1. Early Childhood Education 2012 Community Indicators Symposium Human Capital Development and Education: Early Childhood, K-12, Workforce Preparedness February 10, 2012 Getting it Right from the Beginning

2. Early Childhood Education (ECE) Overview of Presentation Why is this Important? What makes up the ECE System? How do you measure Quality and Impact? ECE Community Indicators and Policy Recommendations Early Childhood Education (ECE)

3. Why is this Important?

4. Why is this Important? Number of Children in Region Growing Rapidly 383,397 Source: Annie E. Casey Kids Count Data Book, http://datacenter.kidscount.org/ 553,414

5. Why is this Important? Increase in Women in Workforce

6. Why is this Important? Over Half of Young Children in Care of Other Adults while Parents Working 315,446 young children Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2005-2009 average

7. Infant Brain Development Longitudinal Research on Impact of High Quality ECE ROI on Children, Families ROI on Community Why is this Important? Science, Research, ROI

8. Science and Research Nature and Nurture: Synapse formation in the first three years Source: Core Concepts in the Science of Early Childhood Development, Center for the Developing Child, Harvard University, C.A. Nelson (2000)

9. Science and Research Nature and Nurture: Disparities in vocabulary begin at 18 months, significant by 36 months College Educated Working Class Parents Low Income Parents Cumulative Vocabulary (Words) Source: Hart, B., & Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experiences of young American children.

10. Longitudinal Research Abecedarian Project provided high quality child care in early years, tracked children through adulthood

11. Return on Investment Lifetime Effects: The HighScope Perry Preschool Study Through Age 40 Showed 16 to 1 ROI Source: HighScope Perry Preschool Study: Lifetime Effects: The HighScope Perry Preschool Study Through Age 40 (2005)

12. Return on Investment 60-80% of long-term benefits of quality early education go to society Benefits to Individual Increased earnings Benefits to Society Crime-cost Savings Reduced Special Education and Welfare Increased Income Taxes Perry Preschool Study Abecedarian Study

13. Return on Investment Higher ROI for Early Investments Source: James J. Heckman, Ph.D., Nobel Laureate in Economics, University of Chicago, 2008

14. Return on Investment Higher ROI for Early Investments Source: James J. Heckman, Ph.D., Nobel Laureate in Economics, University of Chicago, 2008 “The fiscally responsible thing to do is to invest more resources in early childhood education. It is something for which we must find the dollars because it saves money as early as kindergarten and builds equity throughout the life of the child. Early childhood education creates a taxpayer who reduces his or her own tax burden through greater productivity, healthier living and stronger contributions to society.”

15. Return on Investment Public Expenditures Compared to Brain Development Source: R. Haveman and B. Wolfe, “The Determinants of Children’s Attainments: A review of Methods and Findings,” Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 33, December 1995, pp. 1829-1878. Updated in 2005. Cumulative Percent of Public Spending on Children 0 - 18 % of Brain growth per year, 0 – 18 years

16. What makes up the Early Childhood Education System?

17. The ECE System: 5 Components Home Care, Informal Care, Child Care, Pre-K and Head Start * This could also be another family member or other person who has custody and primary responsibility for a child.

18. Unregulated Care Parents, Relatives, Neighbors, Friends – 65%

19. Regulated ECE 35%of all Children, 0-5, in Texas Gulf Coast participate in regulated ECE System Systems within ECE # of Children* Child Care (center/ home-based)132,143 Pre- kindergarten54,037 Head Start8,822 Total in Region195,002 Within Regulated System... *The number of children in child care in our region is based on an estimate using national Census Bureau surveys as the state does not track this number.

