asp?id=5 43 San Mateo County Human Services Agency, Office of Housing. (September, 2001). San Mateo County Housing Indicators. http://www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/hsa.dir/housing.htm 44 Association of Bay Area of Governments. (2001). Smart Growth Strategy: Regional Livability Footprint Project; Shaping the Future of the Nine-County Bay Area- Briefing Book for Public Workshop Participants and Other Bay Area Residents. http://www.abag.ca.gov/planning/smartgrowth/sg_briefing_book.pdf 45 San Mateo County, Children's Executive Council (2000). Children in Our Community: A Report on Their Health and Well-Being. 46 U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). Census 2000 Summary File 1 General Profile 1. http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/dp1/2kh06.pdf 47 Children and Families First Commission of San Mateo County. (2000). Strategic Plan. 48 The Peninsula Partnership for Children, Youth and Families. (2000). Community Voices: Enhancing Community Involvement in Issues Affecting Families with Young Children.


49 San Mateo Compensation and Retention Enhance Stability program, which offers stipends to family child care providers, and center-based teachers and directors, to reward their education and to encourage them to stay in the field. 50 Metropolitan Transportation Commission. (2000). Commuter Forecasts for the San Francisco Bay Area: 1990-2020 (Based on ABAG Projections 2000): Data Summary. www.mtc.ca.gov/datamart/stats/cntycomm.htm 51 Ibid. 52 Ibid. 53 Ibid. 54 Ibid. 55 Healthy Community Collaborative of San Mateo County. (2002). 2001 Community Assessment: Health & Quality of Life in San Mateo County. 56 San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. (2000). Child Care Partnership Council Strategic Plan for San Mateo County, 2000-2005. 57 San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency. (2001). San Diego County Environmental Scan. 58 Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education – Kindergarten through University. (2002). School Readiness Working Group Final Report: Master Plan for Education. 59 Helburn, S., et al. (1995). Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers, Technical Report. Denver, CO: Department of Economics, University of Colorado. 60 Children and Families First of San Mateo County. (2002). Children and Families First website: http://www.childrenfamilies1st.org 61 Ibid. 62 Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education – Kindergarten through University. (2002). School Readiness Working Group Final Report: Master Plan for Education. 63 Children and Families First of San Mateo County. (2002). Children and Families First website: http://www.childrenfamilies1st.org 64 Applied Survey Research. (2001). School Readiness Assessment Pilot Initiative. The Peninsula Partnership for Children, Youth and Families. 65 Ibid. 66 Ibid. 67 San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency. (2001). San Diego County Environmental Scan. 68 Reynolds, A., et al. (2001). Long-term effects of an early intervention on educational achievement and juvenile arrest: a 15-year follow-up of low-income children in public school. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2339-2346. 69 Kamerman, S. (March 2001). Testimony Prepared for the United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. 70 Personal communication with Jeanie McLoughlin, Coordinator, Child Care Partnership Council, San Mateo Office of Education. (August 2002). 71 Ibid. 72 Ibid. 73 The Peninsula Partnership for Children, Youth and Families. (2000). Community Voices: Enhancing Community Involvement in Issues Affecting Families with Young Children. 74 Ibid. 75 San Mateo Compensation and Retention Encourage Stability:


