• Home »
• Specialized Programs »
• Child Development »
• Resources

CAEL QIS Design Subcommittee Highlights

California Early Learning Quality Improvement System (CAEL QIS) Advisory Committee

Design Ideas for Licensing, Quality Rating, and Improvement Systems Subcommittee

Dennis Vicars, Chair
Consuelo Espinosa, Vice-Chair

The CAEL QIS Design Ideas for Licensing, Quality Rating, and Improvement Systems Subcommittee met on May 19, 2010, at the California Department of Education Nutrition Services Division, 560 J. Street, Sacramento, CA from 10:00 am to 4:00 pm with a video conference site at Riverside County Office of Education, 2300 Market Street, Riverside, CA, plus 50 video streaming sites. Additional information such as the meeting agenda and work plan are available at CAEL QIS Web page.

Introductions:

Welcome and introductions were provided by Dennis Vicars, Subcommittee Chair and CEO of Human Services Management Corporation/PACE. The meeting opened with a brief PowerPoint review of work completed and approved to date by the CAEL QIS Advisory Committee.

Overview: Dennis Vicars presented the following:

• The Design Subcommittee’s charge under SB 1629- Steinberg 2008 to develop options for California’s rating structure and process with support systems to improve quality over time.
• Upcoming meeting dates and Workplan topic areas:
  • Design Oversight – July and August 2010
• QRS Design Block System and first 5 Elements (Family Involvement, Ratio and Group Size, Teaching and Learning, Program Leadership, and Staff Education and on-going Professional Development) for California QRS.
• Decisions made by CAEL QIS Advisory Committee, determined California’s QRS will include the following factors:
  • Be based on a block system-each tier building on the previous tier
  • Include up to five tiers with an entry level based on Title 22 and moving to aspirational and attainable criteria for Tier 5
  • Include licensed center-based programs and licensed family child care homes using consistent criteria for all programs
  • Study ways to include license-exempt providers in QRS
  • Cultural and language competence will be integrated into all quality elements with special emphasis on family involvement, staff education and training, and teaching and learning
  • Inclusion of children with special needs will be integrated into all quality elements with special emphasis on family involvement, staff education and training, and teaching and learning
  • Nutrition, health and physical activity need to be included in QRIS
  • California’s QRIS sets quality elements and tiers, third party accreditation and validated performance reviews will be used in conjunction with tiers but not incorporated into tiers
  • Technical assistance with achieving and maintaining the quality improvement plan that is prepared when a program goes through the QRIS process
  • Technical assistance is comprised on both internal and external resources, and technical assistance resources identified locally and regionally
  • Support needs to be greater for entry level programs. Technical assistance is available for all programs, and resources for exempt care providers may include preparation for licensing
  • Technical assistance is done by different groups than assessment and rating to avoid conflicts of interest
  • The importance of a measurement of quality of teacher/child interaction and environment as the criteria for teaching and learning quality element.
  • The use of ECERS for centers, family child care homes and infant toddlers programs as a measure for Tiers 1-5 and the use of Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) for Tiers 4 and 5, to be done in alternating rating periods, as approved by the Committee.
  • The development of a partnership with public and private entities in developing a single assessment tool that measures teacher/child interaction quality and environment.
  • “Alignment to Infant-Toddler and Preschool Curriculum Frameworks and Foundations” with direction to Design Subcommittee to further develop this area.

After the PowerPoint presentation Dennis Vicars outlined elements related to California’s Quality Rating Structure workgroups for the day. Subcommittee members were given instructions on the process. The Design Elements for the workgroups were:

• Oversight
• Licensing-Title 22 Standards and Monitoring

The following is the reporting out of the workgroups for the day. We will continue to refine this work at our next Design Subcommittee meeting.

Oversight Workgroup

Vision Statement

All California early learning programs will provide quality services to children and are encouraged to participate in the Early Learning Quality Improvement System. After the initial voluntary pilot testing phase, all programs receiving state and/or federal funds are mandated to participate in the ELQIS with appropriate funding and incentives provided. Private programs are strongly encouraged to participate.

Voluntary or Mandatory Participation?

ELQIS should be pilot tested for three to five years in a defined targeted area with 50% state funded and 50% private providers. All participation is voluntary during pilot testing.

The vision is that participation in the QRS is ultimately mandatory, but initially voluntary, with appropriate funding and incentives available.

Factors to study: define mandatory; define length of time programs stay on tiers and/or move up on the tiers; methods of recruitment; data gathering for evaluations; testing TA methods and effectiveness of incentives; assessment of costs.

