Strengthening the Pre-K Investment Next Steps to a Winning Beginning for Every Child in New York State an early care and learning coalition 300418_different design.indd 1 3/12/10 11:12 AM Table of Contents Page 4 Introduction 6 Profile of State Pre-K Today Funding and Financing Participating Districts Mixed System for Service Delivery Integration of Special Needs Children English Language Learners 10 Critical Challenges in Implementation 10 Funding and financing issues Inappropriate funding levels Transportation aid Maintenance of effort 11 Lack of state funding for full-day Pre-K Barrier to educational effectiveness Barrier to expansion 12 Focus limited to four-year-olds Pre-K for three’s and four’s is more effective Impact of investing in babies and toddlers 14 Unequal access to health, mental health and social services 15 Insufficient investment in workforce Failure to invest in workforce development Failure to fund professional development 16 Lack of coordination of early childhood investments Unequal resources across settings Uneven access to highly-qualified teachers No uniform strategy for student assessment No common tools for assessing program quality Lack of data infrastructure 21 Failure to fully support collaboration Elimination of local UPK advisory boards Lack of expertise among K-12 educators 22 No plan to improve and expand physical infrastructure 23 Looking to the Future 24 Recommendations 26 References and Resources 31 Acknowledgments 2 300418_different design.indd 2 3/12/10 11:12 AM Strengthening the Pre-K Investment: Next Steps to a Winning Beginning for Every Child in New York State The state’s Universal Prekindergarten initiative represented a bold departure from previous early childhood policies, calling for universal access and new funding. As New York’s largest single investment of its own revenues in early learning and development, it’s time to build on this success. This report was prepared by the Center for Children’s Initiatives (CCI) and the Schuyler Center for Analysis and Advocacy (SCAA) on behalf of the Winning Beginning NY coalition. Funded with support from the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation as well as Pew Charitable 3 Trusts and Pre-K Now, a campaign of Pew Center on the States. 300418_different design.indd 3 3/12/10 11:12 AM In 1997, New York State lawmakers passed the Universal Prekindergarten (UPK) legislation, a bold new approach to early childhood education. It established new part- day Pre-K programs that were free and open to all four-year-olds. Today, the state invests $414 million annually in Pre-K, which serves more than 100,000 children in public schools and community settings. In addition to calling for universal access, the landmark legislation called for services to foster social, emotional and physical development along with language and literacy. It also allowed educators to combine Pre-K funding with other funding streams, such as Head Start, child care and preschool special education. UPK legislation also required public schools and community-based early childhood pro- grams (CBO’s) to collaborate in the design and launch of Pre-K services and to ensure the new services were aligned with the K-12 system. With many community programs serving younger children as well as four-year-olds, the new collaborations bolstered efforts to create a continuum of services from the prenatal months through the early elementary years. The Board of Regents has since formally endorsed a birth through third-grade strategy, The early years are which draws on research that shows the early years are critical in preparing children for suc- critical to preparing cess in school and beyond.1 Such a strategy is also crucial to improving the early elementary grades, which have been largely neglected in recent school reform efforts.2 children for success in school and beyond. In the last 12 years, UPK has produced exciting results. Most importantly, school districts around the state report gains in language, emergent reading and social skills. In addition, research shows that states providing fully-funded universal Pre-K tend to serve more at-risk children than those using a more targeted approach. Despite the promise of Universal Prekindergarten, serious challenges remain: » Currently, up to 120,000 four-year-olds await seats3 and few three-year-olds are served. » The funding formula and part-day approach hinder both Pre-K’s educational effective- ness and potential for expansion. » The state lacks uniform strategies to assess program quality and student progress. » State and local leaders have failed to provide the leadership needed to coordinate Pre-K funding with other resources that support early learning. This report describes the current state of Pre-K across New York State and the lessons learned over the last 12 years. While much progress has been made, essential reforms are needed now. New federal funding, including Innovation grants, education stimulus funding and the anticipated Early Learning Challenge Grant, could provide potential resources for such policy changes.4 4 300418_different design.indd 4 3/12/10 11:12 AM The 11 