76 This fund raises capital to build new centers, thereby increasing child care slots. http://www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/bos.dir/BOSAgendas/agendas2002/agenda20020326/20020326_m_34.htm 77 This fund is geared towards reducing the closure of existing centers. It provides funding for child care providers to develop business plans, including long term facility, plans to promote the retention of child care centers. 78 Child Care Coordinating Council of San Mateo County (Spring 2002). Work and Family Connections. 79 The Peninsula Partnership for Children, Youth and Families. (2000). Community Voices: Enhancing Community Involvement in Issues Affecting Families with Young Children. 80 Child Care Action Campaign. (2002). Child Care Action Campaign website: http://www.childcareaction.org/ 81 The Peninsula Partnership for Children, Youth and Families. (2000). Community Voices: Enhancing Community Involvement in Issues Affecting Families with Young Children. 82 The American Public Health Association & the American Academy of Pediatrics. (1992). National health and safety performance standards: Guidelines for out of home child care programs. In Caring for Our Children. 83 Children and Families First Commission of San Mateo County. (2000). Strategic Plan. 84 San Mateo County Public Health Department, Disease Control & Prevention Unit. (2002). Healthy San Mateo 2010. 85 Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2000). Asthma in the Child Care Setting. http://www.kidsource.com/health/asthma.html 86 Center for the Child Care Workforce (2002). A Profile of the San Mateo County Child Care Workforce: Findings from the 2001 Survey of Family Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers. 87 Personal communication with Donna Gay, Director, Provider Services, Child Care Coordinating Council. (September 2002). 88 California Child Care Resource and Referral Network. (2001). The 2001 California Child Care Portfolio. www.rrnetwork.org 89 Ibid. 90 Ibid. 91 The Child Care Action Campaign aims to increase public and private investments in existing child care solutions that could result in more licensed child care centers, improved physical condition of centers and better quality care for kids. 92 San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. (2000). Child Care Partnership Council Strategic Plan for San Mateo County, 2000-2005. 93 Ibid. 94 The Centralized Eligibility List (CEL) is a consolidation of local child care waiting lists. The Child Care Partnership is state mandated to create such a CEL and provides funding to the Child Care Coordinating Council to create and maintain this list. The CEL is important to local, state, and federal welfare reform efforts. 95 Personal communication with Mariane Harrison, Director, Parent Services, Child Care Coordinating Council. (August 2002). 96 Douglas, M. & Rosenthal, L. (1999). Children and families first/community voices. Kids and Families First. 97 Sustainable San Mateo County. (2001). Indicators for a Sustainable San Mateo County: A Yearly Report Card on Our County’s Quality of Life. 98 San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. (2000). Child Care Partnership Council Strategic Plan for San Mateo County, 2000-2005. 99 UPK Finance Committee. (May 2, 2002). Meeting Minutes.


100 The David and Lucile Packard Foundation. (2002). Welfare reform and child care options for low-income families. The Future of Children, Children and Welfare Reform, 12(1), 97-119. 101 Evans, K.G. (May-June 1997). Caregiving beyond nine to five. Children’s Advocate newsmagazine, published by Action Alliance for Children. http://www.4children.org/news/5-97nine.htm 102 California Child Care Resource and Referral Network. (2001). The 2001 California Child Care Portfolio. www.rrnetwork.org 103 San Mateo County, Children's Executive Council (2000). Children in Our Community: A Report on Their Health and Well-Being. 104 Children and Families First Commission of San Mateo County. (2000). Strategic Plan. 105 San Mateo County. (2000). Child Care Needs Assessment for San Mateo County 1999- 2000. San Mateo Child Care Coordinating Council of San Mateo County, Inc. and the San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. 106 Marcucci, M.R. (November 28, 2001). Bay area child care priciest in the state. San Mateo County Times. http://www.sanmateocountytimes.com/ 107 Children Now. (2001). California County Data Book 2001. 108 Personal communication with Marianne Harrison, Director, Parent Services, San Mateo Child Care Coordinating Council. (August 2002). 109 Ibid. 110 Ibid. 111 The Peninsula Partnership for Children, Youth and Families. (2000). Community Voices: Enhancing Community Involvement in Issues Affecting Families with Young Children. 112 Center for the Child Care Workforce (2002). A Profile of the San Mateo County Child Care Workforce: Findings from the 2001 Survey of Family Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers. 113 Ibid. 114 Ibid. 115 San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency. (2001). San Diego County Environmental Scan. 116 Center for the Child Care Workforce (2002). A Profile of the San Mateo County Child Care Workforce: Findings from the 2001 Survey of Family Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers. 117 San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. (2000). Child Care Partnership Council Strategic Plan for San Mateo County, 2000-2005. 118 Center for the Child Care Workforce (2002). A Profile of the San Mateo County Child Care Workforce: Findings from the 2001 Survey of Family Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers. 119 The Peninsula Partnership for Children, Youth and Families. (2000). Community Voices: Enhancing Community Involvement in Issues Affecting Families with Young Children. 120 San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency. (2001). San Diego County Environmental Scan. 121 Bassoff, B., Kuck, B., Tatlow, J., & Tucker-Tatlow, J. (2002). Universal Preschool Programs: A Review of the Literature. 122 Helburn, S., et al. (1995). Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers, Technical Report. Denver, CO: Department of Economics, University of Colorado. 123 Bassoff, B., Kuck, B., Tatlow, J., & Tucker-Tatlow, J. (2002). Universal Preschool Programs: A Review of the Literature. 124 The David and Lucile Packard Foundation. (2002). Welfare reform and child care options for low-income families. The Future of Children, Children and Welfare Reform, 12(1), 97-119. 125 California Department of Education, Child Development Division. (July 2001). Desired Results for Children and Families.


