One thing in this that stood out to me is when the memo stated that it is not enough to know the WHAT we need to do, but we need to really focus on the HOW to accomplish this. Requirements are not enough, we need a clear understanding of how to implement within the various programs. I greatly appreciated the language suggestions and additions on building connections to the home and community.
3 Likes
I really appreciate the focus on inclusion along with the need for ongoing professional development for all implementers with respect to inclusion.
1 Like
I also want to support Nancy Herotaâs comment that the specificity and details related to the inclusion of preschoolers with disabilities is missing in comparison to the other recommendations. California has consistently lagged behind other states in our Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)/Inclusion data for preschool and school-age students with disabilities; and if we arenât specific and ambitious, there is likely to be little change in that regard. Setting the tone with inclusive preschool programs can lead to amazing outcomes into adulthood for individuals with disabilities in California.
really appreciate the uplift of this and would also add there be accountability to ensuring implementation is in place
1 Like
I also want to make mention that there are not many FCCHENâs in all counties and some only cater to one population such as migrant workers. In ensuring equitable access to parents to have the option to choose and select program type that best fit their needs how will the state ensure that FCCHENâs are equally disbursed throughout the state to ensure equitable access?
We are now moving into the presentation and discussion on Family and Community Engagement which will include information about:
- The evidence base
- Alignment to current quality standards (EC 8203)
- Relevant Master Plan for Early Learning and Care recommendations (and updates on implementation)
- Trust for Learning recommendations
Regarding the inclusion of children with disabilities:
The one major barrier that parents face are most parents do not understand the complicated system of disabilities services or how to navigate and advocate for their children to receive the maximum amount of Early Intervention/Special Education services.
Often time, a parent would put in an application for their child to be assessed but doesnât follow through because they do not understand the process. If they are enrolled at EHS/HS, we have staff to come along side to support the parents. Families that are not enrolled at EHS/HS would have a more difficult time understanding the process or get frustrated because they donât know the next steps.
Other barriers that the parents face:
⢠Response time from the LEA
⢠Children must be enrolled at the LEA in order to receive special education services
⢠Limited transportation is being offered
Recommendations:
⢠Provide parents with a flyer mapping out the steps and timelines; Referral, Assessment, IEP Meeting, Enrollment, contact information, etc.
⢠Knowledgeable staff be available to support and answer parentsâ questions
⢠LEA staff support parents with enrollment application
⢠Once a child is assessed and qualifies for special ed services- LEA staff is assigned as a case manager even if the parent initially declines the services
⢠Collaborate with EHS/HS programs in the area to bridge the gap between the two programs and make transitions seamless for the families
⢠LEA host Q & A sessions for parents of children who are suspected of having a disabilities and children with identified disabilities
1 Like
While I donât disagree with your comment, I wonder if there are more FCCHNs (funded by CCTR) than what we know of since we likely only see FCCHENs (funded by CFCC) especially since center-based and FCCH arenât easily distinguished in CCTR contract lists.
Thatâs a great question. I do know for certain there are no FCCHENâs in my immediate county.
To the discussion about equity for family child care providers- I think it would be useful in this work group to clearly differentiate between the need for differentiated supports and differentiated quality standards. Dr. Green I agree that we need to provide different supports for FCCs since the burden of many of these regulations is very different for a single FCC provider than a large center. And, I also agree with Trust for Learningâs premise that the expectations for quality should be similar across settings, so that we have equity for children and families.
1 Like
Understand and I hear your rationale. I am perhaps impatient with how long it takes to embrace the change research shows that can make a huge difference. I think all the points you raise could still happen by removing what to me reads as an âoutâ (to the extend possible) so that the easy pass of âwell, we tried, but it wasnât feasible for us to get this done because of xyzâ is discouraged. Language matters. It would be refreshing if all throughout language states: âthis is what needs to happen AND this is how we will help you/support you get there.â #WishfulThinking 
1 Like
Thank you, Dr. Jones. Another suggestion (to add to your recommendations) is that the assessors should be, at the least, knowledgeable about the specific disability.
This was an area we gave a lot of thought. In the end, as noted, we came down on keeping the regulations the same as much as possible. It is simply inequitable to suggest that children would need different things in different settings. However, we also suggest throughout both language of feasibility AND support and investment for FCC to make this possible. Family Child care Networks are part of this, but there may also need to be different timelines for implementation.
1 Like
I agree with Scott that using the federal definitions of a regular early childhood program and capping the % of students with IEPs at 49% is appropriate and would be supportive language.
1 Like
I am in support of all the other suggestions in this section; however, I believe the parent advisory payment will produce a lot of different conflicts for LEAâs. Where would that funding come from, etc.
For LEAs that donât want to recreate the wheel, they should partner with Head Start programs since Head Start already does Strength & Needs Assessments.
2 Likes
I believe since we are talkinga about a 3 and 4 years old that, CDE should make an effor to involve FCC or invite them and ask their input on this issue. FCC are part of the communities and have been serving these kids before all this. We need to be involved and aganded in the making
I agree. In addition, some counties donât have the infrastructure, manpower and/or services to meet the needs of families and their children with exceptional needs. At times programs find it difficult to assess childrenâs development because there are little to no places to refer families for additional services.
I agree jmarroquin, it could also create a challenge for other advisory groups such as the LCAP, DELAC, ELAC, CAC, etc.
1 Like
Let me clarify, I am not stating that children need different things dependent on caregiving context or that the level of quality should be different but it will look different in an FCC setting. What I want to bring to attention is the fact of the low participation may be part of the overwhelming feelings of the many roles FCC currently holds and the added responsibilities to be in alignment with Title 5 regulations not to mention being paid at the lowest level possible which contributes to their inability to sustain and maintain high-quality practices. It is with great hopes that understanding the diversity that is evident in FCC settings is considered as supports are developed with FCCHENâs to bring this idea to fruition and to ensure equitable access to high-quality FCC programs.
2 Likes