Universal Pre-Kindergarten (UPK) Pilot Program
Frequently Asked Questions
I. UPK Pilot Requirements
1. Why is the UPK pilot funding programs that are already high quality? Shouldn't it be focusing more on programs that aren't?
Recognizing that most preschool children in Massachusetts (over 70 percent) are already spending time in the care of a program or someone outside of their home, the UPK pilot program is oriented to ensure that the programs where preschool children already are, offer high-quality learning environments and as a result prepare children for success in school. By providing resources to programs that already meet a certain quality standard (yet in many cases are barely able to maintain it at current funding levels) to support and improve the quality of their programming, UPK children are ensured a higher-quality experience. The UPK quality criteria set a defined standard for programs to strive for and perhaps more importantly, for resources to be organized around to support programs to reach the standard (eventually through the Quality Rating and Improvement System).
A variety of resources/supportsbeyond UPK are currently available from EEC to help improve the quality of programs, including Community Partnerships for Children (CPC) local planning and coordination ($14M), professional development ($4.5M) and accreditation grants ($1.7M), Child Care Resource and Referral agency services ($10M), Head Start supplemental grants ($10M), mental health consultation grants ($2.9M), family support programs ($8.6M), and early childhood educator scholarships ($4M). UPK Assessment Planning grants have also been awarded each year of the pilot program to help emerging programs meet the assessment requirement of the UPK quality standard.
2. Why do programs need to be accredited?
One marker of a high quality program is national accreditation, through entities such as the National Association of the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), National Association of Family Child Care (NAFCC), and New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC). Approximately 41 percent of the state’s licensed center-based preschool programs are accredited by NAEYC. Approximately 17percent of school-based preschool programs are accredited by NAEYC or NEASC. Approximately 7 percent of family child care providers are accredited by NAFCC or have a Child Development Associate (CDA).
To achieve accreditation, programs participate in an objective and external measurement process against rigorous and nationally-recognized program standards. These standards are more focused on curricula and teaching practices than state licensing regulations. The accreditation process is a way for programs to recognize what they are doing well, identify areas of improvement, and communicate to parents the level of quality offered. Accreditation can also be expensive and time consuming for programs, however creating a Massachusetts infrastructure to replicate the same functions may not be cost-efficient. Accreditation is currently legislatively mandated through budget line-item language as a requirement for UPK.
3. Why is assessment required?
The program-level practice of assessing young children’s developmental status and progress and using this information to improve instructional practices, individualize curricula, and communicate with parents is seen as another marker of a high quality program. The assessment requirement of the UPK pilot is also a way to better understand if the assessment data being collected by programs can be used to understand the progress of children statewide and lay the foundation for the development of a state kindergarten readiness assessment system. Assessment is currently legislatively mandated through budget line-item language as a requirement for UPK.
4. Why is the quality criteria defined the way it is?
The quality criteria for the UPK pilot is objective, research-based, supported by EEC, and then reflected in budget line-item language.
II. Pilot Structure
5. Is it efficient for UPK pilot funding to go to programs directly? Are there economies of scale that might be achieved by funding through CPCs or CCR&Rs?
There is a need for both direct funding for programs to maintain and improve their quality and funding to the quality infrastructure that supports both UPK programs and emerging programs that do not yet meet the UPK quality standard. Many activities currently supported by UPK funds cannot easily be achieved without direct program funding (e.g., staff compensation, curricular supports, child assessment, comprehensive services, and materials), yet by also investing in a community-level and/or regional infrastructure to provide quality supports to programs, certain efficiencies can be realized and additional supports provided. EEC is currently in the process of designing a UPK community-level capacity building pilot to better understand the “how” and “what” of these economies of scale.
6. What is the rationale behind the level that programs are funded at for the UPK Classroom Quality and Assessment Planning grants?
One goal of the UPK Classroom Quality grants is to help close the gap between the funding programs already receive and the cost of running a high-quality program. The grant that each program receives is based on a formula that includes the number of preschool children in the program and hours of operation of the program. The current funding formula provides $500 for every child enrolled and an additional $1,500 for each child whose enrollment is “subsidized[1].”
