Cincinnati Preschool Promise Year 6 Evaluation

2023 Q UANTITATIVE E VALUATION R EPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS Mission and Vision

2

Commitment to Equity

2

Parent, Teacher, and Provider Testimonials

3

Report Summary

4

Kindergarten Readiness

7

Academic Progress in Grades 1-3

18

Preschooler Progress

19

Reach and Access

20

Tuition Assistance and Enrollment

25

Quality Improvement

30

Teacher and Provider Supports

32

Extended Learning Session

32

CPP Plus: Supporting Learning Through Music in the Classroom

38

Community Stakeholder Experiences

43

CPP Evaluation Advisory Panel

45

Recommendations and Opportunities

46

Appendices

47

Appendix A: Additional Kindergarten Readiness Assessment Revised (KRA-R) Outcomes for CPP TA Participants

47

Appendix B: KRA-R Outcomes by Selected Characteristics for 2022-23

49

Appendix C: KRA-R Logistic Regression Results

52

Appendix D: Demographics of Participants Enrolled in CPP TA Preschools (Prior Years)

53

Appendix E: QI Providers Converted to TA Providers

55

Appendix F: KRA-R Outcomes by Extended Learning Session (ELS) Participation

56

1

MISSION AND VISION MISSION The Cincinnati Preschool Promise (CPP) mission is to ensure equitable access to high-quality preschool so that every Cincinnati child is prepared for kindergarten.

VISION The CPP vision is that preschool is an integral part of every child’s education, and it is equally important to the success of working families. With continuous access to top-rated education, beginning with highquality preschools, the possibilities are endless.

Kindergarten readiness and third-grade reading are short term benefits of increased educational engagement, but in middle school, high school, and beyond, we can expect long-term benefits for our children as they excel in the workforce and thrive in their communities.

COMMITMENT TO EQUITY The mission and vision of CPP are guided by its Equity Policy which addresses equity issues by establishing equity-focused internal structures, spending practices, policies, and procedures to meet organizational goals. In addition to adopting the equity initiatives defined by the CPS Board Policies 2255 and 6320, CPP strives to: •

Stabilize a skilled and qualified workforce, particularly in classrooms serving Cincinnati’s most historically disadvantaged children

•

Foster a highly-skilled preschool teaching workforce including support for historically disadvantaged teachers

•

Develop programs considering the impacts on the diversity of preschool educators, and maintain or expand it in any way possible

•

Work with a wide variety of Provider types (in-home, parochial, public, private, and non-profit centers).

The collection of Providers should be geographically dispersed and culturally and linguistically relevant to the children in their care. These needs include, but are not limited to: o Students from non-English speaking backgrounds o Students who have experienced trauma and adverse conditions (ACES) o Students with special education needs o Students residing in quality gap neighborhoods Ensure that their work addresses inequities and provides options, including single-site, multi-site, and family child care Providers.

•

2

PARENT, TEACHER, AND PROVIDER TESTIMONIALS The goal of CPP is to expand access to high-quality preschool education to children residing within the CPS district boundary. Preschool parents, teachers, and Providers have shared how CPP has had a positive impact on their preschools and families: •

“CPP has helped me pay for preschool. It also allows my Provider to purchase learning materials that I will receive for my child to work on at home. These activities allow me to participate in her learning.” – TA Parent

•

“I feel that CPP is a blessing to my program. CPP has provided many resources, coaching opportunities, trainings, and funding through the TA Program to enhance the quality of my program. This is a direct benefit to the children and families we serve.” – TA Provider

•

“Preschool Promise sends our children backpacks with materials to help them to be able to keep up with activities at home with parents. Preschool Promise supports us with many different types of books and programs to help children and teachers increase their social emotional literacy and skills. Without the financial assistance and tuition assistance from Preschool Promise, my small business would probably be closed.” – TA Provider

•

“I am truly grateful to be a part of the Teacher Promise Grant program. Any supplement is not overlooked or underappreciated.” – TA Teacher

•

“CPP has been nothing short of supportive and helpful. Thank you so much for the resources.” – TA Teacher

•

“We had our playground redone by CPP and had our preschool classroom completely refurnished by CPP. When parents ask where it came from, I make sure I tell them CPP. – QI Provider

3

REPORT SUMMARY Cincinnati Preschool Promise (CPP) provides opportunities for children to benefit from local preschool programs through Tuition Assistance (TA) and Quality Improvement (QI) programs. CPP makes it possible for preschoolers to have equitable access to high-quality preschool by providing support, such as TA funding, to families. CPP also supports professional development for preschool teachers and Providers. This report examines the impact of CPP programs, including benefits for preschoolers and returns for Cincinnati, through quantitative and qualitative evaluations conducted by CPP’s external program evaluator, INNOVATIONS in Community Research and Program Evaluation of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center.

The quantitative evaluation was based on agency-level and participation data provided by CPP, and academic data provided by Cincinnati Public Schools (CPS), designed to address the following key areas: CHILD OUTCOMES • Kindergarten Readiness of CPP Participants Compared to Non-CPP Participants • Preschooler Development and Progress as Measured by Preschool Assessments • Benefits of Extended Learning Session (ELS) REACH AND ACCESS • Enrollment of Preschoolers in CPP Programs • Preschool-Aged Children Not Enrolled in CPP • Providers Participating in CPP • Providers Not Engaged with CPP • Access to High-Quality Preschool Because of CPP Tuition Assistance Funding • Utilization of TA Funding • Availability and Utilization of High-Quality Preschools • Cost and Affordability of Quality Rated Preschools NEW ASPECTS OF THE YEAR SIX EVALUATION • Results of Peanut Butter and Jam (PB&J) Program Pilot • Preschooler Experience Survey (Qualitative Report) • Student-Teacher Perspectives on Future Employment in Early Childhood Education (Qualitative Report) • Provider Marketing and Enrollment Support Needs (Qualitative Report) • Aspects of Parental Trust in Preschool Providers (Qualitative Report) The qualitative evaluation included focus groups and surveys with parents, teachers, and Providers participating in TA and QI programs and prospective parents and Providers who could join CPP in the future. Select findings from the qualitative evaluation are included in this report. The standalone qualitative evaluation report entitled Parent, Teacher, and Provider Insights on Early Learning and Cincinnati Preschool Promise 2022-23 addresses the following key areas: • Awareness of CPP • Understanding of CPP Benefits • Barriers to Enrolling or Engaging with CPP • Impact of Tuition Assistance on Families • Parent Perspectives on Quality and Kindergarten Readiness • Barriers to Accessing Preschool and CPP Funding • Stakeholder Satisfaction with CPP Interactions and Supports • Effectiveness of Providers Communicating to Families about CPP • Teacher Recruitment, Retention, and Pay

4

KEY FINDINGS FROM THE YEAR 6 EVALUATION: Key findings are summarized below. Additional results, details, and definitions about CPP programming and the evaluation methodology are described within the report’s main sections. Note that Kindergarten Readiness and Preschooler Progress results represent TA preschoolers enrolled in CPP Community Providers and CPS Preschools. Preschool Enrollment, Provider, Community Stakeholder, and Financial-related results represent CPP Community participants.

Kindergarten Readiness • CPP TA participants were more frequently (68.0%) Approaching or Demonstrating readiness on the overall Kindergarten Readiness Assessment-Revised (KRA-R) compared to Non-CPP kindergarteners (59.2%).

• Language and Literacy subtest results revealed that the percentage of CPP TA participants On Track for literacy by third grade was 44.5% compared to 37.5% of Non-CPP kindergarteners.

• CPP TA participation increased the odds of Demonstrating readiness by 41.5% and the odds of being On Track by 83.3% when statistically controlling for the other predictors.

Preschooler Progress • Preschoolers assessed showed universal improvement across all domains of the Teaching Strategies GOLD® (TS Gold®) from Fall 2022 to Spring 2023. In the Spring, preschoolers maintained or exceeded expectations at high frequency within the Social Emotional (88.8%), Physical (93.4%), Language (86.2%), Cognitive (87.5%), Literacy (86.9%), and Math (82.7%) domains of measurement.

Reach and Access • Approximately 23,130 children under five years of age live in Cincinnati according to the American Community Survey (ACS) 2021 five-year estimates, with 50.6% of 3-4-year-olds enrolling in preschool.

Nearly 38.0% of all children under five years of age reside in the West region of Cincinnati.

• As of June 2023, there were 204 Providers in the CPP Community Provider network representing 3,935 quality and high-quality seat capacity, which is an increase of 313 seats from the previous year.

Tuition Assistance and Enrollment • In 2022-23, 927 preschoolers received tuition assistance from CPP and were enrolled in high-quality preschools, an increase of 2.2% from 2021-22 to 2022-23.

• As of June 2023, there were 137 TA Provider sites. The TA Providers represent a total capacity of 2,845 high-quality seats for preschoolers.

Quality Improvement • In 2022-23, 12 CPP QI Providers reached high-quality and converted to TA preschools.

• As of June 2023, there were 75 QI Provider sites, 12 of which are in quality gap neighborhoods.

Extended Learning Session • A total of 498 children enrolled in the ELS program which operated from June 2022 through August 2022.

On average, ELS students attended 83.5% of their scheduled school days, with 51.6% having an attendance of 90% or higher.

Teacher and Provider Supports • To date, CPP has supported 258 lead preschool teachers at 105 Providers with the Teacher Promise Grant. Lead preschool teachers can receive up to $4,000 per year.

• To date, CPP has supported 95 teachers at 57 QI preschools (unduplicated) with a Staff Support Fund of up to $3,000 per Lead Teacher, not to exceed $18,000 per site.

CPP Plus • Preschoolers attending Peanut Butter and Jam (PB&J) music sessions showed improvement in observed behavior across ten domains of measurement according to 87.3% of surveyed teachers and Providers.

• PB&J participants made improvements from Fall to Spring in all six development and learning domains measured by the TS GOLD® preschool assessment.

5

Community Stakeholder Experiences • Parents, teachers, and Providers from more than 70 unique preschool locations participated in focus groups or surveys.

• Among parents receiving TA, 89.7% reported they would have been able to afford “none of the cost” or “some of the cost” of preschool had they not received CPP TA. CPP Community Advisory Panel • The diverse panel met monthly and represented both TA and QI stakeholders. The panel included two (2) Providers, two (2) preschool teachers, two (2) parents, two (2) community consultants, and CPP’s Data and Evaluation Manager.

• Panel members shared feedback on the 2023 evaluation plan, preschooler survey items, preschool attendance, participant outreach strategies, parent engagement in learning, non-traditional hours care, and other related topics.

RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS To ensure Cincinnati’s young children, families, teachers, and Providers continue to have equitable access to quality preschool education and resources that help meet their needs, INNOVATIONS suggests that CPP consider the following recommendations and opportunities. Some of these suggestions can be accomplished with existing resources, while others may necessitate long-term preparation, financing, and collaborations.

Additional investments and transformations to the early childhood education system may also be needed to fully address these recommendations.

•

Continue to Offer Resources and Coaching that Support Quality Preschool: It is essential to continue offering resources and coaching that support quality preschool and encourage participation in SUTQ. Although some programs are no longer required to participate in SUTQ to offer publicly funded child care (PFCC), it is still important to highlight the benefits of SUTQ involvement and quality preschool for Providers and the children and families they serve. SUTQ and preschool quality serve a crucial function in building parental trust, maintaining the CPP Community Provider Network, and preparing young children for kindergarten. The standards of SUTQ are grounded in research that has demonstrated improved outcomes for children.

•

Engage Providers and Families to Evaluate their Connection to and Success with Receiving Special Needs Services: Additional evaluation is needed to better understand if special needs referrals result in evaluation and connection to needed services. Assessment of service provider data is important for evaluating appropriate assistance, support, and resources to enhance these services.

•

Encourage Regular Preschool Attendance and Track Absenteeism: CPP can continue positive messaging that promotes regular preschool attendance and its impact on academic and social-emotional outcomes for children. Consistent tracking of attendance and absenteeism is also important to understand opportunities to support children and families. Consistent tracking will ensure data accuracy and sensitivity when evaluating attendance, absenteeism, and for strategic planning.

•

Connect Preschool Parents, Teachers, and Providers to Resources that Support a Successful Preschool Experience and Kindergarten Readiness: Provide preschool parents, teachers, and Providers with tools, resources, and opportunities to support children meeting developmental milestones and gaining social-emotional skills that are essential to success in kindergarten.

•

Continue to Advocate for and Champion the Value of the CPP Community Provider Network: It would benefit CPP to inform all stakeholders, especially those who are not closely connected to CPP or early education efforts, of the quality education that Community Providers provide, the SUTQ standards in which program aligns, and their integral role in making access to high-quality preschool possible for all preschoolers in Cincinnati.

See the 2023 Qualitative Evaluation Report for additional findings and recommendations.

6

KINDERGARTEN READINESS Readiness for kindergarten is fundamental for academic success. Research has shown that children enrolled in high-quality preschool programs are more ready for school compared to children who do not enroll in high-quality preschool. 1 Kindergarten readiness is also related to better academic performance in elementary, middle, and high school. Children who enter kindergarten behind are likely to remain behind throughout their education. Thus, an important step to ensuring that children are ready for kindergarten is to enroll them in a high-quality preschool.

MEASURE The Kindergarten Readiness Assessment Revised (KRA-R) was used to evaluate the impact of CPP TA participation (i.e., CPP community and CPS preschool participants receiving CPP tuition assistance) on kindergarten readiness against Non-CPP participants (a cohort of CPS kindergartners who did not attend a CPP TA Provider). The KRA-R measures academic readiness and literacy skills as well as Social Foundations (socioemotional development), Mathematics, and Physical Well-Being and Motor Development. The KRA-R is administered to all kindergartners in the state of Ohio, including those within the CPS district, beginning as early as July 1 and ending no later than the twentieth day of instruction during the academic year.

The following analysis focuses on the KRA-R composite score (overall KRA-R score) and the Language and Literacy subtest score. The composite scaled score (overall score) on the KRA-R is determined by a kindergartener’s set of skills and behaviors across four subtests. The KRA-R measures readiness through performance levels: Emerging Readiness (Scores of 0-257), Approaching Readiness (Scores of 258-269), and Demonstrating Readiness (Scores at or above 270). A scaled score of 263 and above on the Language and Literacy subtest indicates that a kindergartener is On Track for literacy in third grade. The Social Foundations, Mathematics, and Physical Well-Being and Motor Development subtests do not have performance levels that correspond to their scaled scores to assess a kindergartener’s skills and behaviors within these specific areas.

SAMPLE A cohort of CPP TA participants was examined to understand the status of kindergarten readiness as assessed by the KRA-R. A total of 1,122 children who attended a CPP TA Provider during the 2020-21 and/or 2021-22 school year met the age cutoff for the 2022-23 kindergarten cohort (child reached age five by September 30, 2022). Parental consent for 1,080 (96.3%) CPP TA participants was obtained for matching with CPS KRA-R scores, if available. Twelve CPP TA participants matched to incomplete KRA-R tests. Preschoolers with missing or incomplete KRA-R scores were excluded from the analyses. Reasons a child would not match to a KRA-R score include enrollment in a school outside of the CPS district and inconsistent identifying information (e.g., name spelling, date of birth, race) across data sources.

A total of 654 CPP TA participants with consent completed the KRA-R at a CPS kindergarten in 2022-23, an increase of 12.4% from the 582 preschoolers matched to 2021-22 KRA-R scores. CPP TA participant KRA-R scores were compared to 2022-23 KRA-R scores of 1,681 Non-CPP participants.

Regarding QI participants, a total of 32 QI participants who were eligible for kindergarten in 2022-23 had parental consent for matching with CPS KRA-R scores. Ten QI participants matched to KRA-R scores, one of which was an incomplete assessment. Therefore, analysis of QI participant KRA-R scores was not performed due to the sample size being below the minimum reporting sample size of 10 (as determined by CPS and FERPA guidelines). Efforts to collect QI participant consent forms will continue to understand QI participant preparation for kindergarten.

1 INNOVATIONS in Community Research and Program Evaluation. (2020). Kindergarten readiness, preschool attendance, and academic

achievement: Comprehensive and Longitudinal Outcomes. Retrieved from https://www.uwgc.org/files/UWGC_kindergarten-longitudinalevaluation-final-1-29-20.pdf

7

SES QUARTILES: THE GEOCODING PROCESS Socioeconomic characteristics were determined for all CPS kindergarteners who were administered the KRA-R in 2022-23, including the CPP TA participants. Residential addresses of kindergarteners were geocoded to determine their census tract. Considering the changing socioeconomic landscape of Cincinnati over the past decade, socioeconomic status (SES) quartile ratings were used as a proxy for income. Social factors have also been updated to align with more current metrics. Five SES indicators from the 2021 American Community Survey (ACS) - 5 Year Estimates were used to rank census tracts by socioeconomic risk: (1) median family income; (2) percent of the population 25 years of age or older with less education than a high school diploma; (3) percent of workers in unskilled and semiskilled occupations; (4) percent of children (under the age of 18) living in marriedcouple, family households; and (5) percent of housing units with more than one person per room. SES characteristics for Cincinnati city and metropolitan area census tracts were estimated using the methodology detailed in The Social Areas of Cincinnati (5th Ed.; Maloney & Auffrey, 2013). Ranked census tracts were divided into quartiles (SES 1-4), where lower SES quartiles have a higher concentration of families with socioeconomic risk factors. SES quartiles provide a frame of reference for each kindergartner based on the general socioeconomic makeup of their residential area, but it does not inform their individual income and living conditions.

Figure 1 contains 650 geocoded CPP TA participants that attended preschool between 2020-21 and 2021-22 and completed the KRA-R in 2022-23 within CPS. Four CPP TA participants were not plotted due to a lack of SES data. Participants were plotted and color-coded by SES quartile. The plotted points represent the addresses of CPP TA participants at the time of kindergarten.

Figure 1. Geocoded CPP TA 2022-23 KRA-R Cohort by SES Quartile

8

DEMOGRAPHICS The demographic characteristics of the 2022-23 KRA-R cohort are shown in Table 1. Notable differences can be seen in the distribution of race, where CPP TA participants are disproportionately Black/African American (78.6%) compared to Non-CPP kindergartners (50.1%). Other differences were present between cohorts within White and Hispanic kindergarteners. The distribution of SES quartiles varied where 69.6% of CPP TA participants lived in low SES (SES 1 or SES 2) communities compared to 57.3% of Non-CPP kindergartners. CPP TA participants were comprised of fewer children from SES 4 communities (9.6%) than Non-CPP kindergartners (18.8%).

Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of KRA-R Cohort (2022-23)

Demographic Gender Race

SES Quartile

Group Female Male Black/African American White Hispanic Multi-Racial/Other SES 1 SES 2 SES 3 SES 4 SES Unknown

CPP TA Participants (N=654) 49.5 % 50.5 % 78.6 % 9.6 % 4.9 % 6.9 % 39.9 % 29.7 % 20.2 % 9.6 % 0.6 %

Non-CPP Kindergarteners (N=1,681) 49.3 % 50.7 % 50.1 % 28.4 % 10.5 % 11.0 % 30.4 % 26.9 % 23.4 % 18.8 % 0.5 %

OVERVIEW OF 2022-23 KRA-R PERFORMANCE KRA-R outcomes for 2022-23 kindergarteners are illustrated below in Figures 2 and 3. CPP TA (N = 654) participants outperformed Non-CPP (N = 1,681) kindergartners, where 68.0% of CPP TA participants were Approaching or Demonstrating readiness on the overall KRA-R in 2022-23 compared to 59.2% of Non-CPP kindergartners (Figure 2). Additionally, CPP TA participants exceeded the CPS district-wide result (61.6% Approaching or Demonstrating for the CPS District, which includes CPP TA participants).

Language and Literacy subtest results revealed that the percentage of CPP TA participants On Track for literacy by the third grade was 44.5% compared to 37.5% of Non-CPP kindergartners (Figure 3). Similarly, CPP TA participants were On Track for literacy at a higher rate than the CPS district (39.4% On Track for the CPS District).

Social Foundations subtest results showed that CPP TA participants scored similar to those of Non-CPP kindergarteners with average scores of 269.4 for CPP TA participants and 268.9 for Non-CPP kindergarteners (subtest range: 202-298 points).

9

Figure 2. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels

by CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Figure 3. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy by CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Figures 4-5 show that CPP TA benefitted Black/African American, Hispanic, and Multi-Racial/Other kindergartners. CPP TA participants were more frequently Approaching or Demonstrating readiness on the overall KRA-R compared to Non-CPP kindergarteners by 15.3 percentage points among Black/African American kindergarteners, 7.2 percentage points among Hispanic kindergarteners, and 8.0 percentage points among Multi-Racial/Other kindergarteners (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels by Race and CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Note. Sample sizes for CPP TA participants are 514 Black/African American, 63 White, 32 Hispanic, and 45 Multi-Racial/Other.

Sample sizes for Non-CPP kindergartners are 842 Black/African American, 478 White, 176 Hispanic, and 185 MultiRacial/Other.

