According to the American Association of University Professors, the average salary for full-time college teachers is $80,000. Those teachers, instructors, professors or adjuncts usually have extensive education and are well prepared for their work.  Their students have brains that are nearly fully developed and are at a point in their lives when they have learned how to learn.  The teacher is mostly a guide to knowledge.

The average salary for full-time teachers of preschool-age children is under 25% of that amount (child care workers at $17,000, preschool teachers from $19, 000 to $22,000).  These teachers have lower educational requirements, yet their role is to help children’s brains develop, to learn how to learn, to develop social and emotional skills, and to help create a foundation for life-long learning.

 It is time to raise the bar.  With all that is known about early brain development and early learning, it seems that this is the place to start education reform.

I recently attended a national public policy symposium in Washington, D.C., where Carmen Nazario spoke. Ms. Nazario is the assistant secretary for Children and Families of the Department of Health and Human Services.  Her comments were wide-ranging, talking about the administration’s budget proposals (expanding child care to 300,000 more children), the First Lady’s efforts to decrease the incidence of childhood obesity, and the Early Learning Challenge Fund.  But the biggest “ah ha” moments for much of the audience of early childhood advocates was the discussion of health care reform.

Large numbers of staff in child care centers, and self-employed family child care providers, do not have health insurance through their employers.  These low-wage workers often cannot afford insurance for themselves and their families, and do without.  Due to pre-existing conditions, they may be unable to even buy health care in the individual market.  Ms. Nazario believes that child care workers may be among the biggest beneficiaries of health care reform.

This week may be “do or die” for health care reform that would make care accessible to those who provide care and education to our youngest children.  For their sake and the sake of all the families in America who depend upon them, let’s hope health care becomes available at a price they can afford.

Thanks to Jeff Edmondson of Strive for forwarding this amazing research article from the Public Education Network. 

Pre-K: the biggest bang for your education buck
A new study by Wilder Research of St. Paul, Minn., undertaken at the behest of Michigan nonprofit Early Childhood Investment Corp., finds that Michigan preschool programs over the past 25 years are saving the state $1 billion this year in crime and education costs, as well as contributing to increased state productivity. Michigan school superintendent Mike Flanagan said the study shows the state should spend much more than it does getting pre-kindergarten children ready for school, and suggested that the state and districts consider reducing the cost of school employee benefits and using the savings to expand preschool programs. "In a K-12 system, we spend $1 billion a grade, but we don't spend anywhere close to that where it would get the biggest bang for the buck."

Among the savings cited in the study were a $220 million savings to public schools because fewer students repeat grades and there is less need for special education instruction; $584 million less for programs for juvenile corrections, child abuse, and welfare; and $347 million less in social costs as a result of less crime and substance abuse, as well as increased income for parents. It also affected state unemployment, and boosted work productivity when children enter the workforce.
 

Read more:http://www.freep.com/article/20100125/NEWS06/100125039/1008/Study-Mich.-preschool-programs-save-us-1B
See the report:http://www.greatstartforkids.org/content/study-early-childhood-programs-save-mi-1b-annually

Yesterday an article appeared in the Wall Street Journal describing how governments all over the world are subsidizing child care in order to bring more women into the workforce, and even to boost sluggish fertility rates. Government investments in child care in Japan and France, for instance, are seen as the means to raise women’s employment rates and income, resulting in a huge increase in consumer spending.

I titled this blog “déjà vu” because I have heard this case over and over during the 30 years I have advocated for investments in quality child care. In the last 10 years or so, all the child care focus has been on the importance of the early years in laying the foundation for school success and lifelong learning. But prior to that, child care was in the public eye primarily as a tool to enable parents to work to support their families.

I don’t think U.S. policy makers are concerned with low fertility rates, as they are in Japan and France, but they are concerned with the economy. The article states, “Japanese economists calculate that raising women's employment rate from the current 67.5% would boost consumer spending enough to create an additional $70 billion in wealth.”

The Wall Street Journal article concludes that many in America want the government to stay out of child care, leaving the full responsibility to parents. They ask readers to weigh in with their opinions on the issue. It will be no surprise to my readers that I believe that government investment in quality child care pays double dividends – first, as an essential tool for economic development and, second, to close the achievement gap by having all children ready to succeed.

