|
Senate
Panel Examines Child Care and Early Education Reform
On July 26, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions Subcommittee on Children and Families held a hearing, “CCDBG
Reauthorization: Helping to Meet the Child Care Needs of American Families.”
The hearing focused on the reauthorization of the Child Care Development Block
Grant (CCDBG) Act (P.L. 101-508) and examined reforms needed to improve child
care quality and access across the country.
"Parents across the
nation want child care that is safe, affordable, accessible and high-quality.
That's what parents expect. That's what children deserve,” said Chair Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) in her
opening statement. She continued, “At the federal level, we expect far too
little. In CCDBG, we have no expectation that child care workers have
pre-service training; no expectation that providers who get federal tax dollars
have regular inspections or background checks, no expectation that CCDBG
programs promote healthy development cognitively, emotionally, or physically…We
want to accomplish four things: increase participation of low-income and other
vulnerable children in high-quality child care, promote stable and continuous
care, ensure program integrity and accountability so that parents have peace of
mind, and improve overall quality and coordination of early childhood programs.
Through these efforts, we are fighting for children to succeed in school and
beyond."
Ranking Member Richard Burr (R-NC) echoed Sen. Mikulski’s
call for CCDBG reform in his opening statement: “I believe there are basic
upgrades we can make to this program that give us and parents the peace of mind
that when they drop their kids off and head off to their jobs, their children
are safe. Like most people, I’d like to ensure that every low-income parent who
needs child care in order to maintain work and be a productive member of
society gets it. But as the waiting lists in many states show, the demand is
far outstripping our limited ability to supply care. Meanwhile, we know that
nearly 1.7 million children currently receiving subsidies are not receiving
quality care. And in some cases, are in conditions unbefitting to federal
taxpayer investment. Stories of children dying in locked vans, conditions in
facilities that lack basic health and safety protections, are heartbreaking to
me, and to most. In this time of limited federal resources, examples of this
type of abuse of the public’s and the parents’ trust that children are being
well-served cry for this program to be reformed.”
Linda Smith, deputy assistant secretary and
interdepartmental liaison for early childhood development at the Administration
for Children and Families, discussed the importance of legislation to
reauthorize the CCDBG program: “Reforming the CCDBG Act is a critical part of
our nation’s efforts to support low-income working families and to close the
achievement gap by improving the early learning opportunities of children at
risk of falling behind in school. Over the past three years, the Obama
Administration has worked to ensure that more low-income children receive
high-quality early care and education…Reauthorizing the CCDBG Act provides an
opportunity to build upon these efforts by improving the early learning and
afterschool opportunities for millions of low-income children in all 50 states,
U.S. territories, and hundreds of tribal communities.” She continued, highlighting
parts of the administration’s proposal: “The administration’s reauthorization
principles preserve state flexibility inherent within the block grant
structure, while establishing a foundation that will assure health and safety
in child care and a systemic framework through which states and communities can
improve the quality of child care. This includes increasing the share of
dollars dedicated to quality improvement and incorporating into statute
existing quality set-asides included in appropriations language. We also need
to ensure that states have effective state monitoring systems and protocols to
ensure that providers meet regulatory requirements established by the state. The
key principles of our reauthorization proposal align closely with much of the administration’s
work on improving opportunities for early learning in child care and education
programs. These principles remove barriers to coordination with programs such
as Head Start and state pre-kindergarten to allow states and communities to
better address the comprehensive needs of children and families.”
During her testimony, Janet Singerman, president of Child Care
Resources, Inc. in Charlotte, North Carolina, discussed the need for child care
reforms despite current fiscal restraints: “Of course, we need significantly
greater investment in child care and early education than is currently
available and I am told that the subcommittee is considering reauthorizing
CCDBG without such additional investment. While I support reauthorization, I am
deeply concerned that the current economic environment and national priorities
will not provide sufficient additional funding to significantly increase access
to high quality child care, particularly for poor families. Even in times of
scarcity, our federal government can and should put forward legislation that
can improve the uneven array of child care that is available to families across
our nation.” She continued, addressing child care subsidy accountability:
“Congress will have to decide if it is better to ensure access to quality care
for low-income children or continue along the path of allowing subsidies to be
used for any care available. Without significant increases, access to quality
care is not possible without serving fewer children. I would like to see more
children served. At the same time, I think serving children better is an
important policy goal. Given the current fiscal constraints, it is not an easy decision for Congress.
But, I do think it is important to serve children well and have accountability
for subsidy funding whereby the government knows it is purchasing safe quality
settings for children. In most states, we do not know the quality of care that
families using a subsidy access. I think that’s wrong. I think subsidies should
be tracked to ensure that our policy goals are aligned.”
Dr. Rolf
Grafwallner, assistant state superintendent at the
Maryland State Department of Education, spoke about the need to integrate and
coordinate child care and family support programs: “From a state perspective,
access to subsidized early care and education could be expanded to more middle-income
families if the CCDBG reauthorization were to coordinate its policies with
those of Head Start, also administered out of the Administration for Children
and Families, in terms of funding and performance standards. Over the past
decade, there have been innovative models, where both child care and Head Start
funding were supporting early childhood centers that benefitted more children
in terms of financial support and providing a better learning environment as a
result of the child care programs not only meeting licensing standards, but
adopting the more stringent Head Start performance standards. These models meet
the test of expanded access and higher quality. CCDBG reauthorization could turn these integrated models into business as
usual. This approach should be coupled with a requirement to not only allow
states to access Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) funds for child
care subsidy, but to require that, at a minimum, ten percent
of the state’s TANF funds be reserved for child care subsidy. Such an approach
would integrate the school readiness mission of a child care/Head Start model
with the family support model of all the TANF programs. The first rule
of order should probably be a reorganization of the existing programs to allow
for a more streamlined and consistent support for children and their families.
The reauthorization of the CCDBG can play a historic role in this effort.”
Philip Acord, executive director of the
Children's Home in Chattanooga, TN, and Susana Coro, assistant teacher at Falls
Church-McLean Children’s Center in Falls Church, VA, also testified.
|
|
|