Likewise, CPP TA participants were more frequently On Track on the KRA-R Language and Literacy subtest compared to Non-CPP kindergarteners by 17.2 percentage points among Black/African American kindergarteners, 4.5 percentage points among Hispanic kindergarteners, and 3.3 percentage points among MultiRacial/Other kindergarteners (Figure 5).

Results were generally higher for White kindergarteners, though Non-CPP White kindergartners scored higher than those in CPP TA. This relationship may be due in part to overrepresentation of White families below poverty in the CPP TA cohort compared to Non-CPP peers as a result of income eligibility for CPP tuition assistance. In the city of Cincinnati, fewer White families with children 5 and under live in poverty (21.4%) compared to other 10

races (e.g., 56.0% of Black/African American and 44.0% of Hispanic) according to 2021 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates.

Figure 5. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy by Race and CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Note. Sample sizes for CPP TA participants are 514 Black/African American, 63 White, 32 Hispanic, and 45 Multi-Racial/Other.

Sample sizes for Non-CPP kindergartners are 842 Black/African American, 478 White, 176 Hispanic, and 185 MultiRacial/Other.

Figures 6 and 7 display that CPP TA participation was linked to stronger KRA-R performance than no CPP participation, primarily within lower SES quartiles (SES 1-2). CPP TA participants who live in higher SES census tracts (most notably SES 4) did not exhibit the same relationship. SES 3 and 4 families tend to have higher income levels, whereas CPP TA participants come from families under 300% of the federal poverty level.

Therefore, CPP TA participants in SES 3 and 4 are likely to differ from their Non-CPP peers.

CPP TA participants were more frequently Approaching or Demonstrating readiness on the overall KRA-R compared to Non-CPP kindergarteners by 22.7 percentage points among SES 1 and 19.6 percentage points among SES 2 (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels by SES and CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Note. Sample sizes for CPP TA participants are 261 SES 1, 194 SES 2, 132 SES 3, and 63 SES 4. Sample sizes for Non-CPP kindergartners are 511 SES 1, 452 SES 2, 393 SES 3, and 316 SES 4.

11

Similarly, CPP TA participants were more frequently On Track on the KRA-R Language and Literacy subtest compared to Non-CPP kindergarteners by 23.6 percentage points among SES 1 and 20.6 percentage points among SES 2 (Figure 7).

Figure 7. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy by SES and CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Note. Sample sizes for CPP TA participants are 261 SES 1, 194 SES 2, 132 SES 3, and 63 SES 4. Sample sizes for Non-CPP kindergartners are 511 SES 1, 452 SES 2, 393 SES 3, and 316 SES 4.

KRA-R results were further evaluated by both race and SES (Figures 8 and 9). Due to small sample sizes (N<10) for select SES and race groups, some comparisons were not included in the figures below. Sample sizes for each group can be viewed in Table 2.

Among Black/African American kindergarteners, CPP TA participants were Approaching or Demonstrating readiness on the overall KRA-R at a higher percentage than Non-CPP kindergartners in SES 1-2 (Figure 8).

Among White kindergarteners, CPP TA participants only outperformed Non-CPP kindergarteners within SES 1.

Outcomes for Hispanic and Multi-Racial/Other kindergarteners were limited due to small sample sizes. SES 1 Hispanic kindergarteners with CPP TA participation showed minimal difference from their Non-CPP peers.

Figure 8. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels by Race, SES, and CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Note. Figure 8 continued on next page. Comparisons are omitted if CPP TA sample sizes (Ns) are less than 10. Sample sizes can be viewed in Table 2.

12

Figure 8 (Continued). Overall KRA-R Performance Levels by Race, SES, and CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Note. Comparisons are omitted if CPP TA sample sizes (Ns) are less than 10. Sample sizes can be viewed in Table 2.

KRA-R Language and Literacy subtest outcomes closely mirrored those of the overall KRA-R. Black/African American kindergarteners with CPP TA participation were On Track in Language and Literacy at a greater frequency than their Non-CPP peers within SES 1-3 but not SES 4. (Figure 9). A higher percentage of White kindergarteners with CPP TA participation were On Track compared to Non-CPP participants within SES 1.

Additional relationships in favor of CPP TA participants were found among Hispanic kindergarteners within SES 1. For more data from the KRA-R analysis, see Appendix A-B

13

Figure 9. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy by Race, SES, and CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Note. Figure 9 continued on next page. Comparisons are omitted if CPP TA sample sizes (Ns) are less than 10. Sample sizes can be viewed in Table 2.

14

Figure 9 (Continued). Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy by Race, SES, and CPP TA Participation (2022-23)

Note. Comparisons are omitted if CPP TA sample sizes (Ns) are less than 10. Sample sizes can be viewed in Table 2.

Table 2. KRA-R Cohort Sample Sizes for CPP TA Participants and Non-CPP Kindergartners by Race and SES (2022-23)

CPP TA Par t icipant s

N o n- CPP Kinde r gar t ne r s

SES 1

SES 2

SES 3

SES 4

SES 1

SES 2

SES 3

SES 4

Multi-Racial/O ther

217 13 22 9

163 11 7 13

97 18 3 14

34 20 0 9

331 39 93 48

265 82 63 42

185 143 14 51

54 212 6 44

Total

261

194

132

63

511

452

393

316

Race Black/African American White Hispanic

15

LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS Logistic regression analyses were used to predict KRA-R outcomes using gender, race, SES, and CPP TA participation. A sample of 2,334 CPS kindergarteners from the 2022-23 KRA-R cohort were included in the analyses, excluding cases with missing predictor data (i.e., missing SES). Two models were created: one to predict kindergarteners Demonstrating readiness on the overall KRA-R (i.e., composite scores at or above 270) and the other to predict kindergarteners On Track in Language and Literacy (i.e., Language and Literacy subtest scores at or above 263). See Appendix C for details about the KRA-R logistic regression models.

Results from the first model indicated that gender, race, SES, and CPP TA participation were all statistically significant predictors for Demonstrating readiness on the KRA-R. Most notably, CPP TA participation increased the odds of Demonstrating readiness by 42.0% when statistically controlling for the other predictors. The second model yielded similar results. Gender, race, SES, and CPP TA participation were all statistically significant predictors for being On Track in Language and Literacy. CPP TA participation increased the odds of being On Track by 85.9% when statistically controlling for the other predictors.

The logistic models showed that race is a strong predictor of KRA-R performance (Table 3). Controlling for other predictors, the odds of White kindergarteners Demonstrating readiness were 211.3% higher than Black/African American kindergarteners, 1,538.8% higher than Hispanic kindergarteners, and 109.1% higher than Multiracial/Other kindergarteners. Likewise, the odds of White kindergarteners being On Track in Language and Literacy were 165.0% higher than Black/African American kindergarteners, 1,044.2% higher than Hispanic kindergarteners, and 115.3% higher than Multi-racial/Other kindergarteners. The odds of Black/African American kindergarteners Demonstrating readiness and being On Track in Language and Literacy were 465.5% higher and 331.8% higher than Hispanic kindergarteners, respectively. Lastly, the odds of Multi-racial/Other kindergarteners Demonstrating readiness were 683.6% higher than Hispanic kindergarteners and 48.8% higher than Black/African American kindergarteners, while their odds of being On Track were 431.5% higher than Hispanic kindergarteners and 23.1% higher than Black/African American kindergarteners.

Table 3. Percentage Difference in Odds of Demonstrating Readiness on the KRA-R and Being On Track in Language and Literacy: Comparisons by Race (2022-23)

Calcu lat io n Odds for White Kindergarteners Odds for Black/African American Kindergarteners Odds for Hispanic Kindergarteners Odds for Multiracial/Other Kindergarteners

% Diffe r e n ce in Odds of De m o n st r at in g Re ad in e ss 211.3% higher than 1538.8% higher than 109.1% higher than 67.9% lower than 426.5% higher than 32.8% lower than

% Diffe r e n ce in O d d s o f b e in g O n Tr ack in Lan gu age an d Lit e r acy 165.0% higher than 1044.2% higher than 115.3% higher than 62.3% lower than 331.8% higher than 18.8% lower than

Co m p ar iso n Black/African American Hispanic Multiracial/Other White Hispanic Multiracial/Other

93.9% lower than 81.0% lower than 87.2% lower than 52.2% lower than 48.8% higher than 683.6% higher than

91.3% lower than 76.8% lower than 81.2% lower than 53.5% lower than 23.1% higher than 431.5% higher than

White Black/African American Multiracial/Other White Black/African American Hispanic

The findings for SES demonstrated the impact of social and economic factors on kindergarten readiness (Table 4). Controlling for all other predictors, the odds of an SES 4 kindergartener Demonstrating readiness were 76.7% higher than SES 3, 121.3% higher than SES 2, and 234.5% higher than SES 1. Additionally, the odds of an SES 4 kindergartener being On Track were 119.2% higher than SES 3, 147.2% higher than SES 2, and 269.6% higher than SES 1 when controlling for other predictors.

16

Table 4. Percentage Difference in Odds of Demonstrating Readiness on the KRA-R and Being On Track in Language and Literacy: Comparisons by SES (2022-23)

Calcu lat io n Odds for SES 1 Kindergarteners Odds for SES 2 Kindergarteners Odds for SES 3 Kindergarteners Odds for SES 4 Kindergarteners

% Diffe r e n ce in O d d s o f De m o n st r at in g Re ad in e ss 33.8% lower than 47.2% lower than 70.1% lower than 51.1% higher than 20.2% lower than 54.8% lower than 89.3% higher than 25.2% higher than 43.4% lower than 234.5% higher than 121.3% higher than 76.7% higher than

% Diffe r e n ce in O d d s o f b e in g O n Tr ack in Lan gu age an d Lit e r acy 33.1% lower than 40.7% lower than 72.9% lower than 49.5% higher than 11.3% lower than 59.5% lower than 68.6% higher than 12.8% higher than 54.4% lower than 269.6% higher than 147.2% higher than 119.2% higher than

Co m p ar iso n SES 2 SES 3 SES 4 SES 1 SES 3 SES 4 SES 1 SES 2 SES 4 SES 1 SES 2 SES 3

MOBILITY ANALYSIS CPP TA participants were further examined within the context of residential mobility. A log of residential address data collected over the course of each participant’s preschool and kindergarten enrollment was used to determine the number of CPP TA participants who experienced mobility (i.e., moved to a new zip code one or more times) during this period. Of the 654 CPP TA participants in the 2022-23 KRA-R cohort, 128 (19.6%) experienced mobility, eight (8) of which having changed zip codes twice during that time. Mobility rates differed by race with Hispanic participants having the highest mobility (25.0%), followed by Black/African American (21.0%), MultiRacial/Other (13.3%), and White (9.5%).

