Income Eligible ReProcurement

1
Income Eligible Re-Procurement

• Board of Early Education and Care
• December 9, 2008

2
Procurement DiscussionOverview of Board
Discussion Votes

• December
• Background Information Summary of RFI Results
• Procurement Goals
• Allocation of Contract Resources
• Contract Eligibility Criteria
• Preliminary Evaluation Criteria
• January
• Final Evaluation Criteria
• Required Services
• Contract Duration Integration with QRIS
• Vote on RFR

3
Components of Re-Procurement Topics for Board
Discussions
Integration of Contracts With Other Policy
Innovations
Streamlining Administrative Fiscal Policies
Minimum Contract Eligibility Criteria
Allocation of Contract Resources
Quality Evaluation Criteria
4

• Income Eligible Contracts
• Background Information

5
Background Information Income Eligible Program

• The Income Eligible program provides financial
  assistance to more than 30,000 children from
  birth to age 13 (age 16 for children with special
  needs)
• Financial assistance provides families with
  access to a mixed system of providers through
  vouchers, grants and contracts
• Schools and independent family child care
  providers do not currently participate in the
  contract program
• Contract portion of the program covers nearly
  12,000 children, approximately 40 of Income
  Eligible caseload
• Recent changes made in response to emergency
  budget will significantly increase slots covered
  under contracts

6
Background InformationIncome Eligible Contract
Spending in Context
Notes (1) Includes vouchers for children
receiving assistance through the Income Eligible,
TANF and Supportive programs. (2) Includes
contracts for supportive care, teen parents and
homeless families. (3) Assumes 24 million in
slots funded by the CPC grant program are
converted into Income Eligible contracts. (4)
Remaining 22 million in slots funded by the CPC
grant program will be converted to vouchers or
remain as grants.
7
Background InformationHistorical Spending on
Contracts Vouchers
8

• Income Eligible Contracts
• Goals of Re-Procurement

9
Income Eligible Re-Procurement Goals

• Comply with state procurement laws
• Make policies and practices more equitable
• Ensure consistent and stable placements
• Support stability of the early education system
• Focus on the highest need areas
• Strengthen program quality

Continue building a thriving system
10

• Income Eligible Contracts
• Overview of Request for Information (RFI)

11
Overview of RFIPurpose of RFI

• Purpose of the Request for Information (RFI) was
  to
• Collect basic program information from providers
• Test feasibility of using contracts in all parts
  of the mixed delivery system, including schools
  and independent family child care providers
• Test feasibility of fiscal and operational policy
  options currently under consideration
• The RFI was available to group and school-age
  child care providers, family child care providers
  and systems, and public schools
• Not intended to be a representative survey of all
  providers but targeted to providers likely to be
  interested in EEC contracts

12
Overview of RFISummary of Providers Responding

• 413 center-based organizations and schools,
  representing 589 sites across the state
• 57 family child care systems, representing more
  than 2,600 family child care homes
• 68 independent family child care providers
• 20 Head Start agencies, representing 142 centers
  and family child care homes across the state
• 93 response rate among EECs existing contracted
  providers

13

• Income Eligible Contracts
• Allocation of Contract Resources

14
Allocation of Contract ResourcesDistribution of
Resources Compared to Community Need

• EEC has analyzed the following data for 351
  communities across three age groups
• Children below federal poverty level and children
  on the EECs centralized waiting list
• Capacity for 12,000 licensed providers and more
  than 450 school-based programs
• Early education resources provided through
  contracts, vouchers, CPC, Head Start and
  school-based preschool
• Accountability status of schools in each
  community
• Compared relative need in each community with
  existing subsidized capacity

15
Allocation of Contract ResourcesEEC Resources
Compared to Need Across Regions

• EEC resources are distributed proportionately
  across regions
• Contracts are in high-need communities, with 95
  of children on the waiting list and 95 of
  children below federal poverty living in towns
  with EEC contracts
• We know that we need to do more in all
  communities to serve children seeking financial
  assistance
• Recommendation
• Maintain existing distribution of contract
  resources across communities, and target any
  future expansion funding in communities

16
Allocation of Contract ResourcesEEC Resources
Compared to Need By Age Group

• We know that we need to do more in all age groups
  to serve children seeking financial assistance
• Child populations change at program and community
  level during life of a contract

17

• Income Eligible Contracts
• Contract Eligibility Criteria

18
Contract Eligibility CriteriaExisting
Eligibility Criteria

• Income Eligible contracts were last put out to
  bid in 1998, with eligibility criteria requiring
  providers to
• Operate on a full-day (10 hours per day) and
  full-year schedule (260 days per year)
• Follow state financial assistance policies
• Meet all child care licensing requirements
• Contracts were awarded to licensed center-based
  programs and family child care systems
• The 1998 contract required family child care
  homes to be affiliated with a family child care
  system in order to have access to state contract
  slots

19
Contract Eligibility Criteria Schools Contract
Model Tested in RFI

• Schools have not used EEC contracts due to
  full-day/full-year requirements and licensing
  requirements
• RFI explored the feasibility of a contract model
  that schools could use to
• Expand part-day preschool programs to
  full-day/full-year
• Create new full-day/full-year preschool programs
• Create new full-year school-age programs
• Under the model explored in the RFI, schools
  could remain license- exempt but would need to
• Be accredited or in-process of accreditation
  (NAEYC or comparable institution)
• Implement the Early Childhood Program Standards
  (Preschool)
• Follow the Guidelines for Preschool Learning
  Experiences (Preschool)
• Meet ESE standards for school-age programs
  (school-age)
• RFI also collected data on accreditation,
  educator degree attainment, screening, assessment
  practices and other program information
• _______

