Using the Child Care and Development Fund to Support a System of Quality Improvement for School-Age Programs
Executive Summary
This strategy brief is intended to provide information and considerations for State child care administrators and other policymakers for improving access to high quality school-age care. The full text of the brief, available at the Afterschool Investments website (http://www.nccic.acf.hhs.gov/afterschool), includes examples of State strategies to improve quality. This brief is based on a review of the literature and interviews with State child care staff and their school-age partners in seven States: Delaware, Florida, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Oregon.
State leaders face growing demand for high quality school-age programs. Research has shown that children and youth thrive in school-age programs that are well-staffed, offer engaging and varied activities, and are linked to school and family goals and values. In addition, parents enter or sustain participation in the workforce, and experience less stress when their children are in high quality school-age programs.1
Child care administrators, with access to flexible Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) quality set-aside and targeted funds, are uniquely positioned to invest in quality improvement for programs serving children from birth to age 12 (or older). In partnership with other State leaders, child care administrators in a growing number of States are investing in a system of quality improvements to support a diverse group of school-age practitioners.2 A quality improvement system offers a series of interconnected requirements, incentives and supports to help programs to improve quality over time. State leaders describe many benefits of this approach. For example:
- School-age program leaders can clearly understand the State’s broad vision for quality and access supports to improve the quality of their programs;
- While any one investment in improving program quality may be threatened by budget cuts, State policymakers jointly investing in a coordinated system can make a stronger case for sustaining services.
Drawn from early childhood systems work, the following elements can serve as a useful framework for identifying the strengths, opportunities, and gaps in a coordinated system of quality improvement for school-age programs. 3
Governance – As State leaders work to develop a system of quality improvement for school-age programs, it is critical to involve the range of stakeholders who provide, use and partner with school-age programs and have a clear understanding of the approaches and challenges to running a quality program. Many State child care administrators are using one or both of the following strategies:
- Including school-age perspectives in early care and education coordinating bodies to help leaders think through opportunities to expand or adapt early care quality initiatives to support school-age programs.
- Partnering with Statewide afterschool networks or associations to expand the reach of quality initiatives to school-age programs that are not usually considered part of the child care system.
Regulations ensure the health and safety of children in care; and provide a baseline standard for quality in all regulated programs. Several States have recently revisited licensing requirements around staff qualifications, facilities, and other areas with an understanding of how school-age programs differ from early care and education. Moreover, since licensing is typically a gateway to other quality initiatives, some States are considering how to promote quality in school-age programs that are currently exempt from licensing.
Program and practitioner standards serve as the foundation for any system of quality improvement. Several States have developed research-based standards that apply to range of afterschool programs. For example:
- Statewide afterschool networks have developed voluntary afterschool program standards to inform training and self-assessment tools; and
- Some States have included school-age program standards as part of a child care quality rating and improvement system (QRIS).
The benchmarks associated with program accreditation offer yet another set of standards to guide program quality improvement. Several States have used CCDF funding to support programs in achieving accreditation often through the National Council on Accreditation (COA)4 or through a State accreditation body.
Similarly, professional core competencies also offer an important way to assess and guide training for individual school-age program practitioners as they increase their knowledge and capacity to provide high quality care. Some States are developing core competencies for school-age program staff and school-age professional credentialing programs that mirror similar initiatives in the early care and education field.
Program and practitioner supports - Another critical piece of a quality improvement system is a set of supports for programs and practitioners to help them to reach higher standards of quality. Building directly from regulations and quality standards, States can design supports to help programs and practitioners to move toward higher levels of quality. Key strategies include:
- Regional school-age care specialists embedded in the resource and referral system;
- Training and technical assistance aligned with school-age standards and incentives in a QRIS;
- Grants to school-age programs to become accredited or otherwise to improve quality;
- Coursework at local colleges to support providers in obtaining a school-age care credential; and
- A school-age TEACH scholarship to provide incentives for school-age program professionals to seek further education.
Financing - Child care administrators can take a strategic approach to financing a quality improvement system by first planning the system that they want to finance, and assessing what components they already have in place and what gaps need to be filled. Key strategies to filling gaps may include:
- Partnering with other funders, such as the 21st Century Community Learning Center program, which also has funds set aside to support school-age program quality; and
- Using CCDF quality funds to leverage community support and grants from private funders.
Accountability - As with any State investment, it is critical to regularly monitor and assess effectiveness and consider adapting strategies, when necessary. For example, States can use existing assessment tools such as School-Age Care Environmental Rating Scale (SACERS) results, and programs' status in a QRIS to assess how quality improvement strategies move programs toward higher levels of quality over time. In order to do so effectively, it may be necessary to integrate data systems that currently capture information on support provided to programs and their status on QRIS, SACERS or other measures. Data collection systems may be even more powerful if they can link to information on student participation in school-age programs or data on children and youth outcomes. Finally, some States choose to pilot test quality improvement initiatives and commission independent evaluations to assess their effectiveness.
Many States have in place some components of a school-age quality improvement system, while they are continuing work to strengthen other elements needed to support the school-age workforce. Building any quality improvement system is a long term process that benefits from a strategic plan and vision developed by many stakeholders. A good process takes advantage of opportunities to strengthen the links between system initiatives and takes the time to build collaborative relationships across agencies and stakeholders. Continued efforts to invest CCDF funding in a system of quality will ensure that States are maximizing resources to support and sustain high quality school-age programs that contribute to positive outcomes for children and youth.
1 Priscilla Little, The Quality of School-Age Child Care in After-School Settings, (Child Care & Early Education Research Connections, Research-to-Policy Connections, June 2007), No. 7. Back
2 Pamela Mendels, Opportunities in Hard Times: Building Out-of-School Time Systems That Last (The Wallace Foundation, April 2009). Back
3 Ann Mitchell, Stair Steps to Quality: A Guide for States and Communities Developing Quality Rating Systems for Early Care and Education, (United Way, Success by Six, July 2005). Back
4 In 2008, the school-age accreditation process was transferred from the National Afterschool Association to the Council on Accreditation (COA). For more information, see: http://www.coaafterschool.org/. Back
|