KRA-R outcomes shown in Figures 10 and 11 indicate the impact of mobility on academic performance upon entering kindergarten. Participants with no mobility (N = 526) outperformed those with mobility (N = 128), where 68.8% of non-mobile participants were Approaching or Demonstrating readiness compared to 64.9% of mobile participants (Figure 10). Similarly, non-mobile participants were On Track for literacy at a rate of 45.2% compared to 41.4% of mobile participants (Figure 11).

Figure 10. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels

by CPP TA Participant Mobility (2022-23)

Figure 11. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy by CPP TA Participant Mobility (2022-23)

17

ACADEMIC PROGRESS IN GRADES 1-3 Data will be reported in the Fall of 2023 upon the release of 2022-23 State test data from the Ohio Department of Education.

18

PRESCHOOLER PROGRESS Evidence of the progress that preschoolers enrolled in CPP are making can be observed during their first years of early education. A preschool progress measure, the Teaching Strategies GOLD® (TS GOLD®), was incorporated into the evaluation to understand the impact of a high-quality preschool experience on CPP preschoolers receiving TA. INNOVATIONS examined the overall pre- (fall) and post-assessment (spring) scores of CPP preschoolers assessed.

TS GOLD® is a formative assessment administered multiple times per year through which teachers document observations of a preschooler’s developmental level and growth along multiple domains of learning. This assessment was selected due to its common administration to TA preschoolers attending CPS and Community Providers with Head Start funding. TS GOLD® documents a preschooler’s development as Below, Meeting, or Exceeding expectations along six domains: Social-Emotional, Physical, Language, Cognitive, Literacy, and Mathematics.

Deidentified TS GOLD® scores were acquired for 2022-23 preschoolers. The cohort included preschoolers who attended select CPP community preschools or CPS preschools. TS GOLD® results were summarized by domain (Social-Emotional, Physical, Math, Language and Literacy). Preschool progress was defined as when a preschooler maintained or exceeded expectations on TS GOLD® subtest(s) within the domain or improved on the TS GOLD® from Fall to Spring. Measures of preschool progress are summarized below: PRESCHOOL ASSESSMENT SCORES FOR 2022-23 Deidentified preschool assessment data were obtained from 37 CPP TA Providers representing 71 classrooms throughout the CPS footprint. As seen in Figure 11, preschoolers (N = 873) from CPP participating preschools showed universal improvement across all TS GOLD® domains from the Fall 2022 to Spring 2023. Mathematics had the lowest percentage of preschoolers meeting or exceeding expectations at baseline. Thus, Mathematics showed the largest amount of growth from Fall to Spring with an increase of 15.6 percentage points, followed by Literacy with an increase of 10.7 percentage points.

Figure 11. Percent of Preschoolers Meeting or Exceeding Expectations TS GOLD® - Fall to Spring 2022-23 (N = 873)

19

REACH AND ACCESS Examining the demographic landscape of Cincinnati’s preschool-aged children and their families provides context for the reach and access indicators presented in this report. Factors including the number of children residing in each region, their racial and ethnic background, poverty status, housing type, parental nativity, and language are important in understanding access, utilization, and preferences for early learning. Furthermore, these factors aid in assessing the need for preschools and other services that promote equitable access to quality early childhood education. Demographic characteristics were explored by Cincinnati regions: North, West, EastCentral, and East (Figure 12).

Figure 12. Cincinnati Neighborhoods and Regions

According to American Community Survey (ACS) 2021 five-year estimates, there are approximately 23,130 children under 5 years old in Cincinnati. The majority (38%) are located in the West region; the second largest majority (24%) are in the East-Central region (Figure 13). Figure 14 shows the racial/ethnic makeup of the children.

The largest populations of children under 5 years living below poverty (below 100% of federal poverty level) are in the West and East-Central regions (Figure 15). Housing units with children under 6 are majority renteroccupied in all regions except the East (Figure 16). The largest number of families with children under 6 and foreign-born parent(s) only are in the West region (Figure 17), which also has the largest number of households with limited-English (Figure 18). The ACS estimated that 50.6% of 3-4 year olds enrolled in school in 2021.

20

Figure 13. Cincinnati Population Under 5 Years Old by Region (N ~ 23,130)

Figure 14. Cincinnati Population Under 5 Years Old by Race and Region

Figure 15. Cincinnati Population Under 5 Years Old Living Below Poverty

Figure 16. Cincinnati Population Under 5 Years Old Living in Limited-English Households

Figure 17. Cincinnati Foreign-Born Parent(s) with Children Under 6 Years Old

Figure 18. Cincinnati Renter-Occupied Housing Units with Children Under 6 Years Old

QUALITY GAP NEIGHBORHOODS Quality gap neighborhoods are defined as areas high in socioeconomic risk factors and low in supply of highquality (3-5 star-rated) preschool seat capacity relative to their preschool-aged population (3-4 year olds). Prior evaluation reports utilized quality gap neighborhoods as defined in a report on high-quality preschool access by RAND in 2016. 2 As of December 2022, a new analysis was conducted to revise the quality gap neighborhood 2 Karoly, Lynn A., Anamarie Auger, Courtney Ann Kase, Robert C. McDaniel, and Eric W. Rademacher. "Options for investing in access

to high-quality preschool in Cincinnati" (2016). https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1615.html

21

distinctions using more recent high-quality seat supply and risk statistics to adjust for the community changes that have occurred since the introduction of Cincinnati Preschool Promise.

High-quality preschool locations and Step Up to Quality (SUTQ) Star Ratings were obtained from 4C for Children for all Providers within the Cincinnati Public Schools service area footprint. High-quality seat capacity was estimated for center-based programs using a combination of data sources including Cincinnati Preschool Promise, Cincinnati Public Schools, and ODJFS Inspection Reports. Licensed capacity was used for family child care Providers (Type A and B) and if no other data sources were available for center-based Providers. Provider and seat counts were calculated as of December 2022. These are subject to variation over time as Providers experience changes in star-ratings, enrollment, staff, and seat capacity.

To classify the Seat Supply for each neighborhood, preschool-aged population and high-quality seat estimates were used to calculate seat deficits and seat-to-child ratios. Cincinnati neighborhoods were flagged as having Low Supply if the seat capacity deficit was greater than 100 seats, or if the seat-to-child ratio was less than the city-wide average of 0.6, which is equivalent to 3 high-quality seats for every 5 children of preschool age.

Socioeconomic risk was the second component used to classify quality gap neighborhoods. Risk classifications were based on five key indicators: (1) median family income, (2) percent of single parent households, (3) percent of adults (25 years or older) with a high school diploma or higher, (4) unemployment rate, and (5) violent and property crime rates. Neighborhoods were flagged as At Risk for an indicator if its risk estimate exceeded the collective, citywide estimate (e.g., a neighborhood with an unemployment rate higher than the city’s average would be flagged as At Risk under the unemployment indicator). Neighborhoods at risk in two or more of these indicators were flagged as having moderate risk or greater, relative to the rest of Cincinnati.

Quality Gap neighborhoods were defined by assessing both Seat Supply and Risk. Thus, neighborhoods that were At Risk (having two or more flagged risk indicators) and Low Supply (having a seat capacity deficit greater than 100 seats, or a seat-to-child ratio less than the citywide average) met the criteria to be classified as Quality Gap. Note that because this is a relative measure, results are not generalizable to areas outside of Cincinnati. This is not meant to provide a universal definition of what constitutes “At Risk” or “Low Supply” neighborhoods. Rather, this is to help decision makers prioritize the Cincinnati neighborhoods with the most immediate need of resources.

Additionally, neighborhoods that do not meet the criteria should not be interpreted as having a lack of need of resources. For example, At Risk neighborhoods with at or above average seat supply are indicative of areas moving in the right direction, but these areas must still be monitored due to the risk factors affecting its population.

HIGH Q UALITY (3- 5 STAR RATED) PRESCHO O L SEAT SUPPLY Neighborhoods Flagged as Low Supply if: 1. Seat Deficit is 100 Seats or Greater OR 2. Seat-to-Child Ratio is Less than City-Wide Rate (3 Seats per 5 Children)

Note. Population sizes of 3-4 year olds estimated using American Community Survey (ACS) 2021 5-Year Estimates. High-quality (3-5 star) seat capacity was estimated using multiple sources, including Cincinnati Preschool Promise, Cincinnati Public Schools, ODJFS Inspection Reports, and licensed capacity.

N EIGHBO RHO O D RISK IN DICATO RS 1. Median Family Income 1 2. Percent of Children Living in Single Parent Households1 3. Percent of Adults (25 Years or O lder) With High School Diploma or Higher 1 4. Unemployment Rate 1 5. Violent and Property Crime 2 1 American Community Survey (ACS) 2021 5-Year Estimates 2 City of Cincinnati Police Data Initiative (PDI) Crime

Incidents

The results of the December 2022 Quality Gap analysis can be seen in Figure 19. Quality Gap neighborhoods (At Risk/Low Supply) are shown in dark orange. Classifications are given to the other neighborhoods for additional context. Dark blue neighborhoods, for instance, are Low Risk/Low Supply. Like the Quality Gap neighborhoods, they have a low supply of high-quality seat capacity in relation to their preschool-aged population.

22

However, the data indicate that they are ranked low on the five risk indicators. Efforts to expand the high-quality preschool Provider network in these areas are still necessary but should not prioritized above Quality Gap neighborhoods where the need for quality education is greater. Additionally, the map displays that several

neighborhoods were not classified due to insufficient data.

Figure 19. Quality Gap Neighborhoods of Cincinnati as of December 2022

As shown below, Cincinnati Preschool Promise Providers are located throughout the Cincinnati area with representation in quality gap neighborhoods. As of June 30, 2023, there were 204 Providers in the CPP community-based network representing a capacity of 3,935 quality and high-quality seats (Figure 20), which is an increase of 313 seats from the previous year. Furthermore, there were total of 92 Providers in quality gap neighborhoods representing 1,795 quality and high-quality seats (Table 5).

Table 5. Total CPP Providers and Seat Capacity

Funding Type QI

Cur r e nt N um be r o f Pr o vide r s 67*

To t al Pr e scho o l Se at Capacit y Re po r t e d o n Pr o vide r CPP Applicat io n 1,090

N um be r o f Pr o vide r s in Q ualit y Gap N e ighbo r ho o ds ** 28

To t al Pr e scho o l Se at Capacit y in Q ualit y Gap N e ighbo r ho o ds ** 463

TA

137

2,845

64

1,332

To t al

204

3,935

92

1,795

* Excludes QI Providers that converted to TA.

** Providers and preschool seat capacity located in Quality Gap neighborhoods as they are currently defined as of December

2022.

