Search

Most states in the United States operate their public preschool programs in a mixed delivery system that serves children in local education agencies (LEAs) as well as non-LEA settings, such as Head Start agencies, child care centers, private schools, and family child care homes. To inform state preschool administrators and policymakers as they refine their mixed delivery systems, this report describes the mixed delivery systems of five states that have taken different approaches to supporting providers across settings. The five states discussed in this report include: (1) Alabama; (2) Michigan; (3) New Jersey; (4) New York; and (5) West Virginia. This report answers the following questions: (1) What is the landscape of mixed delivery in select states' preschool programs? (2) How are state preschool contracts awarded, and what supports are provided to non-LEAs to participate? and (3) What are quality requirements, and who monitors and is ultimately responsible for program quality?

The National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER) conducted a landscape evaluation of early childhood programs in Indiana (IN) between the spring of 2021 and the summer of 2022. The evaluation focused on understanding program components, quality, and children's learning and development across a variety of programs in the state. Commissioned by Early Learning Indiana (ELI), this study aims to provide Indiana programs and policymakers with research-based information on the quality of early childhood programs, and the learning and development status of young children birth to five in the state. This evaluation of Indiana's early care and education (ECE) system is a multi-site study encompassing several components to provide the first-ever independent assessment of this scale of the quality of early care and education programs of various auspices and to assess the developmental growth of children in those programs. This research report on the quality of early care and education programs in Indiana discusses differences observed in program quality by program type, Paths to Quality (PTQ) star level, and geographic region. The report uses data on program quality collected across two time points between March 2021 through July 2022. Throughout this period, programs continued to experience interruptions or quarantines due to the COVID-19 pandemic (including the Omicron and Delta variants of COVID-19). This report discusses the implications of these findings for policymakers and funders in Indiana as they seek to strengthen the early care and education system in order to improve school readiness of young children. The full report of the study and an accompanying Research Brief discusses the implications of these findings for policymakers and funders. Together, the two briefs can provide important information about the developmental status of children and classroom quality in the state to the Indiana Early Learning Advisory Committee. [For the full report, "Evaluation of Early Childhood Programs & Child Development in Indiana. Second Report. Commissioned by Early Learning Indiana," see ED628943. For the Research Brief, "The Developmental Status of Young Children in Indiana. Research Report," see ED628952.]

The National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER) conducted a landscape evaluation of early childhood programs in Indiana (IN) between the spring of 2021 and the summer of 2022. The evaluation included assessments of infant, toddler, and preschooler children's developmental status in multiple domains at two time points to measure growth. Commissioned by Early Learning Indiana (ELI), with generous support from Lilly Endowment Inc., this study aims to provide Indiana programs and policymakers with research-based information on the quality of early childhood programs, as well as the learning and development status of young children birth to five in the state. This study employed a set of standardized child assessments designed to measure learning across various domains that are psychometrically valid, proven to discriminate effects in intervention studies, and appropriate for the age range of birth to five. The study found that on average, all children showed significant growth in receptive vocabulary, regardless of their enrollment location or center type. However, literacy development lagged for all children similarly, regardless of where children were enrolled. Overall, children also showed improvements in externalizing behaviors. For infants and toddlers, we found lower developmental levels in language, cognition, and socio-emotional levels relative to what we expected due to maturation alone. At baseline, the children of preschool age in the sample had lower levels of literacy and math skills compared to their typical peers, but they had similar language and executive function skills. During the study period, the children made strong gains in vocabulary and showed expected growth in math and executive functions relative to peers their age. However, their literacy skills showed slower growth than typical, and in fact, they lost relative to their peers in standard scores. The report discusses the policy implications of these findings on children's developmental status and considering the findings on program quality, we recommend that the state provide all educators with the necessary tools to effectively support children's healthy growth and development. This includes enriched, culturally responsive curriculum and instructional resources, effective assessments to measure and drive progress for classrooms and children, sustained professional development, and actionable data for continuous improvement. [For the full report, "Evaluation of Early Childhood Programs & Child Development in Indiana. Second Report. Commissioned by Early Learning Indiana," see ED628943. For the Research Brief, "Quality in Early Childhood Care and Education Programs in Indiana. Research Report," see ED628949.]

