Dr. Walter Gilliam on Preschool Expulsion and Bias

Dr. Walter Gilliam on Preschool Expulsion and Bias

Dr. Walter Gilliam joins us in Portland for a discussion on preschool suspension, expulsion, and implicit bias. He is professor of child psychiatry and psychology at the Yale University Child Study Center, and the director of The Edward Zigler Center in Child Development and Social Policy. He coauthored the book A Vision for Universal Preschool Education, and his groundbreaking study from 2005 called “Prekindergarteners Left Behind” examined expulsion rates, and reasons for expulsion, in state preschool programs across the country. His scholarly writing addresses early childhood care and education programs, school readiness, and developmental assessment of young children, and he is frequently consulted by decision-makers in the U.S. and other countries on issues related to early care and education.

Learn more about implicit bias, preschool expulsion, and what is being done about the issue at the state level: What We Talk About When We Talk About Preschool

Transcript

Rafael Otto: [00:00:00] This is the Early Link Podcast. I’m Rafael Otto. Dr. Walter Gilliam joins us for discussion on preschool suspension, expulsion, and implicit bias. He is professor of child psychiatry and psychology at the Yale University Child Study Center and the director of the Edward Zigler Center in Child Development and Social Policy.

He co-authored the book, A Vision for Universal Preschool Education and his groundbreaking study from 2005 called “Pre-Kindergarteners Left Behind” examined expulsion rates and reasons for expulsion in state preschool programs across the country. His scholarly writing addresses early childhood care and education programs, school readiness, and developmental assessment of young children.

And he is frequently consulted by decision makers in the US and other countries on issues related to early care and education. Walter, welcome to The Early Link Podcast.

Dr. Walter Gilliam: [00:00:50] Hi Rafael, it’s great to be here.

Rafael Otto: [00:00:52] Excellent. Excellent. One of the first questions I wanted to ask you was how you first became interested in studying preschool suspension, expulsion. I know there’s some background to that and I would love it if you could share a story or two.

Dr. Walter Gilliam: [00:01:05] Well, that’s a great question. Um… there is a backstory to it. This was back in 2002. I was at Yale then as a faculty member and doing research but also supervising child psychiatrists and child psychologists and pediatricians who are learning how to work with young children. And so I was on the other side of one of those two-way mirrors – you know what I’m talking about… actions on the one side, and then I’m on the other side and I’m watching, and then I can give them feedback on how well they’re working with the young child, and then sign off for billing purposes.

I couldn’t help but notice that many of the children who are being referred to our clinic for an evaluation were being sent to us because they’d been kicked out of a preschool program or expelled from a childcare program or they were told that if they didn’t come to a place like Yale and get an evaluation that they will be expelled from the program.

And I couldn’t help but notice just how many children this was true for. And I didn’t know if this was a Connecticut phenomenon or this was just something that was happening around the New Haven, Connecticut area. So I decided to take a look at the research on it and found absolutely nothing.

And it just so happened that at that same time I was planning a nationwide survey of preschool teachers, preschool teachers around the nation, all working in state-funded preschool programs and thought, “Well, let’s just weave in some additional questions.” So we threw some additional questions into the survey.

It was a survey that was taking place over the phone. It was about an hour long. We just had a few questions on the expulsion but the findings were just so staggering to so many people that it literally became the study.

Rafael Otto: [00:02:38] And that became “Pre-Kindergartners Left Behind.” Right?

Dr. Walter Gilliam: [00:02:42] Yeah, absolutely. Well, at the time we had No Child Left Behind legislation, which was the hot topic. So it was a bit of a play on the title. In terms of the fact that we are leaving kids behind and we leave them behind before they even get there. For many people when they think of school they think of school as beginning in kindergarten, but not anymore. We have preschool programs for children four years old or three and four years old and you know the concern here for us with phenomena like this, of children being expelled from preschool programs, is this notion of the fact that for many of our kids they can experience a failure before they even get to what most people would consider school.

Rafael Otto: [00:03:16] Talk a little bit more about that study because you found some fairly significant things related to the expulsion rates for preschool as it exceeded the expulsion rate for kids in the K-12 system.

Dr. Walter Gilliam: [00:03:26] By a long shot.