20. Regulated ECE Three systems Child Care Most children Lowest standards Highest cost to families Limited subsidies Serves all ages, birth to after school care Head Start Fewest children High standards No charge to families Serves 3-4 year olds Pre-K All eligible children served Teachers highly educated, no standard for ratios No charge to eligible children Serves mainly 4 year olds, some 3s

21. Regulated ECE System Head Start – Funded by Federal Government 3-4 year olds* Purpose: Reduce impact of poverty on children Most comprehensive * Very small amount of funding for “Early Head Start” to serve infants, toddlers

22. Regulated ECE System Head Start – Children Eligible, Children Served Source: Head Start Program Fact Sheet, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009 Data; Annie E. Casey Kids Count, 2009 Data 1 of 9 eligible children served Access based on first come, first served Different than Social Security, Medicare High level of accountability

23. The Regulated ECE System Public Prekindergarten – Local ISD, State, Federal Primarily 4 year olds* Purpose: Academic preparation for school Part of public school system, degreed teachers * 3 year olds served if spaces available, or if eligible for Preschool Program for Children with Disabilities (PPCD)

24. Regulated ECE System Child Care System – Primarily funded by tuition, limited federal subsidies Infants through school-age care (after-school) Purpose: Care and education of children who have working parents Range of quality – custodial care to very high quality early education

25. Regulated ECE System Child Care System – Cost of Care in Texas Average annual cost of child care centers rival cost of Texas Public University Source: “Child Care in America: Fact 2011, National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies, 2011

26. How do you Measure Quality and Impact in ECE?

27. Measuring Quality, Impact in ECE Two Approaches Process Environment Use of Curriculum Professional Development Assessment of Child Development Structural Director, Teacher Education Teacher to Child Ratios, Group Sizes Adherence to State Regulations National Accreditation Process Indicators are more thorough, require observation of program to track progress Structural indicators represent standards of systems that can either be verified through observation or through self-report Certain structural indicators positively correlate to child well-being, school outcomes

28. Measuring Quality, Impact in ECE State Strategy for Measuring Quality Nearly one-half of states and District of Columbia have a Quality Rating and Information System (QRIS) that provides parents and state officials with process indicators on ECE system Texas in the process of developing framework for QRIS

29. Measuring Quality, Impact in ECE Example: Process Indicator, College Bound from Birth Baseline- 2008 2011 Assessment of Quality of Classroom Environment % of Classrooms in Low, Minimal, Good/Excellent Categories Over Time

30. Early Childhood Education Example: Structural Indicator, Teacher Education Source: Collaborative for Children, QualiFind Database, 2011 Child Care Programs in Texas Gulf Coast

31. Measuring Quality, Impact in ECE Step Toward QRIS Research-based Oregon Model “Consumer Report” layout Research-based Oregon Model “Consumer Report” layout Established Indicators Self-Report State and National data Self-Report State and National data Collect data Excellent Good Minimum Standards Excellent Good Minimum Standards Rate programs On-line updating Confirm Validate sample Update Source: Collaborative for Children, QualiFind Database, 2011

32. Measuring Quality, Impact in ECE QualiFind Indicators QualiFind Teacher : Child ratio, Group Sizes Licensing Compli- ance Staff Tenure Family Involve- ment Accredita- tion Status Education or Specialized Training of Staff

33. Early Childhood Education Indicators

34. Early Childhood Education Community Indicators: Teacher Education # of Programs N = 1,441 programs 130,132 children N = 294 programs 54,347 children N = 95 programs 8,986 children Source: Collaborative for Children, QualiFind Database, 2011

35. Early Childhood Education Trend Line – Teacher Education Source: Collaborative for Children’s QualiFind Early Childhood Education Database, 2011 564 programs 31% # of Programs with Teachers Rated “Excellent” 891 programs 49% January 2010 – June 2011 represents time that Federal Stimulus Funding Invested in Gulf Coast Region with focus on improving teacher education and training

36. Early Childhood Education Community Indicators: Teacher Education Indicator Moving in Right Direction Child CareMarket Forces? Access to Resources Matters StimulusQuality Imp. Standards Matter Head Start, Pre-K High Child Care Low

37. Source: Collaborative for Children’s QualiFind Early Childhood Education Database, 2011 % of Programs N=1,652 N=434 N=105 Early Childhood Education Community Indicators: Teacher to Child Ratios

38. Source: Collaborative for Children’s QualiFind Early Childhood Education Database, 2011 # of Programs with “Excellent” Teacher-to-Child Ratios Early Childhood Education Community Indicators: Teacher to Child Ratios