The National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER) conducted a landscape evaluation of early childhood programs in Indiana (IN) between the spring of 2021 and the summer of 2022. Commissioned by Early Learning Indiana (ELI), this study provides Indiana programs and policymakers with research-based information on the quality of a sample of 321 classrooms in 206 programs in Indiana and the developmental growth of 715 infants, toddlers and preschoolers in these classrooms. The evaluation focused on understanding the impact of various program components on program quality across a variety of types of early care and education programs in the state. In addition, the report describes the developmental growth of the children in the sampled programs (n= 223 infants and toddlers; n= 492 preschoolers.) The study found that despite the intervening impact of the pandemic on program operations, the results of independent assessments of quality over two time periods from 2021 to 2022 were stable. Children in this sample experienced environments that on average were warm, caring, and supportive. However, findings indicate low levels of language and instructional support observed over time for all age groups. This study employed a set of standardized child assessments designed to measure learning across various domains that are psychometrically valid, proven to discriminate effects in intervention studies, and appropriate for the age range of birth to five. The study found that on average, all children showed significant growth in receptive vocabulary, regardless of their enrollment location or center type. However, literacy development lagged for all children similarly, regardless of where children were enrolled. Overall, children also showed improvements in externalizing behaviors. The report discusses the policy implications of these findings on children's developmental status and considering the findings on program quality, we recommend that the state provide all educators with the necessary tools to effectively support children's healthy growth and development. This includes enriched, culturally responsive curriculum and instructional resources, effective assessments to measure and drive progress for classrooms and children, sustained professional development, and actionable data for continuous improvement. [For the Research Briefs: "Quality in Early Childhood Care and Education Programs in Indiana. Research Report," see ED628949; and "The Developmental Status of Young Children in Indiana. Research Report," see ED628952.]

State early childhood administrators are planning to strategically invest the federal appropriations in the American Rescue Plan Act (ARP) to address disruptions in children's care and learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic. State leaders must consider how this one-time funding can be used effectively while understanding the context around sustainability of programs and usage after these funds end. Keeping these issues in mind, it is critically important for this funding to be targeted to children in the early years (birth through Grade 3) to pave the way for longer-term solutions to support school readiness and healthy development. This brief provides state leaders and advocates with a deeper understanding of the possible uses of ARP Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funding and new ideas on innovative practices and sound strategies to the address needs of children in preschool and early elementary grades. The brief considers how investments from the 2021 Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (CRRSA) to state child care and development funds can be aligned and synergetic to strengthen the early care and education system.

In the United States, state-level agencies manage a variety of early care and education (ECE) programs serving children birth through age 5, including publicly funded preschool programs. A state office of early learning (SOEL) often oversees and manages select early childhood programs. SOELs typically have a significant role in such tasks as setting policy to ensure the quality of programs, distributing funding to local programs, and collecting data for accountability and continuous improvement. This report shares the results of case studies focused on the SOELs in the four states of Alabama, Michigan, New Jersey, and West Virginia. The research questions that guided this project were: (1) What are the structural and organizational capacities of effective SOELs? (2) What are the enabling conditions--leadership, staffing, other contextual factors--of effective SOELs? and (3) What are the critical functions necessary for SOELs to effectively execute their authority to implement major programs, including but not limited to the public preschool program? To set the stage for the case studies, Section 1 highlights prior research that contributed to the conceptual framework. Section 2 describes the study methodology. The individual case studies for each of the four SOELs are provided in Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6. Each case study begins with an overview of the SOEL and its parent agency, including a brief history of early education in the state and the office of early learning, funding of the SOEL, and SOEL structure and staffing. This introductory text is followed by the findings for each of the three research questions. Finally, Section 7 provides a recap of the major findings in each of the four states, as well as a cross-state summary of what was learned.