recommendations in this report, summarized below, aim to help state officials revise UPK legislation so that the state’s investment is better coordinated with other funding to make more efficient use of community resources and produce better outcomes for children.5 They also aim to fulfill the original promise of universal access. Recommendations for Strengthening the Pre-K Investment » The Governor and the Board of Regents should create a new Office of Early Care and Learning to develop a comprehensive and accessible system of services for children from the prenatal months to third grade. » New York State should create a robust early learning data system linked with the K-12 system. Payoffs to investing in early childhood » The Legislature, with support from the State Education Department (SED), rate of return to an extra dollar should revise the UPK financing statute so that Pre-K funding is invested at different ages sustainable and predictable, allows all districts to participate and ensures programs targeted toward the earliest years high-quality services that are accessible to all children. » The Legislature should enact legislation to implement QUALITYstarsNY pre-school programs (includes Pre-K) as the state’s quality measure for all early childhood programs. > > » The Early Childhood Advisory Council (ECAC) should develop a five- rn u year plan to prepare an early childhood workforce with appropriate ret K - 12 + college schooling of compensation, credentials and field experience. e job training at r » SED should develop recommendations to create a uniform approach to student assessment in all early childhood settings. age 0-3 4-5 6-21 22+ >> » State officials should strengthen the mixed delivery system for early care Source: James Heckman, University of Chicago and learning. School districts » SED and Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) should strengthen support around the state for English Language Learners in all early childhood settings. report gains in » The ECAC should develop recommendations for building new facilities and language, emergent improving existing ones to ensure every child has access to a high-quality early learning environment. reading and social skills. » SED and OCFS should strengthen collaboration between public schools and community partners. » The Legislature should enact legislation to create an infant-toddler set-aside as part of future Pre-K funding to improve quality and expand access to services for babies and toddlers. 5 300418_different design.indd 5 3/12/10 11:12 AM PROFILE OF STATE PRE-K TODAY New York’s Universal Prekindergarten initia- Funding and Financing tive was part of education reform legislation, During the first eight years of implementa- which also called for reduced class size and tion, the state provided categorical grants to full-day kindergarten. Improving language a limited number of school districts, giving and literacy was a primary goal. State of- priority to high-need, low-wealth communi- ficials envisioned a gradual roll-out of Pre-K ties and large school districts. Prior to 2007, services, with the goal of achieving universal only about a third of the state’s 677 districts access in five years. participated. Annual UPK funding was Today, access to preschool has vastly im- uncertain and districts were often notified proved, with more than 100,000 four-year- about their allocations in late summer, too olds now enrolled in Pre-K across the state. late for appropriate planning and outreach The state’s financial commitment to Pre-K to fill seats. In the first year of operation, the has also increased substantially, with the state’s per-child rate ranged from $2,700 to UPK investment growing from $67 million $4,000. in 1998 to $414 million in the 2009-10 In 2007, state officials made Pre-K funding school year. available to all districts for the first time Most importantly, children in Pre-K are and added $146 million to support a broad growing academically and otherwise. In expansion. Lawmakers also created a new addition to the previously-mentioned Pre-K funding formula, patterned after gains in language, reading and social foundation aid for K-12 schools.7 Like K-12 skills,6 districts with broader assessment aid, the Pre-K formula takes into account measures also show gains for children in student need index,8 regional cost differ- emotional adjustment and self-regulation, ences and school district property wealth. math and numeracy, and physical and The Pre-K rate is half the K-12 rate, since it mental health. Such gains demonstrate the is only a 2.5-hour program, about half the potential for preschool education to close regular school day. the achievement gap, reduce the need for remedial services and boost high school graduation rates. The Number of Districts Participating in Pre-K Has Increased Steadily 700 600 Number of Districts Eligible to Participate 500 400 300 200 Number of Districts Participating 100 0 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 8- 9- 0- 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Source: New York State Board of Regents, September 2009. 