39. Indicator Moving in Wrong Direction Economic pressure toward min. standards Cuts to ISD budgets – more children/class Resources Matter Pre-K cut in funding Child Care – fewer resources w/recession Standards Matter Head Start HighChild Care, Pre-K Low Early Childhood Education Community Indicators: Teacher to Child Ratios

40. Public Policy Recommendations

41. Includes all systems of ECE Incorporates observations of programs Quality Rating System Many parents have no choice but to choose low quality programs because it is all that they can afford. Expand Access to High Quality ECE Programs Standards are outdated, reflect “custodial” care rather than high quality early education Strengthen standards for child care Source: Center for Houston’s Future Early Childhood Education Advisory Committee

42. Public Policy Recommendations Standards are outdated, reflect “custodial” care rather than high quality early childhood education Improve Teacher/Child Ratios Funding cuts have impacted the quality of Pre-K programs, more children in classrooms, fewer teachers’ aides Replace $200M cut from Pre-K in 2011 Expand funding so all children who are eligible for Head Start and child care subsidies are served Fund federal programs so all eligible served Source: Center for Houston’s Future Early Childhood Education Advisory Committee

43. Extra Slides

44. Regulated ECE System Head Start Issues Long way from serving all eligible children – grant vs. eligibility based Significant strides have been made in improving teacher standards Opportunity for Improvement: Offer extended day options for working parents

45. Regulated ECE System Public Prekindergarten Issues Only one of three ECE systems that has goal of serving all eligible children State cut funding for Pre-K by $200M in 2011 session Pre-K only grade that districts have had to apply for portion of funding, not enough for all districts Opportunity for Improvement: Teacher to Child Ratios, extended day options for working parents

46. Research on Impact of Pre-K Impact of Oklahoma’s Universally Available, High Quality Prekindergarten Program on School Readiness Source: Gormley, W.T., et.al (2004). The Effects of Oklahoma’s Universal Pre-K Program on School Readiness. Washington, DC: Center for Research on Children in the United States, Georgetown University. Evaluation shows significant gains by all sub-groups for children participating in program compared to non-participants. Test Score Gains

47. Regulated ECE System Evaluation of HISD Pre-K Program, 2011 Source: HISD Research Department, 2011

48. Regulated ECE System Evaluation of HISD Pre-K Program, 2011 Standardized Scores: Below 34: Below Average 35 – 65: Average Above 65: Above Average Standardized Score (NCE’s) Results of Stanford in Kindergarten Assessment in English

49. Standardized Scores: Below 34: Below Average 35 – 65: Average Above 65: Above Average Standardized Score (NCE’s) Regulated ECE System Evaluation of HISD Pre-K Program, 2011 Results of Aprenda in Kindergarten Assessment in Spanish

50. Regulated ECE System Child Care represents huge family expense “No frills” Monthly Budget – Family of 3 (1 adult, 2 children) Amount Housing$768 Food$356 Child Care (High quality)$918 Medical Insurance and out-of-pocket$212 Transportation$285 Other necessities (clothes, furniture, household items) $288 Payroll & Income Tax Payments/Credits-$33 Total (monthly)$2,903 Hourly Wage Needed$17 Annual Income Needed$34,836 Income as % of Poverty Level (2008) 198% Child Care is 32% of monthly salary 2008 Federal Poverty Guideline for 3-person family: $17,600/yr Minimum wage was $6.55/hr in 2008, $13,624/yr Source: Center for Public Policy Priorities, National Center for Children in Poverty, 2009

51. Regulated ECE System Child Care System – Subsidy for Low Income Families Source: Family Resource Simulator, Houston, Texas, 2008, National Center for Children in Poverty; www.nccp.orgwww.nccp.org Loss of subsidy Impacts ability to hold job Approximately 1 of 6 eligible families served due to limited resources from child care block grant

52. Regulated ECE System Child Care Issues Standards reflect “custodial care” mentality, rather than high quality early education Tuition-based funding system means families make choices on care based on what they can afford Like Head Start, limited funding for child care subsidies serve few (1 of 6 eligible) Opportunity for Improvement: Standards for Teacher training, Teacher to Child Ratios,

53. Demographics – Harris County Difference in Demographics Depending on Age Source: Center for Public Policy Priorities, U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census