I am delighted to hear the renewed conversation about the link between the economy and child care. 

Two nights ago I spent more than three hours at a public hearing for the City of Cincinnati’s 2010 budget.  The Council has an impossible task on its hands – cut $51 million from an already tight budget.  Well over 100 citizens spoke about a wide variety of City services.  The folks dressed in green to support recycling and environmental issues were the most visible.  The parents with their children with special needs advocating to retain therapeutic recreation programs were the most moving.

I was there to support human services:  homeless shelters, services for victims of domestic violence, food for those who cannot afford food this holiday season or any season, and of course child care so that working parents can get and keep jobs.

What struck me on Tuesday was how respectful the members of Council were.  They sat through testimony which was, at turns, boring, thoughtful, repetitive, moving, rude and respectful right back.  While our current Council is extremely divided (four of the nine members are declining to participate in the negotiations) at least most of the members seemed to believe in the value of hearing from citizens. 

I wish them the best in getting to a balanced budget with the least harm to the City.  I also wish that they will fund human services at a time that people are most in need.

New research from the Center for Child Health, Behavior and Development at Seattle Children's Research Institute has found that preschoolers in home-based child care businesses watch 2.4 hours of television a day, compared to .4 hours per day at a child care center.  These numbers may be significantly higher, according to the lead researcher, Dr. Dimitri Christakis, as it is a self-report, and providers may tend to underreport.

Children go home in the evenings to busy households where they are likely to watch two to three additional hours of television, thus five or more hours a day for a child who is awake only 12 hours a day.  The providers in the study were from among the 45 states that license home-based child care, unlike Ohio where no regulation is required until a provider cares for seven or more children.  I suspect that the situation is worse in homes where there is no oversight and no training.

The American Academy of Pediatrics discourages any television viewing, including videos or educational television, in the first two years of life and recommends a daily limit of one to two hours of quality programming for older children.

Child care should be an opportunity to enjoy imaginative play, develop social skills and participate in activities that develop cognitive abilities.  Our community has long rejected simple custodial care since we learned that the majority of brain development takes place during the first years of life.

Christakis, the study’s lead researcher, said, "High quality preschool can make a very, very positive difference. We're so far from meeting that, that we really have a lot of work to do. Any time a TV is on, children speak less and adults interact with them less frequently.”

Public policy issues abound in this research: the need for parent education about choosing quality child care, the need for states like Ohio to regulate all child care businesses, and the importance of ongoing education for child care professionals.  As Christakis said, “we really have a lot of work to do.”

Ohio’s Center for Community Solutions has a terrific workshop about state tax and budget policy, and the impact on human services, education and health care. The workshop was given in Cincinnati yesterday.  After hearing all the dreary news about our structural problems, we are given three rules for advocating:

1.       Relationships matter – don’t wait until you need something to begin,

2.       ID your targets – determine who the decision-makers are and where they sit on the issue, and

3.       Be prepared – be ready with your points anywhere and anytime.

Here’s my story to illustrate the importance of that last point.  Most mornings on the way to work, I stop at the nearby UDF to get my mega-decaf coffee (what can I say?)  One morning during the height of the budgeting process, I ran into Senator Eric Kearney in the UDF, at the end of his morning run, dressed in his sweats.  Right then and there, we had a chance to talk about the major changes impacting families and child care.  He asked me to follow up with a meeting, where we could get more specific about what he could do to help.

Later that same day, as I was getting gas, at the pump opposite me, was state Representative Tyrone Yates. And of course, we had the same conversation – “here are the main state budget issues related to early care and education – and here’s where I need your help.”  I knew he did not sit on any of the key committees, but he is thoughtful, wise and caring, and it would not hurt to bend his ear a bit.  Eventually bills come to the House or Senate floor so every advocate helps.

No matter where we live - big city or small town – state legislators live and work there too. The chances of chance encounters are high, and if you are prepared with you issues, and have done a bit of homework on your legislators (at least to know what they look like!) you’ll be ready.