23

Figure 20. CPP Tuition Assistance (TA) and Quality Improvement (QI) Preschools in 2022-23

24

TUITION ASSISTANCE AND ENROLLMENT CPP Providers who are 3, 4, or 5 star rated by Ohio’s Step Up To Quality (SUTQ) child care quality rating system are approved to receive Tuition Assistance (TA) reimbursements from CPP for eligible preschoolers enrolled in their programs. The number of CPP Providers that have been approved to receive TA reimbursements increased from 2017-18 to 2021-22 (Figure 21). The number of TA Providers in 2022-23 (137) remains similar to that of 2021-22 (139).

Figure 21. Number of Approved CPP TA Providers per Year

PRESCHOOLERS RECEIVING TUITION ASSISTANCE The number of preschoolers enrolled receiving CPP TA reimbursements increased from 2021-22 to 2022-23 by 2.2% (Figure 22). Enrollment continues to recover after it experienced set-backs due to COVID-19 during the 2019-20 and 2020-21 school years.

Figure 22. Number of Preschoolers Enrolled in CPP TA Preschools

Note. Preschoolers included in count if enrolled with at least 1 day of attendance. Enrollment may have been affected by COVID-19 during the 2019-20 and 2020-21 school-years.

25

PRESCHOOLER DEMOGRAPHICS Preschoolers enrolled in TA preschools were 53.9% female, mostly African American/Black (68.1%), and typically live in homes where English is the primary language (81.5% of 850 with primary language data). The majority (92.4%) of preschool children reside in a permanent residence and many (65.8%) have a total of 4 or fewer household members. A group of preschoolers had their income requirement waived (25.7%). A preschooler may have their income requirement waived if they have already met the income requirements for the Ohio Department of Education (requiring 200% FPL or below), Publicly Funded Child Care (requiring 142% FPL or below), or Head Start (requiring 185% FPL or below). Of the 689 that did not have their income requirement waived, 58.5% were from households with an income that is less than 100% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) (Table 6). Additional demographic data for prior years can be viewed in Appendix D. Table 6. Demographics of Preschoolers Enrolled in CPP TA Preschools for 2022-23 De m o gr ap h ic Gender

Race

Primary Language

Housing Status

Household Size

Eligibility Tier

Gr o u p Female Male Gender Unknown African American/Black White Hispanic American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander Other Race Unknown English Spanish French Other Language Unknown Lives in a Permanent Residence Foster Care Homeless Other Housing Status Unknown 2 Residents 3 Residents 4 Residents 5 Residents More than 5 in Household Household size Unknown <100 100-130 131-200 201-250 251-300 Income Requirement Waived*

Co u n t 487 417 23 629 63 158 8 4 61 4 693 132 4 21 77 854 6 19 45 3 141 221 248 139 178 0 403 93 136 44 13 238

Pe r ce n t 52.5% 45.0% 2.5% 67.9% 6.8% 17.0% 0.9% 0.4% 6.6% 0.4% 74.8% 14.2% 0.4% 2.3% 8.3% 92.1% 0.6% 2.0% 4.9% 0.3% 15.2% 23.8% 26.8% 15.0% 19.2% 0.0% 43.5% 10.0% 14.7% 4.7% 1.4% 25.7%

Valid Pe r ce n t 53.9% 46.1% 68.1% 6.8% 17.1% 0.9% 0.4% 6.6% 81.5% 15.5% 0.5% 2.5% 92.4% 0.6% 2.1% 4.9% 15.2% 23.8% 26.8% 15.0% 19.2% 58.5% 13.5% 19.7% 6.4% 1.9%

* Waived if income requirements already met for the Ohio Department of Education (requiring 200% FPL or below), Publicly Funded Child Care (requiring 142% FPL or below), or Head Start (requiring 185% FPL or below).

26

APPLICATIONS FOR TUITION ASSISTANCE In 2022-23, 73.0% of CPP TA preschool applications were approved (Figure 23). The reasons for application denial are presented in Figure 24. The figure indicates that the primary reasons for denial in 2022-23 were due to the child being too young for enrollment (44.6%) or their address was not located in the district (34.3%).

Figure 23. Number of Approved CPP TA Applications per Year

Note. Applications that are “Not Approved” can refer to those that are denied, inactive, pending or referred to Cincinnati Public Schools.

Figure 24. Reason for Denied CPP TA Applications per Year

27

PRESCHOOLER ATTENDANCE RATES The average attendance rate (total days attended/total days scheduled) for 2022-23 CPP TA preschoolers was 87.2%. Figure 25 indicates that attendance rates have remained stable from year to year and begin to show growth. Note that 2019-20 attendance has been adjusted from previous editions of this report. The adjusted rate excludes attendance records from April-May 2020 due to monthly scheduled days continuing to be recorded in the database after the COVID-19 shutdown took place. Removing these two months provides a more accurate depiction of the attendance rates for 2019-20, prior to the onset of the pandemic.

Figure 25. CPP TA Preschooler Attendance Rates

Note. Attendance rates are calculated by dividing CPP TA preschoolers’ total days attended by their total days scheduled. * Adjusted for COVID-19 pandemic: Omits April-May 2020.

TUITION ASSISTANCE SPENDING The total amount of TA reimbursed to Providers in 2022-23 was $5.56 million (Figure 26). The average annual TA reimbursement per preschooler was $4,404 (Figure 27) and the average monthly TA reimbursement per preschooler was $626 (Figure 28). CPP tuition assistance funds are administered as “the last dollar in” after other funding sources such as Publicly Funded Child Care, Ohio Department of Education, and Head Start funding have been applied.

Figure 26. Total Annual TA Dollars

Figure 27. Average Annual TA Dollars (per Preschooler)

Figure 28. Average Monthly TA Dollars (per Preschooler)

28

GEOGRAPHY AND REACH Tuition Assistance Providers are located throughout the Cincinnati area with representation in quality gap areas.

There were 139 Tuition Assistance Provider locations in 2021-22 and 137 in 2022-23, indicating that the network has maintained a similar quantity of CPP TA Providers (Table 7). The TA Providers represent a capacity of 2,845 high-quality seats, according to data submitted by TA Providers on their most recent CPP application. There are 64 TA Providers in quality gap areas representing a capacity of 1,332 high-quality seats (Figure 29).

Table 7. CPP TA Providers and Seat Capacity

Pr o gr am Ye ar TA Providers as of 2017-18

N um b e r o f TA Pr o vid e r s 40

TA Pr o vid e r s in Q ualit y Gap N e ighb o r ho o d s 16

Net Diffe r e nce in TA Pr o vid e r s -

TA Pr o vid e r Se at Cap acit y 1 -

TA Providers as of 2018-19

57

26

+17

-

TA Providers as of 2019-20

83

42

+26

3,317

TA Providers as of 2020-21

114

63

+31

2,931

TA Providers as of 2021-22

139

76

+25

3,011

TA Providers as of 2022-23

137

64*

-2

2,845

1 The methodology for collecting and calculating seat capacity has evolved over time. The change in quality and high-

quality seat capacity has decreased since 2019-20, as expected due, in part, to COVID-19 capacity restrictions and ongoing challenges with recovery. Seat capacity data were not collected in 2017-18 and 2018-19. * Quality Gap neighborhoods for the 2022-23 TA Providers are based on the updated Quality Gap neighborhood classifications established in December 2022. Prior years were based on the previous classifications established in 201516. Seventy-five (75) of the 2022-23 TA Providers were in neighborhoods previously defined as Quality Gap using the 2015-16 classifications.

Figure 29. CPP Tuition Assistance (TA) Providers Added in 2022-23

29

QUALITY IMPROVEMENT Quality Improvement (QI) Providers are either unrated or have a 1 or 2 SUTQ star rating. Through CPP, approved QI Providers received tangible support and coaching to improve quality and increase high-quality preschool seat capacity in the CPP network.

QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROVIDER NETWORK CPP’s network of approved QI Providers included 75 preschools during the 2022-23 academic year (Figure 30).

A decreasing number was expected as more QI Providers reach high-quality leaving fewer that need support to reach the threshold.

Figure 30. Number of CPP QI Approved Providers per Year

QUALITY IMPROVEMENT TO TUITION ASSISTANCE CONVERSIONS CPP QI Providers can be converted to a TA Provider upon earning a three-, four-, or five-star SUTQ rating. QI Providers who are still working to reach a high-quality star rating are described as non-converted for the purpose of the following analysis. During fiscal year 2022-23, CPP converted a total of 12 Providers from QI preschools to TA preschools (Figure 31). Among the converted, 8 were Active QI Providers during the fiscal year and 4 were Inactive QI Providers from a prior fiscal year that returned as a TA approved Provider.

Figure 31. Number of CPP QI Providers Converted to TA Providers per Year

Note. Active QI Providers converted to TA during the fiscal year refer to QI Approved Providers whose QI Inactive date and TA Approval date occurred in the same fiscal year. Inactive QI Providers refer to QI Approved Providers whose QI Inactive date occurred in an earlier fiscal year than their TA Approval date. To date, 103 QI Providers have converted to TA Providers. Names of converted Providers are listed in Appendix E.

30

GEOGRAPHY AND REACH Quality Improvement (QI) Providers are located throughout the Cincinnati area with representation in quality gap neighborhoods. Figure 32 illustrates the 75 QI Providers in 2022-23, including those of which converted to TA Providers during the school year. As of June 30, 2023, there were 12 non-converted QI Providers in quality gap neighborhoods (Table 8).

Table 8. CPP QI Providers

Pr o gr am Ye ar

To t al N u m b e r o f Q I Pr o vid e r s 1

Act ive Q I Co n ve r t e d t o TA

In act ive Q I Co n ve r t e d t o TA 2

N o n - Co n ve r t e d Q I Pr o vid e r s in Q u alit y Gap N e igh b o r h o o d s 3

2017-18

26

-

-

13

2018-19

106

8

2

53

2019-20

135

22

3

60

2020-21

119

30

3

45

2021-22

87 75

14

9

33

8

4

12*

2022-23

1Total number includes QI Providers that converted to TA. 2Not shown in map below (Figure 32).

3QI Providers that did not convert to TA and are in Quality Gap neighborhoods. These are Providers with the potential

to increase high-quality seat capacity in Quality Gap neighborhoods. *Quality Gap neighborhoods for the 2022-23 QI Providers are based on the updated Quality Gap neighborhood classifications established in December 2022. Prior years were based on the previous classifications established in 2015-16. Thirty-one (31) of the 2022-23 non-converted QI Providers were in neighborhoods previously defined as Quality Gap using the 2015-16 classifications.