A significant body of research shows that achievement gaps evident in persistently low-performing schools, in many instances, manifest prior to children entering kindergarten. High-quality early learning programs have proven to demonstrate positive effects on closing academic gaps both for individual children and in the aggregate for the school. Further, research indicates that the impact of high-quality pre-kindergarten (PK) on children's development is sustained when children experience a high-quality, aligned early elementary experience. The Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes (CEELO) and the Center on School Turnaround (CST) collaborated to develop case studies of three selected schools receiving SIG funds that have, with the support of their districts, promoted the use of early childhood programming (PK-3) as a key strategy in their schools' turnaround models. The goal of this document is to increase the awareness and understanding of how to effectively embed PK-3 strategies in school turnaround efforts within the SIG program. Through a review of data on all elementary schools that received SIG funds to implement interventions beginning in school year (SY) 2010-11, three sample schools were selected for this report (Orchard Gardens K-8 School in Boston, Massachusetts; Horace Mann Elementary School in St. Louis, Missouri; and Elliott Elementary School in Lincoln, Nebraska). The practices implemented by these three elementary schools were examined through research literature and school data reviews, combined with interviews with school, district, and state leaders from both early learning and school improvement offices. The findings from the resulting case studies underscore that the principles of good practice in school turnaround may look different from grade to grade and in different contexts, which vary by state, district, and school.

Early childhood educators play a critical role in preparing students for success later in their school experience. The instructional techniques, emotional supports, and assessment approaches for early childhood settings are different from classroom settings in later grades. How can states and districts develop evaluation systems that are tuned to these differences to ensure that early childhood teachers receive accurate and fair evaluations and feedback? Designed as an extension to the GTL Center's resource, Practical Guide to Designing Comprehensive Teacher Evaluation Systems, this supplemental guide helps state and district teams to problem-solve and make design decisions to differentiate evaluation systems for early childhood teachers. The supplemental guide is organized into four sections: (1) Statutory and regulatory requirements that guide the development of educator evaluation systems and that detail inclusive and exclusive criteria used to determine which early childhood educators are subject to evaluation per the regulations and policy decisions. (2) Suitability and need for differentiation within measures of instructional/teacher practice and student growth based upon specific national/state professional association standards and relevant student growth and outcome information. (3) Professional learning for evaluators designed to guide and assist state and local teams in the recognition, evaluation, and support of best practices for evaluators of early childhood educators. (4) Professional learning for teachers designed to assist early education teachers to enhance and move toward best practices. Each section includes state-level examples and a series of questions you can use to facilitate an evaluation design process that better accounts for the early childhood classroom context. This supplement includes an Appendix: Practical Example.

CEELO convened a series of focus groups and conducted a national survey of state early childhood education agency staff, in partnership with the National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education. Data for this report was collected from May through September 2018 in focus groups and a national survey of state early childhood education agency (ECE) staff. The report describes what we learned about state ECE agency staff. State ECE agency staff are typically white, women, 40 or older, highly educated, and have spent a number of years in the field of ECE. Although many were relatively new to their positions, predicted turnover within the next five years is high. This suggests we need to put more emphasis on succession planning and growing the field of future state early childhood policy leaders. The report further describes the complexity of state ECE agency staff work, and identifies a number of factors that would enable them to better accomplish their work, including strong leadership, support around political and leadership transitions, and professional development supports to build their own skills and knowledge. State early childhood education agency staff indicated that social-emotional and mental health supports for young children and a well-qualified, well-compensated workforce were among their top policy priorities. Improving access to quality programs was the number one statistic that state early childhood education agency staff would like to see change by 2030. The goal of the "Early Childhood Legacy 2030 project" is to elevate the perspectives and experiences of state early childhood education agency staff and others who have influenced early education policy. This rich set of data has enormous potential as CEELO and its partners amplify the voices of state early childhood education agency staff doing crucial work across the country. These findings provide a solid foundation for future research inquiries, important guidance for current and future policymakers and capacity-building supports for those who work on behalf of our youngest children and their families.