20
Contract Eligibility Criteria Schools Summary
of RFI Responses

• Of the 100 RFI submitted for schools, 94 were
  from school districts and six were from private
  schools
• Of the 94 public school districts responding,
  three are Commissioner Districts
• Schools were asked to estimate the number of
  sites and number of classrooms that would be
  likely to participate, if the RFR used the same
  contract model included in the RFI

21
Contract Eligibility Criteria Schools RFI
Feedback on Contracts

• The RFI asked schools to rate the difficulty of
  complying with specific elements of the preschool
  and school-age contract models in the RFI ,
  including
• Expansion of Existing Service Full-Day
  Full-Year Schedule
• Achieving Accreditation Using EEC
  Financial Assistance Policies
• Preschool Standards Guidelines ESE
  School-Age Quality Standards
• With the exception of adherence to the Preschool
  Standards Guidelines for Learning, most schools
  found all of the requirements somewhat
  difficult to implement on average
• A limited number of schools indicated that each
  of contract elements would not be difficult to
  implement, including 10 of those responding to
  the preschool model and 20 of those responding
  to the school-age model
• A small number of schools indicated that each of
  the contract elements would be too difficult to
  implement, including 5 of those responding to
  the preschool model and 10 of those responding
  to the school-age model
• Concerns expressed in the narrative section
  related to compliance with state financial
  assistance policies, finding space for expansion,
  adhering to EECs holiday closure policies, and
  operating on a full-day schedule throughout the
  entire year

22
Contract Eligibility Criteria Schools -
Considerations

• Within existing resources, adding new providers
  will require reallocation of resources among
  providers and from the private to the public
  sector
• Some school systems affiliated with CPC programs
  are familiar with EECs financial assistance
  system, but not all
• EEC may not have adequate staff and oversight
  capacity, if significant numbers of schools need
  training and support in EEC policies upon
  entering the contract system

23
Contract Eligibility CriteriaIndependent Family
Child Care Providers

• EEC does not currently contract with independent
  family child care providers
• RFI explored interest of family child care
  providers in EEC contracts
• Collected data on accreditation, educator degree
  attainment, screening, assessment practices and
  other program information
• Also collected information on the interest that
  providers might have in specific services offered
  by family child care systems
• RFI feedback allows EEC to assess the fiscal and
  operational feasibility of developing a contract
  model for independent family child care

24
Contract Eligibility Criteria Independent Family
Child Care Providers RFI Results

• Providers most frequently cited the following as
  very important reasons for being interested in
  EEC contracts
• Easier to serve families with financial
  assistance
• More consistent and stable cash flow
• Many providers also highlighted the need for
  higher reimbursement rates, with some under the
  impression that higher rates could be realized
  through contracts (rates would actually remain
  the same through contracts)
• Some providers were also under the impression
  that contracts would provide access to additional
  support services, such as transportation and
  professional development
• Providers also commented that contracts might
  improve collaboration with EEC and provide
  greater access to information, trainings and
  transportation
• The following family child care systems services
  were perceived to have the highest benefit to the
  providers completing the RFI
• Eligibility Enrollment Professional
  Development
• Substitute Child Care Referrals to Community
  Services

25
Contract Eligibility Criteria Independent Family
Child Care Providers - Considerations

• 8,600 licensed family child care providers in
  Massachusetts
• Expanding the number of contracts regardless of
  the size of the contracts - places additional
  demands on EECs contract staff and contract
  monitors
• Nearly all of the respondents indicated no
  experience with EECs contract billing system and
  more than 1/3 indicated need for training in EEC
  software systems
• Many of the perceived benefits of direct
  contracts might also be achieved by improvements
  to voucher policies and strengthening of services
  offered by family child care systems
• EEC may not have adequate staff and oversight
  capacity, if significant numbers of family child
  care providers entered the contract system
• Future development of the Unified IT Systems
  could facilitate direct contracts

26
Contract Eligibility CriteriaOptions for Board
Discussion
Would only be implemented on a pilot basis, at
a limited number of sites.
27

• Income Eligible Contracts
• Quality Evaluation Framework for
• Reviewing Contract Bids

28
Quality Evaluation FrameworkFramework for
Evaluating Quality of Contract Bids

• To assure best quality, each bidder will respond
  to a series of narrative and data questions
  covering the following areas
• Program Quality Accreditation, teacher
  education levels, staff turnover, screening and
  assessment practices, curriculum practices, and
  other structural measures of quality
• Provider Experience Experience with EEC
  systems, policies and programs
• Collaborations Partnerships Current or
  planned collaborations/partnerships designed to
  improve the quality of care and access to
  services
• Age Groups Served Planned age groups to be
  included in contract in comparison with community
  needs
• Evaluation teams will review each bid and award
  points based on the content and quality of the
  responses in each area, with priority points
  provided if certain criteria are met e.g.,
  accreditation
• Will discuss in more detail at the January Board
  meeting

29
Summary of RFR Framework

• Board will need to approve the following
  components of the RFR framework at the January
  meeting
• Goals of Procurement
• Allocation of Contract Resources
• Contract Eligibility Criteria
• Evaluation Criteria
• Required Services
• Contract Duration Integration with QRIS
• With Board approval in January, the RFR can be
  posted in late January with RFR responses due to
  EEC by early March

30
Procurement Timeline