Figure 32. CPP Quality Improvement (QI) Providers and Tuition Assistance (TA) Conversions in 2022-23

31

TEACHER AND PROVIDER SUPPORTS INNOVATIONS examined factors that impact teacher recruitment, retention, and pay to understand opportunities for actions and policies that may improve access to high-quality preschool by ensuring teachers and Providers have adequate support and pay.

TEACHER PROMISE GRANT CPP provides Teacher Promise Grants (TPG) of up to $4,000 directly to individual preschool teachers at TA preschools as a method to supplement teacher wages and support retention and recruitment. To date, CPP has supported 258 lead preschool teachers at 105 TA preschools (unduplicated). Of the 120 (87 new recipients and 33 continuing recipients) lead preschool teachers receiving TPG in 2022-23, 114 recipients completed 12 months of service – a retention rate of 95.0%.

Survey Results A total of 31 TA teacher and Provider survey respondents identified as lead teachers, including preschool owners/operators who can occupy both the lead teacher and Provider roles. Eighteen (58.1%) indicated that they had received the TPG. Of those receiving the TPG, four (22.3%) “agreed” or “strongly agreed” and six (33.3%) “neither agreed nor disagreed” that the TPG has impacted their decision to stay with their employer.

However, recipients’ comments described the TPG as highly valued support that helps teachers and Providers have additional funds for essential classroom supplies, building improvements, trainings, bills, and staff wages.

STAFF SUPPORT FUND CPP awards Staff Support Funds (SSF) to preschools, with the amount determined by the number of Lead Preschool Teachers. Funds can support staff wages, health benefits, post-secondary education, and credentials.

CPP supported 29 teachers at 14 QI preschools in 2022-23. To date, CPP has supported 95 teachers at 57 QI preschools (unduplicated) with an SSF grant of up to $3,000 per Lead Teacher, not to exceed $18,000 per site.

Note the method for calculating the number of SFF recipients was updated in 2022-23. The previous method counted other site staff who may have indirectly benefited from SSF. Survey Results Through focus groups and surveys, QI Providers who received SSF from CPP were asked to share how the funds impacted their preschools. Six QI Provider participants reported they have received SSF and have used them to “increase staff wages” (66.7%), “fund professional development” (33.3%), “provide staff benefits” (16.7%), “ensure staff with similar titles receive equivalent pay” (16.7%) and described other ways such as purchasing classroom supplies. The 12 QI Provider participants who have not received a SSF explained that they haven’t applied because they are new to CPP, they don’t have staff, or they need more information.

EXTENDED LEARNING SESSION Cincinnati Preschool Promise offered an Extended Learning Session (ELS) for preschoolers who were enrolled and active at a CPP TA Provider during the 2021-22 academic year to continue supporting the preschoolers’ education in preparation for kindergarten. Preschoolers who were not enrolled and active at a CPP TA Provider during the 2021-22 academic year were not eligible to participate. The ELS took place during the months of June 2022-August 2022. CPP recognized the importance of an ELS during 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted learning for most children. The ELS has continued to be offered since then and has remained in high demand from parents. A total of 498 preschoolers attended an ELS program in the summer of 2022 (academic year 2021-22). On average, ELS preschoolers attended 83.5% of their scheduled school days, with 51.6% having an attendance of 90% or higher. Demographic characteristics of the ELS cohort were similar to those of the general sample (Table 9). As of 2022-23, there are 89 ELS Providers currently active in Cincinnati (Figure 33).

32

33

Table 9. Demographics of Preschoolers Enrolled in ELS Preschools for 2021-22 De m o gr ap h ic Gender

Gr o u p Female Male Gender Unknown

Co u n t 256 231 11

Pe r ce n t 51.4% 46.4% 2.2%

Valid Pe r ce n t 52.6% 47.4%

Race

African American/Black White Hispanic American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian or Pacific Islander Other Race Unknown

391 25 40 7 1 28 6

78.5% 5.0% 8.0% 1.4% 0.2% 5.6% 1.2%

79.5% 5.1% 8.1% 1.4% 0.2% 5.7%

Primary Language

English Spanish French Other Language Unknown

420 31 2 6 39

84.3% 6.2% 0.4% 1.2% 7.8%

91.5% 6.8% 0.4% 1.3%

Housing Status

Lives in a Permanent Residence Foster Care Homeless Other Housing Status Unknown

465 6 7 18 2

93.4% 1.2% 1.4% 3.6% 0.4%

93.8% 1.2% 1.4% 3.6%

Household Size

2 Residents 3 Residents 4 Residents 5 Residents More than 5 in Household Household size Unknown

97 127 128 73 73

19.5% 25.5% 25.7% 14.7% 14.7%

19.5% 25.5% 25.7% 14.7% 14.7%

Eligibility Tier

<100 100-130 131-200 201-250 251-300 Income Requirement Waived* Eligibility Unknown

183 33 68 12 7 175 20

36.7% 6.6% 13.7% 2.4% 1.4% 35.1% 4.0%

56.7% 10.2% 21.1% 3.7% 2.2%

* Waived if income requirements already met for the Ohio Department of Education (requiring 200% FPL or below), Publicly Funded Child Care (requiring 142% FPL or below), or Head Start (requiring 185% FPL or below).

34

Figure 33. CPP Extended Learning Session (ELS) Preschools as 2022-23

Note. Shows active ELS Providers as of 2022-23. ELS preschoolers shown on the map attended an ELS program in the summer of 2022 (academic year 2021-22).

KRA-R PERFORMANCE FOR ELS PARTICIPANTS A total of 123 CPP TA participants who participated in the ELS (hereafter ELS participants) had parental consent and matched to a complete KRA-R score at CPS in 2022-23. Assessment scores of ELS participants were compared to 2022-23 KRA-R scores of 531 Non-ELS participants; a cohort of CPP TA participants that did not participate in ELS in 2021-22.

ELS participants were less frequently Approaching or Demonstrating readiness on the overall KRA-R (60.2%) than Non-ELS participants (69.8%; Figure 34). Fewer ELS participants were On Track in Language and Literacy (33.3%) than Non-ELS participants (47.1%; Figure 35).

35

Figure 34. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels

by ELS Participation (2022-23)

Figure 35. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy by ELS Participation (2022-23)

The impact of ELS participation told a different story when viewed within the lens of dosage. That is, ELS participants who attended 90% or more of their scheduled days showed stronger performance in relation to those below 90% attendance (Figures 36-37). Furthermore, ELS participants with 90% attendance or higher were Approaching or Demonstrating readiness at a rate of 72.4% compared to 69.8% of Non-ELS students. The percentage of ELS participants with 90% attendance or higher On Track in Language and Literacy was 43.1% compared to 47.1% of Non-ELS students.

Figure 36. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels

by ELS Participation and Percent of Scheduled Days Attended (2022-23)

Figure 37. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy by ELS Participation and Percent of Scheduled Days Attended (2022-23)

Figures 38-39 display KRA-R performance within the context of SES, ELS participation, and dosage. Overall KRA-R performance appeared more favorable among SES 1 ELS participants with 90% attendance or higher (69.2% Approaching or Demonstrating) compared to Non-ELS (64.0% Approaching or Demonstrating). However, this did not extend to Language and Literacy, where 26.9% of SES 1 ELS participants with 90% attendance or higher were On Track compared to 43.9% of Non-ELS. This is likely due to the larger proportion of SES 1 NonELS Demonstrating readiness (23.8%) compared to SES 1 ELS participants with 90% attendance (19.2%).

Among SES 2, ELS participants with 90% attendance or higher had a smaller combined Approaching and Demonstrating percentage compared to Non-ELS (69.3% vs. 73.2%). However, they were more frequently Demonstrating readiness compared to Non-ELS (38.5% vs. 32.1%). This was also reflected in Language and Literacy where ELS participants with 90% attendance (69.2% On Track) showed stronger performance than Non-ELS (51.8% On Track). Outcomes for SES 3 were also favorable for ELS participants with 90% attendance; however, the sample size was small (N = 11) and should be interpreted with caution. Notably, ELS results are omitted entirely among SES 4 due to sample sizes being below 10.

36

Figure 38. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels by SES, ELS Participation, and Percent of Scheduled Days Attended (2022-23)

Figure 39. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy by SES, ELS Participation, and Percent of Scheduled Days Attended (2022-23)

Note. Data are omitted if sample size is below 10. Sample sizes for Non-ELS students were 214 SES 1, 168 SES 2, 99 SES 3, and 48 SES 4. Sample sizes for ELS Students with 90% attendance or higher were 26 SES 1, 13 SES 2, 11 SES 3, and 7 SES 4. Sample sizes for ELS Students with less than 90% attendance were 21 SES 1, 13 SES 2, 22 SES 3, and 8 SES 4.

37

KRA-R outcomes by race, ELS participation and percent of scheduled days attended are not shown due to small ELS sample sizes for White, Hispanic, and Multi-Racial/Other students (N < 10). Additional findings can be viewed in Appendix F. The Year 7 Evaluation will report the updated total of ELS Providers that have participated since 2020 as well as KRA-R outcomes for ELS participants that participated June-August 2023 and completed a KRA-R at CPS during the 2023-24 academic year. Additional evaluation is needed to understand the potential benefits of ELS programs for preschool-aged children and their families.

CPP PLUS: SUPPORTING LEARNING THROUGH MUSIC IN THE CLASSROOM PEANUT BUTTER & JAM Peanut Butter and Jam (PB&J) is an interactive music program created for preschoolers to learn through singing classical nursery songs, dancing, and working with musical instruments. Studies have demonstrated that music programs can positively influence the development of children’s executive functions (e.g., planning, working memory, inhibitory control), academic abilities, and may influence academic performance. 3 Additionally, research has also shown that participating in music and movement programs can improvement children’s behavior and social skills. 4 For the second year, CPP partnered with PB&J to provide special in-school programming to 10 preschools which lasted for a total of 30 weeks. The program included one 30-minute visit per week, providing 15 hours of programming per classroom from September 2022 to May 2023. A total of 131 preschoolers had participated in PB&J by year-end. Among them, 10 participated in the program during the 2021-22 and 2022-23 school years.

The evaluation of PB&J consisted of two parts. First, teachers and Providers from participating preschool sites were surveyed about their observed behaviors of preschoolers who attended the sessions. Six surveys were submitted with some sites completing multiple surveys and others submitting one survey with their combined observations from teachers and Providers (Table 10).

Table 10. Peanut Butter and Jam Preschool Sites and Survey Respondents

Preschool Site Type

# of Surveys Submitted

Single Site Center

5

Type B

1

Preschoolers attending PB&J showed improvement from fall to spring in observed behavior across all domains of measurement according to 87.3% of teachers and Providers who provided feedback. Survey items spanned 10 domains of measurement related to the TS GOLD© domains and responses were tallied across respondents.