6 300418_different design.indd 6 3/12/10 11:12 AM Unlike school aid, however, the level of Participating Districts state funding is capped. Currently, per-pupil Today, 450 of the state’s 677 districts – rates range from a minimum of $2,7009 about two out of three – participate, but to $5,785. New York City receives $3,300, with current state funding frozen, no new which is about average. Per-pupil rates for districts will be allowed to join the effort. most districts have remained flat over the Most of those already offering Pre-K have last 12 years. high concentrations of working class and Many districts supplement state UPK fund- low-income children. “It’s really the city ing with local revenues, federal education and the low-income suburbs that have been funding, or special funding to promote eager to implement UPK,” says Peggy Liuzzi, early literacy. Generally, school districts executive director of Child Care Solutions in provide the supplemental funding only to Syracuse, New York. “That’s where you have school-based classrooms, and use the state’s districts that recognize the value of Pre-K in per-pupil rate as a guide for CBO contracts. closing the achievement gap and know that Many districts also use some of the state many families are unable to afford private UPK funding to cover their administrative programs.” costs and professional development. The Big Five school districts – New York New York’s Pre-K legislation doesn’t assume City, Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse and or require a local share of funding, as do Yonkers – have achieved the broadest statutes governing K-12 funding. Still, the implementation, with New York City leading current Pre-K aid formula was patterned the way. More than 57,000 children in New after the K-12 aid formula. The issue of local York City now receive state Pre-K services, share is an emerging one in New York as more than half the children enrolled well as other states that have added Pre-K statewide.10 services. The 225 districts that do not participate in the state’s Pre-K initiative tend to be higher- wealth suburban districts. School officials from these districts cite the lower per-pupil rates designated for their districts as well as uncertainty about future funding. Some rural districts declined to participate for logistical reasons. For example, children would have to travel long distances for just 2.5 hours of class time. Plus, there was no transportation aid for UPK students and few community partners with which to collaborate. 7 300418_different design.indd 7 3/12/10 11:12 AM Mixed System for nutrition, health, social service and family Service Delivery supports called for in UPK legislation, but not adequately funded. The diversity of The mandate for collaboration with commu- Pre-K providers also offers more choice for nity programs led to quick implementation families, especially those seeking programs of Pre-K in many districts, especially those that are culturally and linguistically with overcrowded schools. Overall, the state competent. 12 has far exceeded the mandate to provide The infusion of new UPK funding into 10 percent of Pre-K services in non-public community-based early childhood pro- school settings, creating a diverse array of grams has also brought new resources and options in many communities. About 43 equipment to many programs that previ- percent of the state’s Pre-K funding is now ously depended on parent fees, child care invested in community programs, which subsidies and fund-raising to support their serve 54 percent of the children.11 Children services. One early childhood coordina- are enrolled in child care and Head Start tor in New York City said, “The classrooms programs, YWCA’s and YMCA’s, settlement are more enriched, have more books and houses, private and parochial schools and many have created a language-rich, inviting even children’s museums and libraries. environment.” 13 The diversity of providers has been About one-third of participating districts especially beneficial for working families have waivers exempting them from col- who need year-round, extended-day laboration. Local school officials cite four services. The ability to combine UPK main reasons for seeking waivers: (1) lack of funding with other funding streams, local programs to collaborate with; (2) local such as Head Start, child care and special programs fail to meet quality standards; (3) education has also allowed many districts community programs do not wish to col- to use existing capacity and resources more laborate; and (4) the district is in the process effectively. Head Start and Preschool Special of updating and reviewing the contracting Education funding, for example, cover process.14 Surveys and interviews also reveal the need for greater technical assistance and support to strengthen and expand collabora- tions with community-based programs.15 8 300418_different design.indd 8 3/12/10 11:12 AM Integration of Special English Language Learners Needs Children State law calls for Pre-K programs to provide support to children with limited Universal Prekindergarten changed the English proficiency, including culturally- educational