Agree - but is the challenge just with funding…it seems the system is structured in a way that views child care as non-educational? Messaging about child care as educational is important and relevant also
2 Likes
The link on the form for public comment is being directed to the May comments rather than the June.
this comment (Linda) about division in settings is very important to consider - as I reflect on today’s meeting, there does seem to be messaging that CSPP and FCCN are higher quality and I don’t think we are trying to suggest this - this is a huge equity issue as the one public speaker mentioned regarding lack of networks in counties
CDA is equivalent to the Associate Teacher Permit from the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing and is a great entry point for cross-over in to the UPK MDS
I want to reiterate that we need to be inclusive of FCCH networks that are currently in existence and operating in California using Head Start funding and not just CCTR, CSPP, and/or CFCC.
3 Likes
Also, earlier a comment was made about the 15% administrative rate cap on programs seemed limited. I think it is important to remember that almost all state and federally funded early education programs have this same limitation and are able to operate with efficacy (programmatically and financially).
Thank you for joining us for the June meeting of CA’s Universal PreKindergarten Mixed Delivery Quality & Access Workgroup. The meeting has now ended. This Discourse channel and written public comment on agenda item 2 will remain open until 5:30pm. Members of the public can make written public comments here, and all written public comments on agenda item 2 can be viewed here.
This topic was automatically closed after 59 minutes. New replies are no longer allowed.