Participants were asked to endorse each item based on the question, “Please indicate if the PB&J program has made a positive impact on your preschoolers in the following domains.” Respondents could select “yes” or “no”.

Results by item and domain are listed in Table 11. Summary scores by domain are: 1) Social Emotional 96.7%, 2) Physical 100.0%, 3) Language 83.3%, 4) Cognitive 88.5%, 5) Literacy 66.7%, 6) Mathematics 75.0%, 7) Science and Technology 83.3%, 8) Social Studies 72.2%, 9) The Arts 91.7%, 10) English Language Acquisition 66.7%.

3 Dumont, E., Syurina, E. V., Feron, F. J., & van Hooren, S. (2017). Music Interventions and Child Development: A critical Review and

Further Development. Frontiers Psychology, 8(1694). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01694 4 Lobo, Y. B. & Winsler, A. (2006). The effects of a creative dance and movement program on the social competence of Head Start preschooelrs. Social Development, 15, 501-519.

38

Table 11. Peanut Butter and Jam Survey Scores by Domain

Social-Emotional Manages feelings Follows limits and expectations Takes care of own needs appropriately Forms relationships with adults Responds to emotional cues Interacts with peers Makes friends Participates cooperatively and constructively in group settings Balances needs and rights of self and others Solves social problems Average for Domain Physical Demonstrates traveling skills Demonstrates balancing skills Demonstrates gross-motor manipulative skills Demonstrates fine-motor strength Uses fingers and hands Average for Domain Language

# of Yes Responses 5 6 6 6 5 6 6 6

% 83.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 83.3% 100.0% 100% 100.0%

6 100.0% 6 100.0% Average for Domain 5.8 96.7% # of Yes % Responses 6 100.0% 6 100.0% 6

100.0%

6 100.0% 6 100.0% Average for Domain 6 100.0% # of Yes % Responses

Listens to and understands increasingly complex language

5

83.3%

Comprehends language Follows directions Uses language to express thoughts and needs

6 6

100.0% 100.0%

6

100.0%

Uses an expanding expressive vocabulary

6

100.0%

Speaks clearly Uses conventional grammar Tells about another time or place Uses appropriate conversational and other communication skills

6 6 4

100.0% 100.0% 66.7%

6

100.0%

Engages in conversation Uses social rules of language Average for Domain Cognitive

6 100.0% 6 100.0% Average for Domain 5.7 95.5% # of Yes % Responses

Demonstrates positive approaches to learning

6

100.0%

Attends and engages Persists Solves Problems

6 6 5

100.0% 100.0% 83.3% 39

Cognitive (continued) Shows curiosity and motivation Shows flexibility and motivation Remembers and connects experiences Recognizes and recalls Makes connections Uses classification skills Uses symbols and images to represent something not present Thinks symbolically Engages in sociodramatic play Average for Domain Literacy

# of Yes Responses 6 6 5 6 6 4

100.0% 100.0% 83.3% 100.0% 100.0% 66.7%

4

66.7%

%

4 66.7% 5 83.3% Average for Domain 5.3 88.5% # of Yes % Responses

Demonstrates phonological awareness, phonics, word recognition

4

66.7%

Notices and discriminates rhyme Notices and discriminates alliteration Notices and discriminates discrete units of sound Applies phonics to concepts and knowledge of word structure

5 5 6

83.3% 83.3% 100.0%

3

50.0%

Demonstrates knowledge of the alphabet

3

50.0%

Identifies letter-sound correspondence

3

50.0%

Retells stories and recounts details from informational texts

3

50.0%

Average for Domain Mathematics Understands spatial relationships Demonstrates knowledge of patterns Average for Domain

Science and Technology Uses tools and other technology to perform tasks Average for Domain Social Studies Demonstrates knowledge about self Shows basic understanding of people and how they live Explore changes related to familiar people or places Average for Domain

Average for Domain 4 66.7% # of Yes % Responses 4 66.7% 5 83.3% Average for Domain 4.5 75.0%

# of Yes Responses

%

5

83.3%

Average for Domain 5

# of Yes Responses

83.3%

%

5

83.3%

4

66.7%

4

66.7%

Average for Domain 4.3

72.2%

40

The Arts Explores the visual arts Explores musical concepts and expression Explore dance and movement concepts Explores drama through actions and language Average for Domain English Language Acquisition

# of Yes Responses

%

5

83.3%

6

100.0%

6 5

100.0% 83.3%

Average for Domain 5.5

# of Yes Responses

91.7%

%

Demonstrates progress in listening to and understanding English

4

66.7%

Demonstrates progress in speaking in English

4

66.7%

Average for Domain Domain Totals

Average for Domain 4

66.7%

51.5

87.3%

A survey respondent also provided the following qualitative feedback about the program: •

“Peanut Butter and Jam Sessions have introduced our children to the different uses of instruments, how to express languages through music and movements, use of gross and fine motor skills, how to listen and follow directions, turn taking and sharing. The concerts help engage the parents and build confidence in the children. The impact on the community has been introducing music and instruments that the children may not have access to normally.”

41

The second part of the PB&J evaluation included 31 children, who spent an average of 14.4 hours in the program.

Their progress was assessed in six development and learning domains of the Teaching Strategies GOLD® (TS GOLD®) preschool assessment. At pre-test, more than 90% of participants met or exceeded expectations on all domains of the TS GOLD®. Still, preschoolers made improvements from Fall to Spring in all six domains of measurement with the greatest improvements in the Social-Emotional and Language domains (Table 12).

Moreover, when examining the differences in TS GOLD® scores for participants who were exceeding expectations at pre-test, results showed a 32.2% growth in the Social-Emotional domain, a 29.1% growth in the Physical domain, and a 16.1% growth in the Cognitive domain. For all participants, paired samples t-tests revealed statistically significant differences in scores for five out of the six domains, excluding the Literacy domain where participants maintained their performance level. Compared to 2021-22, more participants were exceeding expectations for their age in 2022-23.

Table 12. Peanut Butter and Jam TS GOLD® Assessment Outcomes (N=31) Pr e - Te st

Po st - Te st

Me e t in g o r Exce e d in g

Me e t in g o r Exce e d in g

% Im p r o ve d

90.3% 90.3%

100%

9.7%

Ph ysical

93.5%

3.2%

Lan gu age

90.3%

100%

9.7%

Co gn it ive

90.3%

96.8%

6.5%

Lit e r acy Mat h e m at ics

93.5% 93.5%

96.8% 100%

3.3%

Do m ain So cial- Em o t io n al

6.5%

Note: If a Fall test was unavailable, the Winter test was used as the Pre-Test.

42

COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDER EXPERIENCES INNOVATIONS conducted focus groups with 105 preschool parents, teachers, and Providers during the spring of 2023. An additional 235 surveys were collected from these groups. Focus group and survey participants were from Tuition Assistance (TA) and Quality Improvement (QI) preschools in the CPP Community Provider network, as well as prospective parents and Providers from the Cincinnati Public Schools (CPS) District geographic footprint who are not formally connected to CPP. Participants represented more than 70 unique preschool programs.

IMPACT OF TUITION ASSISTANCE Parents were asked, “Would you have been able to afford preschool if you had not received CPP tuition assistance?” and 62.1% said, “none of the cost” and 27.6% responded, “some of the cost” (Figure 40).

Figure 40. Would You Have Been Able To Afford Preschool If You Had Not Received CPP Tuition Assistance? (N=29)

3.4% 6.9%

27.6%

62.1%

All of the cost

Most of the cost

Some of the cost

None of the cost

Parents, teachers, and Providers made the following comments about the impact of receiving TA: •

“I didn’t qualify for any other benefits. Our Provider told me about the program. It has made an extreme difference for us financially.” – TA Parent

•

“It helped me keep my nephew in a private preschool for which I would have had to pay private pay. Being able to qualify for Preschool Promise really helped a lot. Because he was learning so much at this school, I really didn’t want to take him out, so that was good for me and him.” – TA parent

•

“Preschool Promise bridges the gap for middle class, blue collar people that maybe don’t qualify for Head Start but still can’t really afford the high tuition of a quality center.” – TA teacher

•

“A lot of the families at my school are working. Having tuition assistance really helps them be able to work and have their kids go to school. They don’t have to wait until kindergarten to get them ready for school.”

– TA teacher

43

PROSPECTIVE STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES The surveyed prospective parents’ awareness of CPP increased from 2022 to 2023. They identified “safe environment” (92.1%), “social skill development” (86.1%), and “kindergarten readiness” (84.2%) as the top three aspects of a quality early educational experience (Figure 41). Parents commented that quality means “following state or local curriculum”, “cleanliness and safety”, and “teachers invested in the kids’ learning and wellbeing and have genuine relationships with them”.

Figure 41. Prospective Stakeholder Views on Quality Preschool 100% 77.2%

80% 60%

84.2%

61.1%

66.7%

72.2%

92.1% 72.2%

72.2% 65.3%

Safe Environment

Teachers are Credentialed

86.1% 77.8%

41.6%

40% 20% 0%

Motor Skill Provider is SUTQ Kindergarten Development Rated Readiness Prospective Provider (N=18)

Social Skill Development

Prospective Parent (N=101)

ATTENDANCE Nearly three in four (72.4%) TA parents were aware that preschoolers who attend preschool regularly are significantly more likely to be ready for kindergarten and have much greater success later in life compared to preschoolers who do not attend regularly. According to parents, 89.6% “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that their preschool encourages them to have their child attend school every day.

SPECIAL NEEDS SUPPORT Preschoolers who require special education services and supports were reported in all stakeholder groups.

“Developmental screenings”, “assessments of social skills or behavior programs”, “speech/language screening”, among others were mentioned as services relevant to parents of preschoolers with special needs. Some teachers and Providers expressed concern about not having the appropriate skills to serve preschoolers with special needs and voiced that they need more training around autism, behavior management, trauma, and using medical or adaptive equipment (e.g., feeding tubes, sensory supplies).

Additional stakeholder feedback can be found in the 2022-23 qualitative report.

44

CPP EVALUATION ADVISORY PANEL For the third year, INNOVATIONS facilitated an Evaluation Advisory Panel to receive input on the external evaluation process and activities from CPP stakeholders. Six individuals were invited to join monthly evaluation meetings between February and June 2023. The panel consisted of two Providers, two teachers, and two parents from TA and QI preschools. Two community consultants and CPP’s Data and Evaluation Manager also participated in the panel’s discussions. Parent, teacher, and Provider panel members were compensated for their time and expertise.