X
$500
(A) / + / Total
Classroom
Subsidized Enrollment*
X
$1,500
(B) / = / Total UPK Classroom Quality Grant
(A+B)
As the grant is primarily focused on maintenance costs (staff compensation, professional development, and accreditation activities), maintaining the level of the grant awards to each program for a number of years is consistent with the objectives of the grant. The FY08 UPK Evaluation further tested this assumption and at this time the findings do not support changing the funding formula.
The purpose of the UPK Assessment Planning grant is to help programs set-up and use a child outcome assessment system. Inherent to setting up this type of system are some costs that are one-time and others that are ongoing. EEC is renewing the Fiscal Year 2008 Assessment Planning grants on a one-time basis for Fiscal Year 2009 with the recognition that it takes at least 18 months for programs to implement these systems. In Fiscal Year 2009, grantees are eligible for up to 80 percent of their Fiscal Year 2008 award, with the recognition that about 20 percent of the grant in Fiscal Year 2008 was spent on one-time costs such as copies of the assessment tools and technology to use the tools.
III. UPK Monitoring and Evaluation
7. How is EEC monitoring the implementation of the UPK grants?
EEC conducts an extensive programmatic and fiscal review of each grantee’s proposed UPK expenditures at the beginning of each grant period. Coordinated licensing visits (including licensing staff and UPK program staff) are planned for a sample of UPK programs each year. A final fiscal review is conducted at the end of the year to ensure that funds are spent as planned. In addition, this year's UPK grantees are reporting every six months about their progress towards the intended outcomes of the grant. The FY08 UPK evaluation also collected extensive data from grantees about the implementation of the pilot program.
8. How do we know our dollars are making a difference for children?
UPK quality grants are currently being spent on research-based activities (e.g., high quality teachers, instructional practices, and quality learning environments) that have been found to be linked to improved outcomes for children. In Fiscal Year 2008, EEC funded the first phase of an external evaluation of UPK, which focused on documenting the specific activities that UPK programs are spending funds on, program experiences with the grant, and perceptions of impact on the quality of programs. EEC is currently in the process of formulating a longer-term evaluation plan, which will focus on measuring the quality of UPK programs and the outcomes of children in these programs.
IV. UPK Pilot vs. Full Implementation
9. Does EEC have plans to expand beyond the two current grant programs or is this really universal pre-k?
The UPK pilot program is the first step toward a broad-based and multi-pronged system to meet the challenges of access, quality and affordability for all families. The following principles are guiding the work to develop and implement a system for universally, accessible, high-quality early education in Massachusetts:
- Start with serving low-income/educationally at-risk children and move towards universal
- Build on existing mixed delivery system and current preschool funding
- Create a universal quality standard that is identifiable to parents
- Set high standards and help program achieve those standards
- Fund programs adequately to maintain standards
- Ensure access and choice for working families
- Ensure access and choice for families with children with special needs
- Build a UPK system not a program
Additional details about the envisioned components of the full UPK system can be found in the UPK Concept Paper on EEC’s website (
10. What about the children on the waiting list? And what about the children not currently served by any program (because of access and affordability barriers)?
EEC currently provides more than $150 million in financial assistance for families with preschool-aged children to enroll in an early education and care program. There are currently about 4,500 preschool children on the EEC-centralized waiting list for financial assistance, which likely is a significant underestimate of the actual number of children eligible for and not currently receiving financial assistance.
The current financial assistance system is well-positioned to accommodate an increase in funds to address the affordability of programs for families with preschool-aged children and other ages, which is part of the envisioned UPK system. As specified in EEC’s UPK Concept Paper, the vision for UPK includes the dual strategy of providing increased and targeted financial assistance for preschool-aged children to enroll in UPK level quality programs while also investing in improving the quality of current programs.
11. How will UPK funding be used to increase the number of eligible programs, especially in disadvantaged communities?
As the answer to question #1 describes (above), a variety of resources/supports beyond UPK are currently available from EEC to help improve the quality of programs. UPK Assessment Planning grants have also been awarded each year of the pilot program to help emerging programs meet the assessment requirement of the UPK quality standard. EEC envisions that planning grants could be broadened in the future to help programs improve their quality, and that the scope of all EEC supports will eventually be aligned with the Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS).