Rafael Otto: [00:03:27] Right, what did those numbers look like?

Dr. Walter Gilliam: [00:03:29] Well, when we got the rates back we found that 10% of the preschool teachers… Now bear in mind these are state funded preschool programs; this is not your typical childcare programs. These are your better resourced early care and education programs that are part of state systems, usually run out of state Departments of Education and are funded through state Departments of Education. So they have actually more resources to them than most of your regular child care programs. And in these programs, the teachers were telling us – 10% of them – that they had expelled at least one child in the past 12 months. Now, expelled meant permanent. Permanently, totally, kicked out of the program. 10% of the teachers said that they had done this and we knew how many children had been expelled and we knew how many children were in their classrooms, and so with some simple division we were able to figure out what the rate was. But then when we had the rate it was kind of hard to figure out how to communicate that. The rate was 6.7 expulsions per thousand children enrolled. So at 6.7 is that a lot, is that a little or is that like baby bear and it’s just right? You know like, what do you do with that? So we thought, “Well, you need to have something to compare it to.”

So we thought K-12 expulsion rate would be the best thing to compare it to. But we couldn’t find anything published on the K-12 expulsion rate except that the US Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights had conducted surveys on expulsion and suspension in K-12. But, they never analyzed the data. Instead, it existed as 16,000 databases. One for every school district in America on the US Department of Education’s website. So we downloaded all 16,000 and wrote our own formulas to figure out what the rates were state by state and nationally. And then when we compared the rate we found that preschoolers, three and four year old children, were being expelled at a rate more than three times that of grades K through 12 combined in the United States. And when you look at it state by state, all but three states have an expulsion rate in preschool that outpaces the expulsion rate K-12. That’s a lot of kids being expelled.

Rafael Otto: [00:05:24] You also found that boys were much more likely to be expelled than girls?

Dr. Walter Gilliam: [00:05:29] About four times as likely.

Rafael Otto: [00:05:31] Four-year-olds more likely to be expelled than three-year-olds and that African-American children more likely to be expelled and expelled more often than White, Latino, and Asian kids…

Dr. Walter Gilliam: [00:05:42] About twice as likely.

Rafael Otto: [00:05:44] Tell me how those findings came out and what else should we know about that study?

Dr. Walter Gilliam: [00:05:49] In the original study, we were curious about things like what kind of programs are the ones doing the most expulsion and then also what types of children were the most likely to be expelled. And like you said, we found that in mixed age groups where you have three- or four-year-old children together, the older child is more likely to be expelled. We found that boys were expelled at about four times the rate of girls, and Black children were expelled about twice the rate of every other demographic of children.

And so when you think about it, there’s really three expulsion risk factors. You have “big,”
the bigger children, “the boys,” and “the Black children” – big, black, and boy. And the more of those that existed within a single child, the greater the likelihood that that child might be expelled from the program. But that just tells us about which children were most at risk. And then there’s other factors too that have to do with what types of programs were more likely to be the ones doing the expulsion. When we did the pilot study for this, we piloted it in child care programs in Massachusetts and we found that one teacher reported expelling six children out of a class of 16 in the course of 12 months. It’s almost half the class. It’s amazing, isn’t it?

Rafael Otto: [00:06:56] It’s incredible.

Dr. Walter Gilliam: [00:06:57] The rate’s much, much, much higher than what a lot of people would have thought and certainly even more so for our Black children and for our boys. We didn’t know what to do and how to understand the finding about four-year-olds more likely than three-year-olds. CBecause I could’ve made a guess either way on that. I could have guessed, well maybe the bigger child. I could have guessed, well maybe the younger child who might be more socially immature in the classroom. And so what we did was we pulled together a group of preschool teachers similar to the ones in the national study and we said: “In a national study this is what teachers like you said, why do you think they would say this?” And the teachers thought about it in this focus group and they came back and they said, “Well you know it’s one thing If you have a child who’s this big you know and they held their hand about waist high… and they said it’s another thing If you have a child who’s this big and they held it a little bit higher.”