Sampling Classrooms for Quality

Sampling factors:

• each age-range of children to be considered - must ensure to have a good showing of the younger children (infant and toddler) as well as older children (preschool);
• an appropriate random sample size based on statistically valid sampling methodology;
• Site visitation: programs would know the period of time when the evaluation is scheduled but do not have an exact day or classroom.
• Evaluator needs to have discretion to determine which classrooms will be visited.  
• Different agencies:
  • Single agency, one site, multiple classrooms, and
  • One agency multiple sites with only one classroom per site would be treated the same way. 
• Tiers 4 &5 would not have sampling on CLASS and PARS– all classrooms assessed every other rating period;
• CLASS and PARS to be used as professional development;
• Tiers 4 & 5  with ERS to be sampled

Review and Technical Assistance

Pilot:

• Ongoing technical assistance using a coaching model as well as other techniques to encourage continuous improvement   
• Technical assistance resources to focus not only on the on the quality of the environment but also areas such as operational, business, fiscal, administration, management, as well as programmatic resources.

Quality Improvement Actions Plans:

• Tool for improvement not a grading or punitive system.
• A system that enables training to be offered.   
• Technical assistance would be more fundamental in the beginning tiers with movement and more comprehensive or detailed in the higher tiers 
• Focus TA on lower tiers to move up in the tiers, and
• In higher tiers focus is to sustain higher quality levels.

NOTE: Part of the pilot would include simultaneous State-wide technical assistance with resources already available:

• R&R, CPIN, PITC, SEEDS already offered;
• LPC’s as a “local broker” to make sure that regional and local technical assessment resources are identified.

Return to Top

Licensing and Monitoring Workgroup

Nutrition

Further clarification was needed for the proposed Nutrition grid. The chart was distributed for clarification and discussion.

The question was raised specifically in Tier 3 that if 25% or more of its enrolled children are state subsidized, is it mandatory that they participate in the food program?

Pros:

• At Tier 1, the orientation will include information (i.e., benefits) on the food program and make it optional for providers to participate
• Content of food program is quality

Cons:

• Administrative record keeping is extensive and time consuming
• Cost of food program exceeds the amount of reimbursement
• Too costly for part-time/3-hour programs to participate if the program is mandatory

The proposal was made to:

• Elements of Tier 5 will be moved into Tier 1.
• Elements of Tier 4 will be moved into Tier 2.
• By Tier 3, children will be eating healthier (the chart would be from Tier 1 to 3).

Revised Chart for Nutrition

Tier 1

• Child care center that serves meals/snacks must meet nutrition requirements in Title 22 regulations.
• Children are served meals and snacks at regular times.
• If serving meals, child care facility posts menus so parents are informed about what their child is eating.
• Children have access to water throughout the day.
• Children are not required to eat all food on their plates.
• Parents receive guidelines for food brought from home.
• Child care facility supports mothers who breastfeed their infants.
• Child care facility communicates nutrition and physical activities philosophy and policies to parents.
• If the child care facility provides meals/snacks, it implements the following recommended state nutrition standards:

1. Limits fried potatoes to a maximum of one time per week.
2. Serves no fruit packed in heavy syrup.
3. Limits sweet grains* to no more than 2x per week & serves them only as snacks.

Tier 2

• Consistent with the recommended division of roles and responsibilities around eating:
• Child care facility decides what food is offered and when. Children decide if they will eat which foods and how much they will eat.
• Child care facility has written nutrition and physical activity policies.
• If the child care facility provides meals/snacks it implements the following recommended state nutrition standards:

1. *Serves only 1% low-fat or non-fat milk to children 2 years or older (unless parent provides a substitute*)                   
2. Serves no more than one serving of 100 % pasteurized juice per day.
3. Serves at least one vegetable at lunch and supper.
4. Does not deep fat fry foods on site.
5. Limits sugar in hot and cold cereals to 6grams per serving.

• Child care facility serves meals family style.
• Adult staff sits with children at table during mealtimes.

*Refer to the USDA Food Buying Guide, pp. 3-15, 16, Grains/Breads List, items with superscripts 3 and 4

Tier 3

• Child care facility utilizes a self-assessment tool to evaluate the nutrition and physical activity environment.
• Child care facility participates in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) if 25% or more of its enrolled children are state subsidized.
• If the child care facility provides meals/snacks and less than 25% of the child care facility’s enrolled children are state subsidized, all meals provided by child care facility must meet Title 22 regulations.