landscape dramatically for chil- competent programming and information dren with special needs. “With the advent for parents in their primary language. Yet of UPK, full integration of four-year-olds because Pre-K is a voluntary program, state comes within reach,” said Margerie Ames, and local officials have collected little data former executive director of the InterAgency and offered only minimal support for Eng- Council of Mental Retardation and Develop- mental Disabilities Agencies, Inc.16 The new lish Language Learners (ELLs). Statewide efforts to collect data on ELL students in UPK funding proved especially useful to Pre-K stopped in recent years. community programs that had long served special needs children and could then add There are more than 220,000 ELLs in the Pre-K seats and recruit more typically-devel- state’s K-12 system and studies show that oping children. such children are at higher risk for school failure. Thus, advocates and education of- The launch of Pre-K also allowed school ficials have called for increased attention to district officials a new opportunity to satisfy the needs of ELL’s in Pre-K programs. They the legal mandate that disabled children be emphasize the need to collect more data, served in the least restrictive environment, recruit and train more teachers who are alongside their more typically-developing linguistically and culturally competent, and peers. Preschool special education had been develop appropriate curriculum and assess- mandated for children starting at age three, ment for this population. 18 but there had been no parallel “general edu- cation” program for other three- and four- year-olds. Though the goal of full integration Fast facts on Pre-K in New York is not yet attained, much progress has been made. About 5 percent of the children 4-year-olds served, 2008-09 100,208 enrolled in Pre-K have special needs – 12 percent would represent full integration. 17 Estimated participation in 2009-10 109,031 Total 4-year-old population in NY** 240,000 Participating districts 450 % of children served in CBO’s 54% Total UPK funding* $414.1 million *2009-2010 school year ** Rounded to the nearest thousand Source: State Education Department 9 300418_different design.indd 9 3/12/10 11:12 AM CRITICAL CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTATION The State Board of Regents has long championed the expansion of Pre-K services as part of the state’s public education system.20 This is a logical goal given the significant achievements during the first 12 years of UPK. The Legislature has dramatically increased Pre-K funding and expanded the number of children served since 2007. But in 2009, state officials froze funding, stalled further expansion and have failed to heed recommendations to improve Pre-K implementation. In 2009, state officials cited the state’s fiscal challenges for their inac- tion despite the fact that research shows the state can save money and improve children’s school readiness by reforming the Pre-K legislation.21 This report draws on surveys, inter- views, data and research on implementation of Pre-K, both in New York State and nation- ally, to identify the key challenges that remain and make recommendations for next steps to strengthen the state’s Pre-K investment and achieve better outcomes for children. Funding and financing issues Inappropriate funding levels The state’s UPK funding formula and per-pupil allocations don’t cover the true cost of Pre-K services, given the program standards and scope of services envisioned in the legislation. Highly-qualified teachers and aides, research-based instruction, professional development A growing number and adequate supports for health, nutrition, social and emotional development each come of districts are with a price tag that far exceeds the rates provided to most districts. National researchers finding it difficult to estimate the true cost of providing a half-day of high-quality preschool to be $5,000-$7,000, but the state’s per-child rate currently ranges from $2,700 to $5,750. 22 maintain enrollment. Transportation aid The state’s failure to provide transportation aid for Pre-K students reduces the number of children served across the state. Without transportation, many families simply can’t get their children to a program. Some districts, especially those in rural areas, report the lack of transportation aid as a primary barrier to launching Pre-K. Some participating districts use local revenues to provide transportation. Others have turned to their community partners, such as local Head Start providers, to provide transpor- tation. As the economy soured, however, a growing number of district officials report they can no longer afford to cover transportation, which could reduce the number of children served in the future.23 Maintenance of effort In the 2007 revision of the Pre-K aid formula, state officials tied local maintenance of ef- fort requirements to the number of students served. This created significant challenges for districts that had used federal funding or local revenues to supplement UPK dollars. As local 10 300418_different design.indd 10 3/12/10 11:12 AM