And so we asked the logical follow-up question of why does height matter. Like how does height factor into who you’re going to expel or not expel? And they said, “Well if the child is smaller, then the child might be smaller than the other children, but if the child is bigger then the child might be bigger than some of the other kids in the classroom and then maybe someone will get hurt.” And that was an important clue to us that it makes a lot of sense because the teacher is not just concerned about the singular child. The teachers has to be concerned about all the children in the classroom. But if you listen really closely to what the teacher’s saying, what the teacher’s saying is this: it’s not the behavior of the child. You can have two children equally aggressive, but the bigger child’s going to be the one to be expelled. So it’s not really the behavior of the child. It’s what we make out of that behavior. It’s what we assume might happen as a result of that behavior. And that’s when it became clear to us that preschool expulsion isn’t really a child outcome. Preschool expulsion is not a child behavior. It’s an adult decision that may be based in part on the child’s behavior but there could be other factors, too, that could come into play having to do with how that teacher views that child.

For the complete transcript, please download the pdf below.

 

Culturally Specific Advocacy

Culturally Specific Advocacy

In this episode of The Early Link Podcast, host Rafael Otto talks with Pooja Bhatt and Anthony Castaneda about the value of culturally specific early childhood advocacy and how their organizations are approaching this important work. 

Guests: 

Pooja Bhatt is the cofounder and managing partner at SeeChange, a consultancy focused on people-centered change. She also works as a facilitator for the Early Childhood Equity Collaborative and is a participant in Oregon’s Early Childhood Coalition.

Anthony Castaneda is the policy manager at Latino Network and is a participant in Oregon’s Early Childhood Coalition.

Summary:

Pooja and Anthony provide background on the Early Childhood Equity Collaborative and how the five culturally specific organizations involved are approaching advocacy. They also discuss the passing of the Early Childhood Equity Fund in 2019 and what that fund is helping accomplish in Oregon. Finally, Pooja and Anthony share some of the advocacy challenges for their organizations, describe describe what makes partnerships and coalitions successful, and share the impact that culturally specific advocacy can have for families. 

Recommended Resources:

Our episode on Coalition Building and Advocacy

Our episode on the Student Success Act

Transcript

Rafael’s Daughter: [00:00:00] Welcome everyone. This is the Early Link Podcast. Thanks for listening!

Rafael: Big thanks to our special guest opening the show today. That’s my daughter and she’s in third grade. I’m your host, Rafael Otto. As usual, you can catch us on the airwaves on 99.1 FM in Portland on Sundays at 4:30 PM or subscribe and listen wherever you find your podcasts.

Today, I’m talking with Pooja Bhatt, who is the co-founder and managing director at SeeChange, a consultancy focused on people-centered change, and Anthony Castaneda, the policy manager at Latino Network. We’ll be talking about early childhood advocacy and what that looks like from the perspective of a number of organizations in Portland.

Pooja works as a facilitator for The Early Childhood Equity Collaborative, which we’ll learn more about, and which Latino Network is a part of. Both Pooja and Anthony are participants in Oregon’s Early Childhood Coalition. Welcome, and thank you to both of you for joining me today. It’s great to have you.

Pooja Bhatt: [00:00:58] Thank you. It’s great to be here.

Anthony Castaneda: [00:00:59] Thank you. I’m happy to be here.

Rafael: [00:01:02] Pooja, I thought we could start with you, and if you could just give us a bit of background about the collaborative that you work with and how the organizations involved are approaching advocacy.

Pooja Bhatt: [00:01:13] Sure. Great question. So, the Early Childhood Equity Collaborative actually came together in 2018, because at that time there was no systematic public support for culturally specific services in the early learning field, at a time when our state’s population of zero to five-year-olds is the most racially and ethnically diverse it’s ever been.

So on one hand, we’re growing in the diversity of our young children and families, and at the same time, we’re actually investing a lot more in early childhood. But at that time in 2018, there wasn’t a systematic support and acknowledgment of the need for culturally specific services throughout the state. So the reason that this collaborative came together was really to help advocate at the state level for legislation and investments to invest in culturally specific services.

