1. 1 Massachusetts’ Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) Responses to Public Input on Standards

2. Process for Public Input on the Standards Posted draft Standards with a survey for public input in March 377 individuals responded + several organizations submitted letters Reviewed the feedback for significant trends and necessary edits For subset of trends, we are presenting and getting recommendations for responses from: Original QRIS External Stakeholders group (5/15) EEC Advisory Council (5/29) Board Committee on Policy and Programs (6/1). Will make decisions based on prior groups’ recommendations 2

3. Review Process for Public Input Reviewed the responses for significant trends. Definition = comment made by at least 10% of respondents within the prototype 56 significant trends total Positive Validations: 23 trends Addressed other elements of QRIS (i.e. program and practitioner supports, fiscal incentives, community engagement): 29 trends To be addressed by research: 1 trend To be addressed by further public response: 3 trends 3

4. Significant Trends: Head Start Performance Standards Trend: Should meeting the Head Start Performance Standards with no deficiencies (in receipt of a Blue or Gold letter) be considered equivalent to NAEYC at Level 5? Considerations: Crosswalks of Head Start and NAEYC standards show a high level of correlation between the standards. Head Start PRISM review process involves an external reviewer. With the reauthorization, every site within an agency will now be visited during the PRISM. Currently large percentage of Head Starts in Massachusetts are NAEYC accredited. Other New England states are considering NAEYC and the HS Performance Standards as equivalent at the top level of their QRIS. QRIS External Stakeholders Recommendations: Yes 4

5. Significant Trends: Alternative to NAEYC Trend: Should there be an alternative to NAEYC accreditation at the top levels for Center/School- Operated programs? Considerations: In the general comments section, 8 respondents requested an alternative to accreditation. 10 said cost was a barrier, 6 believed accreditation is unnecessary if QRIS is an alternative. In the response to a question about essential elements of quality, 13 center/school respondents noted NAEYC accreditation Of the 18 states currently with a QRIS, 9 require NAEYC at the top level with no alternative QRIS External Stakeholders Recommendations: No 5

6. Significant Trends: Should there be an alternative to degrees for FCC? Trend: Should there be an alternative to degrees for Family Child Care providers? For example, years experience. Considerations: The Career Lattice, which is currently under development, will address this. Process needed to verify years of experience as proxy for quality. QRIS External Stakeholders Recommendations: No 6

7. Next steps: Board Committee will meet and review recommendations on Monday, June 1. Standards will be revised based on feedback 7

8. FOLLOWING SLIDES ARE FOR REFERENCE IF NEEDED 8

9. MA QRIS Standards: Preliminary Recommendations  Five levels of quality defined in draft standards with combination of required criteria and more flexible points.  Nine categories within draft standards*:  Relationships  Physical Environment  Leadership and Management  Health and Safety  Curriculum and Assessment  Community Involvement  Family Involvement  Program Evaluation  Workforce Quality and Support *Special Education & Cultural Competence embedded across categories of draft standards.  Three versions of draft standards by program type:  Center/school-based  Family child care  ASOST 9

10. 10 Quality Levels Level 1: Full licensing with no action to revoke, or Programs operated and overseen by a local education agency (i.e. license-exempt programs) Level 2: Programs must earn at least 36 points, at least 4 points must be earned in each standard area Level 3: Programs must earn at least 72 points, at least 8 points must be earned in each standard area Level 4: Current accreditation from NAEYC or If a Head Start designee, receipt of a Blue or Gold letter from the Office of Head Start as a result of the triennial review process Level 5: Current accreditation from NAEYC and Every classroom has at least one teacher in each classroom with a higher education degree (BA or higher) in education, child development, or a related field Programs which are operated and overseen by a local education agency (i.e. license-exempt) must demonstrate that they meet all EEC licensing requirements for group programs [1] [1] To be determined - appropriate language for other types of license-exempt programs, i.e. Catholic, Montessori Center/Preschool Standards

11. 11 Quality Levels Level 1: Full licensing with no action to revoke Level 2: Programs must earn a total of at least 36 points, at least 4 points must be earned in each standard area Level 3: Programs must earn a total of at least 72 points, at least 8 points must be earned in each standard area Provider has a current CDA and earns 40 points, at least 8 points must be earned in each of the following standard areas: Physical Environment, Curriculum & Assessment, Leadership & Management, and Program Evaluation Level 4: Current accreditation from NAFCC, or Provider has an Associates degree and earns 40 points, at least 8 points must be earned in each of the following standard areas: Physical Environment, Curriculum & Assessment, Leadership & Management, and Program Evaluation Level 5: [Outside evaluation – To be determined through public input process], and Provider has a higher education degree (BA or higher) in education, child development, or a related field Family Child Care Standards

12. 12 Quality Levels Level 1: Full licensing with no action to revoke, or Programs operated and overseen by a local education agency (i.e. license-exempt programs) Level 2: Programs must earn at least 36 points, at least 4 points must be earned in each standard area Level 3: Programs must earn at least 72 points, at least 8 points must be earned in each standard area Level 4: Use of research-based program quality and youth outcome tool, and development of program improvement plan (These are currently options within the criteria, but those criteria will be mandatory at Level 4.); And Earning of x (amount to be determined) points, distributed across all nine standard areas; And In Certification (if serving 150 children, or budget > $150,000) of Council on Accreditation (COA) Accreditation. Level 5: Programs may apply for level 5. Application must include an external evaluation that shows program quality is equal to or greater than the quality necessary to complete COA Accreditation or Council on Accreditation (COA) Accreditation complete School Age Standards