Recommendation: The Design Subcommittee will recommend to the full Advisory Committee that the food program be voluntary.

Based upon the agreements above and the findings for which elements in the nutrition grid are already measured by Title 22, ECERS and the Foundations Frameworks, the nutrition grid will also be presented to the full Advisory Committee for approval.

Action: The subcommittee asked for volunteers to determine which elements of the nutrition grid are already covered by Title 22 also which elements of the nutrition grid are already covered in ECERS, and which elements of the nutrition guide are already covered by the Foundations and Frameworks.

Return to Top

How Do We Provide Technical Assistance to Family, Friend and Neighbor Providers?

Agreements:

• Technical assistance with family, friend and neighbors will best be served through the parent.
• Technical assistance will be channeled through local agencies (i.e., county agencies, Resource & Referral Network, First 5, Alternative Payment Programs (APP), Local Planning Councils, etc.). These agencies would provide the parent with a parent/caregiver handbook with a list of resources, options, activities, best practices, First 5’s kit for new parents, etc…
• The parent is KEY, especially in terms of supporting “parental choice”.
• The goal is to have all 4-year olds in a part-day quality program.

Action: This information to be shared with the Family Engagement Subcommittee to conduct a crosswalk.

Definitions for License-Exempt Providers

A) LICENSE-EXEMPT: family, friend and neighbor

B) LEGALLY LICENSED EXEMPT: Agencies who have operational oversight and responsibility for meeting Title 22 requirements as recourse to families. Legally license- exempt providers include Cal SAFE, Tribal ECE, school districts, Parent Co-Op, Parks and Recreation and Boys and Girls programs.

The concern for legally license-exempt providers was expressed. Who will be responsible for ensuring that the requirements are being met? Who will certify these programs? Who will be liable? Can we use a MOU?

 How can license-exempt programs, such as CalSAFE be included in the CAEL QIS?

Current CAEL QIS decisions:

• Include licensed center-based programs and licensed family child care homes using consistent criteria for all programs
• Study ways to include license-exempt providers in QRIS

Clarification of CAEL QIS decision:

• Since license-exempt early childhood development programs can be reviewed for Title 22 licensing, CAEL QIS will include “licensed center-based programs and licensed family child care homes using consistent criteria for all programs.”
• CAEL QIS will provide technical assistance for all ECE programs, and resources for exempt care providers may include preparation for licensing.

Discussion:

Previously, information was provided that license-exempt programs (i.e., Cal SAFE) could not be licensed because the license-exempt programs would not be reviewed by DSS Title 22 staff, and this misinformation was corrected. License-exempt programs, such as Cal SAFE do meet all of the requirements for Title 22 and Title 5. Cal SAFE programs can apply for Title 22 licensing. However, some of their reasons for not applying for a license are related to having other oversight mechanisms in place (i.e., oversight by school districts), physical plans (i.e., being in older buildings with not enough bathrooms, not enough square footage, etc.), etc… It should be noted that Cal SAFE is exempt from the enforcement piece, but can operate under the program design criteria of Title 22.

A second option was discussed in which the CDE/CDD staff would monitor Cal SAFE programs for compliance with the Title 22 and Title 5 regulations. However, this option requires additional liability for the CDE and is not recommended as a statewide policy. Also since infants and toddlers are our most vulnerable population group, the health and safety requirements of Title 22 licensing are accepted as minimum requirements for a quality program. (See handout for more information.)

Recommendation: The Design Sub-committee will recommend to the full Advisory Committee that legally license-exempt providers be included in the CAEL QIS because they meet the following three criteria:

#1. There is operational oversight and responsibility for meeting Title 22 requirements,

#2. There is a district, agency, or entity that holds the liability

#3. There is recourse for families.

(The above does not include family, friend and neighbor care because they do not meet all three of the criteria.)

Family Involvement

Family Child Care Homes will crosswalk with Family Involvement.

Tier 1: Orientation

Tier 2: Pure assessment

Tier 3: Transition Planning

RECOMMENDATION: When Title 22 is updated, requirements need to be consistent as it relates to the family engagement piece of the QRIS.

ACTION: Invite a representative from Family Child Care Homes to speak on how they would like to be included and what they would like to be included in the QRIS.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 pm with Mr. Vicars thanking everyone for their input into the Design Subcommittee. The next meeting is in Sacramento at the California Department of Education, Nutrition Services Division at 560 J. St. Room 250 on May 19, 2010 with video-conference site at Riverside County Office of Education, in addition to video streaming option.

Return to Top