So the Collaborative partnered with culturally specific organizations, philanthropy, and community-based organizations throughout the state to really build awareness about the need for these services, these culturally specific services, and mobilize advocacy for communities of color and immigrant and refugee communities. And the real purpose is really to shift power dynamics in our state, where communities of color are actually being able to self-determine policy and budget priorities. So that’s the real power of this collaborative, is that a lot of times you see foundations investing in direct services, which is of course very important, and at the same time there hasn’t been historic investment in the ability of culturally specific organizations to advocate on their own behalf, on their own communities’ behalf, for statewide legislation and investments in culturally specific services. So the partners around the table are Latino Network, who really helped to begin convening this conversation, with KairosPDX, Black Parent Initiative, NAYA, and IRCO. So they were the original five culturally specific partners, but many more partners, other culturally specific organizations around the state, have been engaged in the past. We’ve had the support, generous support, of our foundation partners and our fiscal agent of Social Venture Partners, and my role is really the contract facilitator for the group.

Rafael: [00:03:25] Anthony, I know Latino Network is part of the Collaborative. Can you give us just a background overview of what Latino Network does and its role in the community?

Anthony Castaneda: [00:03:33] Sure. Latino Network is a culturally specific organization serving children, youth, families in the Tri-County area: Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington counties. We provide services to thousands of Latinos in the areas of education, mentorship, leadership development, and family stability. And one of the reasons why organizations like Latino Network exist is to address those needs in the community that are currently not filled by the systems in place. So we see families falling through the cracks and we see some of those needs of students not being met, which is why we see a lot of these disparities, which is the reason why we worked so hard to connect with these families.

Rafael: [00:04:20] So, can you talk about the experience of participating in the Collaborative and what that has been like?

Anthony Castaneda: [00:04:27] The experience has been overwhelmingly positive. I think the Collaborative provides a space for our organizations to connect on shared goals and interests. it provides a space for information sharing as well as strengthening ties between our organizations. I think one of the early experiences has been learning about the other services provided in the area by our partner organizations.

We can share expertise, share resources with one another, and really connect these families to other services that may be needed.

Rafael: [00:04:59] Talk about, and maybe you both can talk about this a little bit, but the approach to advocacy as… as you’re representing direct service organizations that have close ties to the community and families. What does that mean for advocacy and how has that shifted or changed because of the Collaborative? Anthony, did you want to start with that?

Anthony Castaneda: [00:05:17] Sure. I think one of the strengths has been bringing parents from different backgrounds and perspectives together and really leading with that parent voice and really elevating the needs of those children or the youth that we’re working with.

Rafael: [00:05:31] Pooja, do you have comments on that?

Pooja Bhatt: [00:05:32] Yeah. I mean, I think that that exactly is the power of the Collaborative, of bringing together parents from diverse communities and really showing the richness of Oregon’s community. We often say that Oregon is very white, right? That we’re known as one of the whitest big cities in the country. But what that does is that it makes invisible the communities of color that are here. And so I think that one of the great things about the Equity Collaborative is that it really elevates the power of being present and being seen and we are here and we do have policy priorities that we want to engage partners across the spectrum to uplift.

So I think that the way that this collaborative has really connected parents from diverse communities with the organizations that they are most connected to – with other partners, dominant culture partners, school districts, as well as policymakers and funders – has been really powerful.

For the full transcript, please download the pdf below.

 

Foregrounding Racial Equity in Early Childhood

Foregrounding Racial Equity in Early Childhood

In this episode of The Early Link Podcast, host Rafael Otto speaks with Elena Rivera and Soobin Oh from Children’s Institute about the importance of racial equity in early childhood spaces and how the Children’s Institute is working to center racial equity in its own work.

Guests:

Elena Rivera is the the senior health policy and program advisor at Children’s Institute. She is responsible for establishing strong linkages between health and early learning in policy and advocacy efforts, including identifying opportunities to leverage Oregon’s health system transformation to improve outcomes for young children.

Soobin Oh is Children’s Institute’s senior early education advisor. He is a committed social justice educator and is well-versed in Anti-Bias education, culturally sustaining pedagogy, and critical pedagogy.

Summary:

Elena and Soobin explain how racism impacts learning experiences for young children, share their own personal stories related to racial bias in early childhood, and provide data on the number of children of color living in poverty in Oregon. Finally, they break down the concepts of diversity, equity, and antiracism while looking at the work that Children’s Institute is doing and how the organization is holding itself accountable to these terms.

