Stars Oversight Committee Notes
February 6, 2014
In attendance: Rachel Hunter, Nancy Sugarman, Joanne Mattson, Daniela Caserta, Dianne Carter, Jan Walker, Manuela Fonseca, Ben Allen, Sonja Raymond, Ilana Snyder, LouAnn Beninati, Tricia Pawlik, Jeanette Fisher
By phone: Brenda Schramm, Cathy Siggins, Claire Kendall
Coordinators’ Report: The numbers of applications continue to grow, the coordinators have been busy processing and keeping up. Johanna participated in the Nutrition and Physical Development Committee. (Dianne added an interesting note that she heard from a colleague in Delaware. They are considering removing N. and PH from their QRIS based on the strength of their licensing regs that address the issue.)
LouAnn announced that she will be leaving her position as Stars Coordinator at the end of February. Given this opportunity for a change, Ilana led a discussion about the role of coordinator, what the system needs now and what might be needed going forward. The discussion included the following points:
· We should develop a vision of Stars in 5-10 years and bring that back to what we need now using current funding and needs.
· Should there be a division of tasks, a coordinator and assistant, two coordinators each responsible for everything or each responsible for specific parts? There are 3 general roles: office administrative tasks, the public engagement and professional development piece, and the coordination and processing of applications and participation.
· There is a positive in having both people be generalists. They can have different tasks that they are responsible for, but for mentors and community members it is good if both know the system fully.
· Due to the increase (and the continued expected growth) of Stars, Stars need two full time coordinators.
· Jan mentioned that there are funds in the current Stars grant dedicated to the reliability of the assessment process that, due to funds in RTT-ELL, might be able to be used to increase coordination at this time.
· Consider the assessment piece in the AOE part of RTT-ELC and make sure that we are not developing separate processes.
· Consider feedback from community partners ( VB3, etc)
· A physical presence in communities is important. Developing an online system of application and data collection would help be more efficient with time. ( Nancy recommends Access spread sheets)
· Continue mentoring and strengthen relationships with RD’s in all regions. Some are doing more to represent Stars than others
· MJCC Stars Administrators and Jan have had a preliminary discussion and will make a decision on how to move forward
· LouAnn has offered to be available during the transition if needed.
Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge Discussion:
Ben Allen attended the meeting to participate in a discussion about the pieces of RTT ELC that include Stars. He shared a reporting format that will be used for the Rating and Monitoring Early Learning and Development Programs piece of RTT ELC.
VT received $500,000.00 less than was requested in grant proposal. Due to the delay in getting permission from Joint Fiscal to accept the grant, the grant will begin in March instead of January. Because of that less administration money will be needed so that took care of the difference and no plans for programming will be affected. VT included 29 projects in the grant.
Rating and Monitoring Early Learning and Development Programs- This includes recruiting and hiring two assessors for Stars, developing reliability of ERS assessors, working with AOE as it develops a monitoring system and CLASS assessments. The state should ensure that systems work together instead of developing separate AOE and DCF systems when the same work will be required. Manuela mentioned that although H270 has not made it through the legislature yet, it is assumed at this point it will pass and will go into effect in FY 2015-2016. That bill requires monitoring of programs receiving education funds.
Stars Annual Bonuses- Jan mentioned that Stars annual bonuses could start with renewals that have happened since January of 2014. Indiana has had very high participation in their QRIS without financial bonuses. They use the RD system for outreach and mentoring the QRIS. All providers in a district have 3 contacts about the QRIS from the RD in the region each year. At the 1 and 2 star level providers are given a choice of 3 program support “boxes” that they can choose from as a bonus for participation. The choice of materials is related to a professional / program development plan. Should we consider any of these ideas for bonuses going forward? Jan asked for feedback from the committee and the extended discussion included:
· Don’t give a “set” box as a bonus, but providers should report to someone what they bought with bonus money
· Require a report on what the bonus funds were spent on. Accountability is important
· Possibly allow funds to be spent however they choose the first time a provider receives a bonus, and following years must report back
· No annual bonuses to 1 and 2 star programs
· Yes, bonuses for all levels if we agree that participation in stars is a commitment to quality
· Registered providers make so little that we should not require a report. They might need to spend the funds on household needs.
· Home providers run an in home business and often earn more than they think due to inexperience in budgeting.
· The Stars system supports quality, so bonuses should be spent on quality.
· A Stars bonus is a program bonus and should be spent on the program. ( Unlike NL individual bonuses)
· All providers should be connected to mentoring.
· Repurpose the role of the RD. Reconnect RD’s to the Stars system. This has happened in some areas better than in other regions.
· The report of how the funds are spent could be a simple line in the annual report or renewal form.
· Should providers report what they are going to spend it on before they receive it?
· Require a receipt to ensure funds are spent appropriately
· Don’t be too prescriptive. Allow discretion. Funds could be spent on staff benefits.
· Require lower star rated programs to report on what they spend bonus on, and not require higher rated program to report.
Stars Evaluation / Validation Process- The current stars evaluation committee has just about completed a 10 year summative report. This brief, tri-fold product is the culmination of a year of work by this committee. The hope is to have this document to share with policy makers very soon. (Early Childhood Day at the Legislature, for instance?) The next steps for the evaluation process and then validation process will follow.
LouAnn’s note: Thanks for all of your kind wishes. I have appreciated working with this committee over the past 3 1/2 years. The strength and expertise of this group offers such important grassroots guidance. I look forward to continuing to work with you all on our mission to provide quality services for all VT children!
Next meeting: March 6, 2014