The photo is of 4C staffers Annetta Rutland, Stephannie Kennedy and Janet Keller en route to Columbus for an advocacy day.

For 41 years the City of Cincinnati has licensed child care centers. The City adopted regulations long before the State of Ohio began its oversight function, and City leaders regularly renewed their commitment to higher standards – particularly when it came to class size. 

Effective October 31, 2009, the City regulations are off the books, and inspections have ended.  The reason is, like so much in this time of economic strain, the City cannot afford to subsidize this protection for children.  A second concern is that state law does not “give permission” to localities to create child care regulations. This has been the case for the full 41 years, but with this legal opinion, combined with budget constraints, the regulations were doomed. 

4C has convened a group of child care providers and advocates to determine if the child protections are salvageable.  Our first step will be to get language in the state law that permits cities to have regulations which exceed the state’s.  Such language currently exists for nursing homes, and we hope to mirror that language.  If we succeed in this first step , we will then propose a plan in which fees cover all expenses.  I’ll keep blogging on this issue, so stay tuned.

A number of highly dedicated early childhood professionals are hard at work designing Ohio’s new Center for Early Childhood Development.  This far-reaching endeavor is designed to create a single administrative structure with the authority and responsibility to implement and coordinate state funded or administered early childhood programs and services for children prenatally until entry into kindergarten. See the Build Ohio website for more information. www.build-ohio.org

This planning is based on Governor Ted Strickland vision stated in his 2009 State of the State Address: “To better serve our youngest learners and help them thrive in school and in life, we will unite all of our early childhood development programs and resources into the Department of Education. This comprehensive early childhood system will focus on the whole child and provide quality early learning and care while improving our efficiency and effectiveness.”

It sounds ideal – and even more important now that the state is struggling with drastic reductions in funding to important efforts like early childhood.  But the devil is in the details.  Early Childhood leaders enter this effort with distrust all around.  This distrust is borne out of years of the different departments (Ohio Department of Job and Family Services and the Ohio Department of Education, in particular) establishing programs and services which they truly believe are in the very best interest of children.  To this end Ohio has two sets of licensing procedures and standards, two entirely different professional development standards and infrastructures, two different approaches to higher education. 

The two departments start from entirely different places.  ODE is focused on education regardless of a family’s work status or income. And the underlying purpose of ODJFS to ensure quality settings for children whose parents work in low-wage jobs. On the personal level (for don’t most things come down to the personal level), there is a long history of personnel from one department showing disrespect and misunderstanding toward the others’ systems and goals.

The plan is to join staff from education, health, mental health, family support, special needs and early intervention under one roof, and one leadership – and to create a great team on a playing field which, prior to this consolidation, was (is) littered with silos.  I’m rooting for a winner, where children and families can be better served with fewer resources, and I hope that Ohio can create a model for other states.  However, there is a long way to go, and it is going to take respect and compromise that has yet to surface.

I think, however, that it can be done.  I’m rooting for the team – and for the children.

A few weeks ago I wrote about the value of Cincinnati’s child care licensing law – and a proposal to preserve only a few of the provisions.  I testified before the Board of Health and followed up with letters to the Commissioner, the Chairman and two City elected officials. Last night the Board of Health met again and eliminated the entire ordinance without a word about alternative plans. The ordinance is officially dead and gone after 41 years of protecting children.`

HOWEVER, I am pushing hard for a task force to consider our proposal to have child-to-staff ratios and square footage re-introduced.  Among some former supporters of the City law there is some ambivalence because of the tough economic situation and because there are some flaws in the law as it was.  However, those same (former) supporters have expressed a desire to restore the best of the law.  While I haven’t heard back from anyone at the Health Department, I approached their public information officer last evening at the meeting and learned that Commissioner Noble Maseru has referred the issue to their attorney.  We know from past experience that the attorney will warn against licensing, but we have had it for more than 40 years with no law suits or even threats, so I’m not buying that as a barrier. As you can see, there is still fight in me for this – particularly for the infant ratios!   

Loss of the City standards adds an extra burden on our community’s voluntary efforts to increase school readiness. I hope you will join 4C in the effort to restore some of the standards.  If you know anyone at the Board of Health or the Mayor, you might make a call!