Recommended Reading:

Ibram Kendi Defines What it Means to be an Antiracist

Gloria Ladson-Billings Reframes the Racial Achievement Gap

Geneva Gay – Preparing for Culturally Responsive Teaching

Dr. Walter Gilliam on Preschool Expulsion and Bias

When a Black Baby is Born, the Race Matters

Transcript

Rafael: [00:00:00] Welcome everyone. This is The Early Link Podcast. I’m your host, Rafael Otto. I want to thank all of our listeners for tuning in and as usual you can catch us on the airwaves on 99.1 FM on Sundays at 4:30 PM, or subscribe and listen wherever you find your podcasts. Today, I’m talking with two of my colleagues at Children’s Institute.

Elena Rivera is our senior health policy and program advisor, and Soobin Oh is our senior early education advisor. We’ll talk about why a focus on racial equity is essential when thinking about the needs and hopes for kids, for all children, but particularly for young children in the early childhood space.

And we’ll talk about how Children’s Institute is working on centering racial equity in its work. Elena and Soobin, how are you both doing today?

Soobin Oh: [00:00:46] Really great, Rafael. It’s great to be with you and Elena today.

Elena Rivera: [00:00:50] Yeah, I’m doing well, too. Excited for this conversation.

Rafael: [00:00:54] Glad to have you both. I know we’ve had some opportunities to talk about this in person, of course. And I’m glad to have you both on the podcast and to get this conversation out to a broader audience. When we’re talking about racial equity, it means that we’re also talking about racism and its impact on young children.

Soobin I thought we could start with you, if you could describe some of the ways you’re thinking about how racism impacts the learning experiences for young children and then, Elena, I’ll give you an opportunity to talk about this as well.

Soobin Oh: [00:01:27] Yeah, you’re not starting with the easy questions are you Rafael?

Rafael: [00:01:32] We’re going to go right into the big picture.

Soobin Oh: [00:01:34] I love it. I love it. I mean, where do we even start in terms of how racism impacts the learning experiences of young children? I think we could think about it in different levels. What I mean by that is, on some level, we can look at data and outcomes and understand that people’s life trajectories are being impacted by racist systems or racist policy decisions or different races. Different people are having different experiences just based on the categories that they’re being put into.

And then I think you can also describe how racism impacts learning experiences for young children on a more intimate level in terms of the classroom experience of a child. For example, just receiving a lot of negative attention from a teacher, more than usual, and that could perhaps be impacted by the teacher’s uninterrogated biases.

We know that can be the case based off of new research on how implicit bias works. So, I think it could be anywhere from there to there in terms of intimate experiences all the way to broad trend data across populations. We can see a variety of ways that racism is having an impact on people.

Rafael: [00:02:51] Thanks Soobin!  Elena, What are your thoughts on that?

Elena Rivera: [00:02:53] Yeah, I really appreciate that framework Soobin offers, kind of the data approach and then the experiential approach. I just want to interject another potential setting. You know, children are in classrooms and even before they’re in classrooms, children are interacting with these other systems and services be it healthcare – starting even with the prenatal care that their mothers receive when they’re pregnant – and including family support services as well. And in these kinds of programs and settings, kids and families are experiencing everything from bias at an individual level to the kind of systemic impacts like neighborhood poverty, crime rates, poor housing conditions and so on, you know, lack of access to food as well.

These are conditions that are created by structural racism that we have built into our institutions and our policies. And so this all adds up. You can think of the kind of compounding nature of racism. Such that by the time a child enters a classroom, they already have a host of experiences that have shaped the kinds of opportunities they’ve been exposed to, how their families are doing and how those children perceive both their own skills and identity, as well as how they fit into the picture of their community.

For the full transcript, please download the pdf below.

 

Coalition Building & Advocacy with Amanda Manjarrez and Dana Hepper

Coalition Building & Advocacy with Amanda Manjarrez and Dana Hepper

In this episode of The Early Link Podcast, host Rafael Otto explores the topic of advocacy and the details of two legislative agendas focused on building an inclusive, equitable, and just public education system.