A strong early childhood system that is well funded, fully coordinated, and highly accountable is essential to a state's long-term economic health. Significant research during the past decade has identified short- and long-term benefits to children, families, and communities when young children arrive at school healthy and ready to learn. Therefore, Hawaii's Early Learning Council commissioned this study of current fiscal resources to provide a detailed account of federal and state expenditures on programs supporting children, prenatal to age five, and their families in the state. The report also highlights the key role private dollars and parent fees play in the funding mix for early childhood services and supports. It summarizes how funds align with Hawaii's framework for an early childhood system; which agencies control key funding sources; and to what extent funding comes from federal, state, or private sources. In addition, the report analyzes how funding sources and financing strategies are and can be used to support Hawaii's goals for young children. Appended are: (1) Publicly Funded Programs Supporting Children, Prenatal to Age Five, and Their Families in Hawaii, by State Agency; (2) Funding Landscape for Children, Prenatal to Age Five, and Their Families in Hawaii; (3) Public Funding for Key Services Provided to Children, Prenatal to Age Five, and Their Families in Hawaii; and (4) Summary of Parent Fee Methodology and Results. (Contains 8 figures, 9 tables, 8 footnotes and 70 notes.) [Funding for this paper was provided by the Omidyar Ohana Fund.]

Hawaii's largest populations of at-risk youth include those youth who have dropped out of school, are at-risk of not completing high school, and youth who have completed school but are still not prepared for the workforce. Depending on estimates used, between 20 and 25 percent of Hawaiian youth are at risk of dropping out school. For older youth, 28 percent of 16 to 19 year olds and 14 percent of 20 to 24-year olds are neither employed nor enrolled in school. Efforts to address the needs of at-risk youth are critical to future success and stability of Hawaii's economy. The costs incurred by high school dropouts from one year alone (2008) is estimated to cost Hawaii $1.4 billion over the course of their lifetime in lost wages and other costs. To achieve key goals for at-risk youth in Hawaii, state leaders need information on which programs are currently used to support youth, what resources are available to fund initiatives for youth, and how resources can be used to deliver services to youth. The Hawaii Community Foundation commissioned The Finance Project (TFP) to conduct a fiscal mapping study to identify the public and private funding available to support at-risk youth, ages 13 to 24. This report also analyzes the extent to which the state is using funding effectively to sustain services for at-risk youth. Several questions guided the research including: (1) What are the major funding sources that support youth, ages 13 to 24?; (2) Where does the funding come from (i.e., federal, state, or other sources)?; (3) Which state agencies administer funding?; (4) How does funding align with key goals for youth and their families?; and (5) Who does the current funding support (e.g., eligibility, age groups, and special populations)? Appended are: (1) Summary List of Publicly Funded Programs Supporting At-Risk Youth, Ages 13 to 24, in Hawaii, by State Agency; (2) Funding Landscape: Publicly Funded Programs Supporting Youth, Ages 13 to 24, in Hawaii; (3) Funding by Type of Services Provided for Youth, Ages 13 to 24, in Hawaii; and (4) Promising Strategies for Financing Services for At-Risk Youth in Hawaii. [Funding for this paper was provided by the Hawaii Community Foundation and the Omidyar Ohana Fund.] (Contains 8 figures, 8 tables, and 18 footnotes.)

The Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes' (CEELO) mission is to strengthen the capacity of State Education Agencies and state Early Learning Agencies to lead sustained improvements in early learning opportunities and outcomes. These agencies have authority to establish and implement policies, administer funding and provide oversight for programs serving young children, depending on the state agency structure. Regardless of governance structure, strong leaders, highly capable staff, and effective and efficient functions within state agencies are critical to achieving the goal of enhanced early learning outcomes. There are generally three models of governance in early childhood: (1) coordinated governance across multiple state agencies; (2) consolidated functions within in one agency and a designated Office of Early Learning (OEL); and (3) creation of a new state agency focused on early childhood services. The goal of these offices is to create greater policy coherence and more efficient delivery of services. The intention of this paper is to describe a vision for an effective OEL, regardless of the "governance" structure. The authors reviewed the literature on leadership and organizational effectiveness, interviewed early childhood state and national leaders, and drew on their more than 30 years of experience in the field. This paper is a first step toward a deeper understanding of what it takes to be a highly effective office of early learning in state government that improves outcomes for children.

A state asked the Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes (CEELO) and Child Trends to review national research on best practices that have been shown to improve results on the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS), with a specific focus on research that impacts instruction and is applicable to teachers in school and community-based settings. The state is implementing a legislative mandate to unify its early childhood education programs, including all publicly-funded pre-K, child care, and Head Start. It is seeking to build upon previous advances made in their early childhood education system by including research-based professional development models and use of effective implementation to improve instructional practice in early childhood settings. The authors reviewed the research on curriculum implementation and effective professional development interventions, identified selected examples of promising approaches to professional development and coaching, and offer next steps and considerations for policymakers.

This study analyzes survey data from 423 parents at 6 high schools in Maryland--2 rural, 2 urban, and 2 suburban. Multiple regression analysis was used to explore the effects of the high schools' programs of partnership on parental attitudes and reports of involvement in their teens' learning both at home and at school. The findings show that parental attitudes toward school are positively influenced by schools' partnership programs. Further, the study suggests that different types of school practices result in different parental involvement behaviors. Specifically, parental reports of involvement at home are positively and significantly influenced by school practices that assist parenting and facilitate interactions with teens on learning activities at home. Similarly, parental reports of involvement at home are most strongly influenced by school practices to involve families. The results remain constant when controlling on family and student background characteristics such as race, gender, and academic performance, and on parental employment and educational background. It is concluded that high schools that develop strong programs of partnership that include practices for different types of involvement are likely to improve parental attitudes toward the school and encourage greater family involvement at school and at home. (Contains 5 tables and 26 references.) (SLD/Author)

High-quality preschool lays the foundation for a child's educational career. Preschool is where children are learning how to self-regulate, make friends, communicate, and express their wants and needs while preparing for their educational career within the K-12 system. If children do not have the behavioral and social-emotional skills needed to effectively participate in preschool programs, they are missing critical opportunities to grow and learn. Teachers and parents are often the "first responders" to address challenging behaviors and need knowledge, resources and support to nurture positive social-emotional development as a foundation of learning. This report includes resources to inform early childhood stakeholders at the state and local level interested in developing policy and guidance for programs to prevent and reduce suspension and expulsion.

A study evaluated one local Even Start project, using the results of the final report of the "National Evaluation of the Even Start Family Literacy Program" for comparisons where possible. The clearest result of the national evaluation is that the amount or intensity of service is directly related to the strength of effects for both adults and children. Results for the Frederick County, Maryland's Even Start project show that 18 participants significantly improved their literacy skills, averaging a 6-point gain on the Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment System (CASAS) functional reading survey. Nine participants now are ready to take their General Education Degree (GED) exam or have received their GED. Program effects on children were not assessed due to a number of constraints, primarily the wide age range of children served and the inconsistent attendance of the children. However, children of parents in the Frederick County Even Start project are now much more likely to be exposed at home and in the community to literacy related activities, including visiting the library with their parent, checking out books, and spending more time in literacy-related parent-child activities. Findings suggest that the Frederick County Even Start project developed an effective collaborative network for both the provision of project services and as source of referral for other family needs. The project was able to reduce most of the common barriers cited by parents of preschool children to their participation in adult education. (Contains 46 references, 6 tables, and 2 figures of data.) (Author/RS)

The Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes (CEELO) and the Center on School Turnaround (CST) collaborated to develop case studies of three selected schools receiving SIG funds that have, with the support of their districts, promoted the use of early childhood programming (PK-3) as a key strategy in their schools' turnaround models. The goal of this document is to increase the awareness and understanding of how to effectively embed PK-3 strategies in school turnaround efforts within the SIG program. Thus, we sought schools where specific practices in the PK-3 years aligned with and accelerated promising turnaround efforts through the implementation of the SIG models. The schools considered include Orchard Gardens K-8 School in Roxbury, MA; Mann Elementary School in St. Louis, MO; and, Elliott Elementary School in Lincoln, Nebraska.

The Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes (CEELO) reviewed data on 21 states' principal licensure requirements, conducted structured interviews with experts on principal preparation and professional development in 7 states, and spoke with staff at the National Association of Elementary School Principals and the National Institute for School Leadership. Our research reveals an array of administrator licensure titles assigned to grade-level authority across states, some permitting principals or administrators the flexibility to oversee programs ranging from early childhood through high school. To date, only Illinois has included early childhood content specifically in their licensure and accreditation processes. Early childhood content is not a required element of principal preparation or professional development for principals in most states, according to our findings. Very few states have any formal requirement for early childhood content in licensure for principals responsible for early education programs. Some states have developed policies and programs that acknowledge a need for integrating early childhood content (DE, IL, MD, NJ, PA, WA), but very few have progressed beyond initial stages of providing training or outlining policies. An appendix presents the Principal Interview Protocol. Acknowledgement and endnotes are also provided.

The Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes (CEELO) was asked to review current information on how states are preparing principals to supervise and support early childhood teachers in schools and districts. This document summarizes what is known about principal licensing requirements and professional development in early childhood pedagogy and best practice, and provides selected state examples of professional development models for principals.

A state contacted the Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcomes (CEELO) for guidance in developing a definition of "reading proficiency" and what it means to "read on grade level by third grade." The state also requested information on how national sources or states define and measure proficiency. The state was particularly interested in national perspectives pertaining to the development of shared meaning for the terms, as well as any evidence of individual state-adopted definitions of reading proficiency. "Literacy" is most often described as the skills and knowledge that are necessary to learn to read, including phonological awareness/beginning reading, listening, speaking, and writing. "Reading" is described as a set of interrelated skills needed to learn from reading in order to comprehend meaning from varied texts. "English Language Arts" generally refers to the skills needed to comprehend and communicate effectively. This report provides selected resources regarding national and state definitions to inform a definition of reading proficiency and approaches measuring proficiency.

Early childhood teachers are rightly concerned with implementing a system that was, at least in the initial stages, designed with a different set of teachers in mind--teachers of older students who have standardized achievement data. In most states, policy, practices, and guidance for early childhood teachers are just now being developed or adapted from materials developed for K-12 teachers of core subjects. While much about good teaching is the same for all teachers, it is important that the unique considerations of teaching young children are addressed in teacher evaluation systems' methods and measures. This policy report provides state leaders and technical assistance providers with information about the design and requirements of teacher evaluations systems for early childhood teachers in 11 states. The report discusses the approach each state is taking to adapt the state system and develop resources for early childhood teachers. It identifies specific opportunities and challenges state leaders are addressing in implementing student learning objectives as an alternative method of measuring early childhood teachers' contributions to children's learning. The report concludes with questions for further research and recommendations for state policy makers. The following are appended: (1) Colorado; (2) Connecticut; (3) Delaware; (4) Hawaii; (5) Illinois; (6) Maryland; (7) Massachusetts; (8) New Jersey; (9) Ohio; (10) Pennsylvania; and (11) Rhode Island.