Now discussing Recommendation #3. Encourage County Offices of Education (COEs) to designate a UPK Coordinator and ensure the CDE continues to provide capacity building and technical assistance for UPK Coordinators and support UPK Coordinators, to collaborate with the Local Child Care and Development Planning Council (LPC). Consider a no-cost extension of the UPK Planning and Implementation Grant.
Similar to before, I think this will be needed ongoing work to bridge the early learning system with the TK-12 system, and with future P-3 alignment work.
#s 31, 2, 8, and 1: these are connected in terms of how we can better outreach and communicate to not just families but also early childhood care and education providers that need to be brought in to the UPK MSD system; how can we we effectively communicate to families with young children and ECE providers not currently represented in the UPK MSD system in a such a way as First 5 CA did (i.e. short, sweet, effective), with the Read, Sing Play campaign? there is lots of confusion in the field between UPK and UTK (they get interchanged often, but shouldnāt be); how might R&Rs be part of the needed communication?
1 Like
We have current UPK Coordinators, but we need to sustain them and encourage COEās to maintain them
Now discussing Recommendation #5. Analyze the statutory roles of early education and care planning, referral, and coordination infrastructure (e.g., Local Planning Councils, Resource and Referral Agencies, UPK Coordinators, etc.) and identify necessary changes to support their coordinated ability to conduct outreach, provide training, and support technical assistance for prospective and current UPK programs.
#3: add the UPK MDS to the no-cost extension recommendation; UPK P&I and UPK MDS and extending them will add to the rich dialogue happening at the local level about this new UPK system
I have to jump off for another meeting. Thanks again for facilitating a productive meeting.
I agree we need a system similar to the central eligibility list that we had in the past to help connect families to programs and connect programs to families. How can we do this at no additional cost???
2 Likes
Another observation is that while this work group is coming with our set of recommendations, local planning councils may have good recommendations from what they are facing as well. Not sure if there is a way to gather some feedback from local groups to inform our work
1 Like
starting with the CCCC Association Executive Committe is a great place to start.
2 Likes
CCCCA would be glad to assist. If collecting this type of feedback could be considered allowable under the Mixed Delivery Planning Grant and that was messaged prior to the release of Round 2 Funds, Iāll bet LPCs would support this ask as a deliverable
1 Like
Thank you for a great meeting! So grateful the meeting has moved to virtual to allow for more voices to participate.
letās discuss. Thanks!
not sure where this fits, but it appears that UTK administrators may need some competency-based requirements to oversee the programs and ensure that play-based learning environments with developmentally appropriate practices are happening and that UTK teachers (especially those who crossed to ECE to TK credential bridge to enter this part of the workforce) are not being unfairly evaluated in their pedagogy. There should also be a bridge developed for CDP matrix program director document holders to be able to cross over to administrative services credential.
This topic was automatically closed after 60 minutes. New replies are no longer allowed.