Guests:

Amanda Manjarrez is the public policy & government affairs director at Foundations For A Better Oregon. Previously, Amanda served as director of advocacy at Latino Network, and as advocacy director for the Coalition of Communities of Color.

Dana Hepper is the director of policy & advocacy at Children’s Institute. She oversees the organization’s legislative advocacy and community engagement work, including Oregon’s Early Childhood Coalition.

Coalitions:

Oregon Partners for Education Justice is a cross-cultural network of community-based organizations, culturally specific service providers, and education advocates who are championing a racially just and community-centered public education system for Oregon. The coalition believes in the vision, wisdom, and leadership of impacted communities, and advocates for equitable policies and investments that eliminate disparities and empower historically underserved children. Foundations For A Better Oregon is the coalition’s coordinating member. Read their 2021 Legislative Agenda.

Oregon’s Early Childhood Coalition includes more than 40 state and national organizations that work to advocate for young children and families. The coalition asks legislators to commit to continued improvement in early care, education, and supports for all of Oregon’s young children and families and to center the voices of those most impacted by legislative actions in their decision-making processes. Children’s Institute serves as a coordinating member of the coalition and offers facilitation support. Read their 2021 Legislative Agenda.

Summary:

In this episode, Amanda Manjarrez and Dana Hepper explain the priorities of the coalitions’ respective agendas as well as where they overlap. They also share why racial equity is key to an advocacy agenda, and discuss the need to build on the historic investments established in the 2019 Student Success Act.

Relevant Resources:

The Early Link Podcast’s episode on the 2019 Student Success Act

Transcript

Rafael: [00:00:00] This is the Early Link Podcast. I’m Rafael Otto. Today, we’re exploring the topic of advocacy and the details of two legislative agendas focused on education for kids from birth all the way through high school. I’m talking with Dana Hepper from Children’s Institute. She’s the director of policy and advocacy. And Amanda Manjarrez, who’s the public policy and government affairs director at Foundations for a Better Oregon. Amanda and Dana, welcome to the podcast.

Dana Hepper: [00:00:26] Thank you.

Amanda Manjarrez: [00:00:26] Thank you for having us.

Rafael: [00:00:28] So I know you’re both involved in two coalitions that are, that have been very active in, are active right now in the advocacy space, Oregon Partners for Education Justice, and the, and Oregon’s Early Childhood Coalition. I would love it if you could talk a little bit about these two coalitions, who’s involved, how you work and what your purpose is. Amanda, would you start us off?

Amanda Manjarrez: [00:00:52] Sure.  So I work most closely with the Oregon Partners for Education Justice, which is essentially a cross-cultural network of over two dozen community-based organizations, culturally specific service providers and education advocates who are working on efforts to create a more racially just and community-centered public education system for Oregon.

In terms of how we work, I would say the coalition is a BIPOC community-driven space that’s rooted in on the ground experience and expertise. So this really drives the conversations and the design and implementation of the agendas that we advocate for. And our purpose as an organization is to ensure that impacted communities are more involved in the development and implementation of equitable and inclusive education policy that centers kids, families, and those who are directly affected by systemic inequities.

Rafael: [00:01:44] And tell me a little bit about who’s involved in that coalition. What are some of the organizations or people?

Amanda Manjarrez: [00:01:49] Sure. it’s predominantly culturally specific partners. So those include organizations like the Latino Network, Adelante Mujeres, the Native American Youth and Family Center, Kairos PDX, Euvalcree, APANO, among many others. We have folks  from across the state who are providing services to families who work in the education space.

We also have education advocates like Foundations for a Better Oregon, the organization I work for, Children’s Institute and other organizations who do more work in the policy sector space.

Rafael: [00:02:24] Okay Dana, can you talk about the Early Childhood Coalition and who’s involved? How has the coalition been functioning? Kind of bring us up to speed.