126 San Mateo County, Children's Executive Council (2000). Children in Our Community: A Report on Their Health and Well-Being. 127 The David and Lucile Packard Foundation. (2002). Welfare reform and child care options for low-income families. The Future of Children, Children and Welfare Reform, 12(1), 97-119. 128 Ibid. 129 Ibid. 130 San Mateo County. (2000). Child Care Needs Assessment for San Mateo County 1999- 2000. San Mateo Child Care Coordinating Council of San Mateo County, Inc. and the San Mateo County Child Care Partnership Council. 131 Ibid. 132 California Children and Families Commission. (Spring 2002). Diversity Report. 133 San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency. (2001). San Diego County Environmental Scan. 134 Center for the Child Care Workforce (2002). A Profile of the San Mateo County Child Care Workforce: Findings from the 2001 Survey of Family Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers. 135 Equal Rights Advocates. (2000). Summary of the 2000 Self-Sufficiency Standard for California. http://www.equalrights.org/welfare/ssavg.htm 136 Center for the Child Care Workforce (2002). A Profile of the San Mateo County Child Care Workforce: Findings from the 2001 Survey of Family Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers. 137 Ibid. 138 Ibid. 139 Ibid. 140 Ibid. 141 Ibid. 142 Ibid. 143 Ibid. 144 Ibid. 145 Ibid. 146 Ibid.

APPENDIX A


Child Development Permit Matrix Title Educational

requirement Experience

requirement Alternative qualifications Authorization Five-year renewal

Assistant (optional)

6 units* Early Childhood Education (ECE) or Child Development (CD)

None Accredited HERO program (including ROCP) or CCTC-approved training

Assist in the instruction of children under supervision of Associate Teacher or above

105 hours of professional growth

Associate Teacher

12 units ECE/CD, including core courses†

50 days of 3+ hours per day within 2 years

Child Development Associate (CDA) Credential; or CCTC-approved training

May provide instruction and supervise Assistant

Must meet teacher requirements within 10 years

Teacher 24 units ECE/CD, including core courses +16 general education (GE) units‡


AA or higher in ECE or related field with 3 semester units of supervised field experience in ECE setting; or CCTC-approved training

May provide instruction and supervise all of the above (including Aide)


Master Teacher

24 units ECE/CD, including core courses +16 GE units +6 specialization units +2 units adult supervision


BA or higher with 12 units of ECE +3 semester units supervised field experience in ECE setting; or CCTC-approved training

May provide instruction and supervise all of the above (including Aide). May also serve as coordinator of curriculum and staff development.


Site Supervisor

AA (or 60 units) with 24 ECE/CD units (including core); +6 units administration; +2 units adult 4 supervision

350 days of 3+ hours per day within 4 years, including at least 100 days of supervising adults

BA or higher with 12 units of ECE, +3 semester units of supervised field experience in ECE setting; or a Teaching or an Administration credential with 12 units of ECE, +3 units supervised filed experience in ECE setting, or CCTC-approved training

May supervise single-site program; provide instruction, and serve as coordinator or curriculum and staff development


Program Director

BA with 24 ECE/CD units (including core), +6 units administration, +2 units adult supervision

Site supervisor status and one program year of site supervisor experience

Teaching or Administrative credential with 12 units of ECE +3 units supervised field experience in ECE setting; or CCTC-approved training; master’s degree in ECE or CD.

May supervise multiple-site program; provide instruction; and serve as coordinator of curriculum and staff development


*A unit is the California term used to refer to college credit. Thus, six units equals six college credits. †Core courses are child growth and development; child/family/community; program/curriculum. ‡The general education requirement is one course in each of four general education categories: English, mathematics or science, social science, and the humanities. HERO = Home Economics Related Occupations. ROCP = Regional Occupational Center Program. CCTC = California Commission on Teacher Credentialing. Adopted by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, February 1, 1997. Source: Burton, A., and M. Whitebook. 1998. Child Care Staff Compensation Guidelines for California, 1998. Washington, D.C.: Center for Child Care Workforce, p. 19.

Documents

SM County Universal Preschool Feasibility Study -- Phase I. · UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY: PHASE III – Environmental Scan ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY San Mateo County is a small