12. To maximize resources, what needs and expenses are more community-based and less program specific that can be supported through current existing resources and funding streams?
This is a broader policy question that EEC will be addressing, with the Board's input over the next year, through the design of the Program and Practitioner Supports component of the QRIS.
As child outcome assessment is a relatively new area of support for the agency, EEC is beginning to develop an infrastructure to support programs in building child outcome assessment systems. Currently, grants are awarded directly to programs to assist them with purchasing assessment materials, technology, and training. This past year, EEC also offered technical assistance to grantees to help them identify the topics their staff needed training in, find appropriately qualified trainers, and network with other nearby grantees to maximize the opportunities. EEC plans to convene an Assessment Learning Community for grantees to further the networking opportunities, cover common training topics, and provide technical assistance about common issues. Additionally, this past year, EEC hosted the first (to be annual) Assessment Institute for all UPK grantees, which covered many advanced topics around using child outcome assessments.
V. UPK Participation
13. How did EEC select the current programs to participate?
Programs that met the specified UPK quality criteria were eligible to apply for grants each year (Fiscal Years 2007 and 2008). Both years, EEC first set aside a portion of the available funding for each region based on the population of families in that region at or below 85 percent of the state median income. Then EEC allocated a portion of the funding within each region for each provider type, based on the proportion of that type in the region. Next if the applicant pool still exceeded available funding for any provider type in a region, EEC applied priority criteria, which have varied slightly by year. The priority criteria have included programs with classrooms led by BA teachers, programs in underperforming districts, current UPK grantees with additional eligible classrooms, and former planning grantees. If the applicant pool still exceeded available funding for any given provider type, EEC conducted a random selection process. Random selection has been necessary within almost every region each year.
14. Shouldn’t UPK funds be spent in the lowest incomecommunities, on the lowest income children?
As described in the UPK Concept Paper, the first principle guiding EEC’s implementation of UPK is to start with serving low-income/educationally at-risk children and move toward universal. This principle has been achieved by prioritizing both programs that serve low-income children and/orthose that are located in disadvantaged communities. A significant number of UPK pilot programs are serving the Commonwealth’s poorest children and communities, and this priority has been balanced with the priority to include a mixed delivery system and limited by the eligible applicant pool. The long-term vision in Massachusetts for UPK is for a system of universally, accessible, high-quality education for all children.
15. Shouldn’t UPK funds be spent only in underperforming districts?
EEC has prioritized programs that are located in underperforming districts, but this priority has been balanced with other priorities, including but not limited to achieving a mixed delivery system and geographic diversity. EEC has also been limited by the eligible applicant pool. The long-term vision in Massachusetts for UPK is for a system of universally, accessible, high-quality education for all children.
16. Why isn’t a program in my community currently part of UPK?
The demand for funds and eligible applicant pool has greatly exceeded available resources for each UPK competitive grant process thus far. It may be that a program from your community applied but was not selected due to resource constraints. Or alternatively, there may not be any programs that applied, either because they do not meet the eligibility criteria or for other reasons.
17. Shouldn’t UPK only be in the public schools?
The UPK pilot program in Massachusetts has been uniquely committed to including all types of programs, with the rationale that all of the different provider types that families currently choose to send their preschool children to should be included. It is true that some other states only include public school preschool in their UPK systems.
18. Are family child care providers a part of UPK?
Yes, the UPK pilot program in Massachusetts has been uniquely committed to including all types of programs. Few other states with UPK systems have included family child care. Currently 75 of the 216 UPK pilot programs are family child care providers. In an effort to include a representative sample of providers (proportionate to the whole), EEC has funded each eligible independent family child care provider that has applied and the vast majority of eligible providers that are part of family child care systems.
1
8/06/08
[1]*For the purposes of the UPK program the term "subsidized enrollment” is defined to include the following: EEC-subsidized children (i.e., children accessing care through contracts, vouchers, or CPC scholarships); children funded with Head Start dollars; privately subsidized children from families meeting EEC income eligibility criteria (i.e., total household income at or below 85% of the state median income) with supporting documentation from the program; and the proportion of children qualifying for free/reduced lunch, which will be used to help approximate the number of subsidized children in public school preschool programs.