Dana Hepper: [00:02:34] Yeah of course! The Early Childhood Coalition first formed to advocate for and support early learning investments in the Student Success Act in 2019. But after that session, the coalition decided to center racial equity in developing our shared agenda for the 2021 legislative session. Really recognizing that well, all children are born full of potential, and even young children can experience barriers to opportunity that are driven by racism, classism, and other forms of discrimination. And so we wanted to tackle those issues head on with the development of our legislative agenda. Many of the partners who are on the Oregon Partners for Education Justice also participate in the Early Childhood Coalition. Some that Amanda named, the Latino Network, Adelante Mujeres,  and we also have many early learning hubs and other child advocacy organizations. FACT Oregon works with families experiencing disability, the Head Start Association, and Relief Nursery Association, and foundations, as well as others.

So, that’s a summary of who we are.

 Rafael: [00:03:49] In thinking about the language that the Early Childhood Coalition uses, I thought this was pretty powerful that children ages zero to five are the most racially, ethnically, and linguistically diverse Oregonians. And they are the group of Oregonians most likely to live in poverty.

And to me, you’re making the case for why a focus on racial equity is so important in the advocacy agenda. Can you say more about why that is and what that means in terms of the coalition’s priorities?

Dana Hepper: [00:04:17] Absolutely. I think early childhood advocacy has often focused primarily on serving low income children and closing income related opportunity gaps. But we know that not all gaps are driven by income. There’s actually an interaction between the impact of racism and the impact of economic disparity that layers.

And if we look at who are Oregon’s children, who live in low income families, children of color, especially Black children, Indigenous children and Latino children are more likely to live in families with lower incomes. And, if we really want early learning strategies to be effective, they need to be designed by and for the families that they’re intended to serve.

So we wanted to make sure as a coalition that we were doing a better job of ensuring the policies and investments that we advocated for weren’t just good for children that are low-income children generally, but that we specifically were thinking about how these policies would impact children who are Black, Indigenous, Latino, children of color and have an impact on those children specifically.

For the full transcript, please download the pdf below.

Child Care in Rural Oregon: A Report from The Ford Family Foundation

Child Care in Rural Oregon: A Report from The Ford Family Foundation

A new report from The Ford Family Foundation in Roseburg, Oregon examines approaches to addressing systemic inequities in Oregon’s child care system. Oregon has struggled with child care availability for years. In 2019, 90 percent of the state was designated a child care desert by the Center for American Progress. The impact of COVID-19 has made these conditions worse: statewide child care capacity is down nearly 25 percent since March 2020.

This report shines a light specifically on the child care needs in rural Oregon and offers five recommendations to help stabilize care funded by the Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS). These include:

Cost-Based Reimbursement Rates:

State reimbursement rates have typically been based on market prices influenced by regional incomes. This leads to higher reimbursement rates in regions with higher household incomes, such as Multnomah County. But the cost of providing care — including wages, insurance, supplies, and equipment — differs little in urban and rural parts of the state. If the cost of providing care remains relatively consistent from county to county, but rural counties receive lower reimbursements because their regional incomes are lower, then providers in rural Oregon are at a significant disadvantage. The report recommends calculating reimbursements based on costs.

Lower Family Co-Payments:

Family co-payments for child care do not vary across the state and are based on income and family size. Additionally, the state’s payment for child care is often significantly lower in rural counties compared to urban counties, but parent co-payments don’t vary. Additionally, other state programs, including Baby Promise, Preschool Promise, and Head Start do not require copays from families. The report recommends waiving or significantly lowering co-payments for families.

Stable and Consistent Funding:

The report recommends that reimbursements be based on enrollment, and administered as slot contracts, versus basing reimbursements on attendance. ODHS moved to this approach during the COVID-19 pandemic, understanding that attendance-based reimbursements would hurt many child care providers. The report recommends making this policy permanent, as well as establishing contracts with providers for yearly slots in advance, both of which would help ensure stability for children and families and help ensure quality.

Support for Provider Networks:

Regional networks for providers could help streamline administrative tasks and help provide flexibility for smaller providers across the state. The Shared Services Alliance in Coos and Curry counties launched recently to help ease the contracting process for providers and help stabilize the number of available slots for families.

A Regulatory Framework:

Some rural child care providers struggle with finding teachers and staff that meet state licensing standards, creating administrative challenges and obstacles for families seeking care. Adopting a regulatory framework for small sites enrolling under 16 children and allowing smaller non-residential locations to be licensed as Certified Family Child Care Homes, could significantly improve access to child care in rural Oregon.