Topics discussed by the panel included: •

2022 evaluation reports

•

2023 evaluation plan

•

Survey administration and outreach strategies

•

Preschooler survey items

•

Parent engagement in school and in at-home learning

•

Non-traditional operating hours

•

Supporting the transition to kindergarten

Parent Engagement: During a discussion on parent engagement in schools, panelists shared their experiences and insights on effective ways to involve families and overcome obstacles. One participant suggested conducting a survey at the start of the academic year to determine parents' preferred modes and times of engagement, whether in-person, virtual, or using platforms like Class Dojo. Teachers and Providers have organized a range of events to engage parents, such as fashion shows, dance contests, and family culture poster-making. They found offering both in-person and virtual attendance options to be effective in boosting parent participation.

However, some challenges were identified, such as parents having work conflicts during school hours or being too busy during pick-up and drop-off times. The group also proposed that preschools create a picture book showcasing preschool parent engagement activities to entice prospective parents.

Non-Traditional Operating Hours: Panel members reported that parents are struggling to find childcare services outside of traditional operating hours. One participant shared that their preschool is considering opening earlier to assist parents but would need to close earlier for staff safety. Another parent mentioned their difficulty finding childcare for their child during third shift after losing their voucher for afterschool programs. The lack of vouchers for extended day programs is also a barrier for some families seeking access to preschool.

Supporting the Transition to Kindergarten: Panelists shared that some of their families do not know where they will enroll their child in kindergarten which is a barrier to supporting them through the process. A Provider also mentioned that they have non-English speaking families and need external support to help them. Participants agreed that conducting parent training on kindergarten readiness and providing a checklist for kindergarten transition would be beneficial for parents who are new to this phase of school enrollment.

Participant Input and Ideas: The survey for preschoolers was improved based on the feedback from the panel members. Furthermore, their suggestions on how to help readers understand the evaluation report were taken into account in the design and organization of the report. The insights gained from the Evaluation Advisory Panel will have a lasting impact on the CPP evaluation.

45

RECOMMENDATIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES To ensure Cincinnati’s young children, families, teachers, and Providers continue to have equitable access to quality preschool education and resources that help meet their needs, INNOVATIONS suggests that CPP consider the following recommendations and opportunities. Some of these suggestions can be accomplished with existing resources, while others may necessitate long-term preparation, financing approaches, and collaborations.

•

Continue to Offer Resources and Coaching that Support Quality Preschool: It is essential to continue offering resources and coaching that support quality preschool and encourage participation in SUTQ. Although some programs are no longer required to participate in SUTQ to offer publicly funded child care (PFCC), it is still important to highlight the benefits of SUTQ involvement and quality preschool for Providers and the children and families they serve. SUTQ and preschool quality serve a crucial function in building parental trust, maintaining the CPP Community Provider Network, and preparing young children for kindergarten. The standards of SUTQ are grounded in research that has demonstrated improved outcomes for children.

•

Leverage Community Partnerships to Strengthen Special Needs and Language Services for Providers and Families: Assess current and new community partnerships with a strong emphasis on enhancing special needs and language services, particularly for those who speak Spanish. Identify appropriate assistance, support, and resources to enhance these services.

•

Standardize Absence Data Tracking and Reporting: Develop definitions and required tracking procedures to ensure reasons for absences are reported in a consistent way by all Providers. It would also benefit CPP to expand support for Providers to improve their communication about daily attendance.

•

Connect Parents, Teachers, and Providers to Resources that Support the Transition to Kindergarten: Provide parents, teachers, and Providers with tools, resources, opportunities, and contact information to assist families with kindergarten enrollment.

•

Continue to Advocate for and Champion the Value of the CPP Community Provider Network: It would benefit CPP to inform all stakeholders, especially those who are not closely connected to CPP or early education efforts, of the quality education that community Providers provide, the SUTQ standards in which program aligns, and their integral role in making access to high-quality preschool possible for all children in Cincinnati.

See the 2023 Qualitative Evaluation Report for additional findings and recommendations.

46

APPENDICES APPENDIX A: ADDITIONAL KINDERGARTEN READINESS ASSESSMENT REVISED (KRA-R) OUTCOMES FOR CPP TA PARTICIPANTS Additional KRA-R analyses were conducted on a cohort of 233 CPP preschoolers with parental consent using data obtained from the SugarCRM database operated by MetrixIQ. SugarCRM is the database that stores information collected by CPP. Relationships were examined between KRA-R and preschool attendance, eligibility tier, parent/guardian employment status, Provider quality rating, and Provider pandemic site status.

Preschool attendance rates (total days attended/total days scheduled) were calculated for the 2020-21 and 202122 academic years. Figures A1-A2 illustrate higher performance on the KRA-R for kindergartners with preschool attendance rates of 90% or higher in both 2020-21 (during 3-year-old preschool) and 2021-22 (during 4-year-old preschool). The effect of CPP preschool attendance was more pronounced for 4-year-old preschoolers. CPP preschoolers with attendance rates at or above 90 percent in 2021-22 more frequently Approaching or Demonstrating readiness (72.8%) and were On Track in Language and Literacy (44.2%) compared to those with attendance rates below 90 percent (50.0% and 31.0%, respectively).

Figure A1. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels of CPP Participants by Preschool Attendance*

Figure A2. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy of CPP Participants by Preschool Attendance*

Note. Sample sizes for 3-Year Old Preschool (2020-21) participants are 76 for “Attendance < 90” and 68 for “Attendance ≥ 90”.

Sample sizes for 4-Year Old Preschool (2021-22) participants are 116 for “Attendance < 90” and 77 for “Attendance ≥ 90”. *Comprised of CPP preschooler data collected from the SugarCRM database operated by MetrixIQ.

47

Federal poverty level (FPL) eligibility tiers were determined using family income data from the most recent enrollment record of each CPP preschooler. Kindergarteners of families greater than or equal to 100% FPL were Approaching or Demonstrating readiness (Figure A3) at a frequency of 68.8% and were On Track in Language and Literacy (Figure A4) at a frequency of 42.6% compared to 59.2% and 39.5% of kindergarteners of families less than 100% FPL, respectively.

Figure A3. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels of CPP Participants by Eligibility Tier (2022-23)*

Figure A4. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy of CPP Participants by Eligibility Tier (2022-23)*

All TA Providers have obtained SUTQ ratings between 3 and 5 stars. KRA-R performance was compared between kindergarteners by the star rating of their most recently attended CPP Provider. Due to small sample sizes, 3 and 4-Star Provider attendees were combined into one group (N=54). Results indicated that KRA-R performance levels (Figure A5) differed between 5-star Provider attendees (27.4% Demonstrating) and 3 and 4Star Provider attendees (20.4% Demonstrating). Furthermore, On Track percentages (Figure A6) showed a more distinct difference between 5-Star Provider attendees (41.3%) and 3 and 4-Star Providers attendees (25.9%).

Figure A5. Overall KRA-R Performance Levels of CPP Participants by Star Rating (2022-23)*

Figure A6. Percentage On Track in Language and Literacy of CPP Participants by Star Rating (2022-23)*

*Comprised of CPP preschooler data collected from the SugarCRM database operated by MetrixIQ.

48

APPENDIX B: KRA-R OUTCOMES BY SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS FOR 202223

49

50

51

APPENDIX C: KRA-R LOGISTIC REGRESSION RESULTS

52

APPENDIX D: DEMOGRAPHICS OF PARTICIPANTS ENROLLED IN CPP TA PRESCHOOLS (PRIOR YEARS)

53

54

APPENDIX E: QI PROVIDERS CONVERTED TO TA PROVIDERS Name of Converted Provider

TA Approval Date

Carmen Riddle

8/16/2022

Constant Care Learning Center

4/16/2023

Exploring Excellence Learning Center Corp

4/23/2023

Golden Rule Daycare LLC

5/18/2023

Kings & Queens Unlimited LLC

7/18/2022

Linda Blakney

10/19/2022

Lisa Cox-Wade

1/19/2023

My 2nd Home Childcare

9/12/2022

Mylestones Early Learning and Development

4/24/2023

St. Joseph

9/28/2022

Yolanda's Day Care

7/18/2022

Your Learning Treehouse LLC

1/24/2023

55

APPENDIX F: KRA-R OUTCOMES BY EXTENDED LEARNING SESSION (ELS) PARTICIPATION

56

2023 QUALITATIVE EVALUATION REPORT

Table of Contents Report Summary

3

Full Report

5

Tui�on Assistance Stakeholders – Evalua�on and Results

6

Impact of Tui�on Assistance on Families

9

Perspec�ves on Preschool Enrollment, Quality, and Atendance

9

Barriers to Accessing Preschool and CPP Funding

17

Sa�sfac�on with CPP Interac�ons and Supports

19

Child Development, Kindergarten Readiness, and Special Educa�on

25

Provider Perspec�ves on Statewide SUTQ Changes

29

Cost of Quality

30

Impact of COVID-19

31

Addi�onal Feedback for CPP

32

Quality Improvement Stakeholders – Evalua�on and Results

33

Perspec�ves on Preschool Enrollment, Quality, and Atendance

34

Barriers to Accessing Preschool and CPP Funding

37

Sa�sfac�on with CPP Interac�ons and Supports

38

Child Development, Kindergarten Readiness, and Special Educa�on

43

Provider Perspec�ves on Statewide SUTQ Changes

46

Cost of Quality

47

Impact of COVID-19

47

Addi�onal Feedback for CPP

48

Preschooler Survey Results

49

Teacher and Provider Recruitment, Reten�on, and Pay

50

Work Environment Sa�sfac�on

50

Job Fit Sa�sfac�on

52

Pay and Benefits Sa�sfac�on

53

Influence of Wages on Teacher Recruitment

56

Teacher Wage Changes in Response to Labor Shortages and Infla�on

56

Emerging Teacher Perspec�ves on Early Childhood Educa�on Profession

58

Prospec�ve Stakeholders – Evalua�on and Results

1

59

Prospec�ve Parent and Provider Awareness of CPP

63

Prospec�ve Providers’ Understanding of CPP Benefits

64

Increasing Awareness of CPP Benefits

64

Perspec�ves on Early Learning and Preschool Enrollment

66

Barriers to Preschool Enrollment and CPP Engagement

71

Child Development, Kindergarten Readiness, and Special Educa�on

75

Provider Perspec�ves on Statewide SUTQ Changes

80

Cost of Quality

80

Impact of COVID-19

81

Addi�onal Feedback for CPP

81

Key Findings, Next Steps, and Opportuni�es

2

83

REPORT SUMMARY Cincinnati Preschool Promise (CPP) is committed to ensuring children have access to high-quality preschool, setting them on a path to long-term success. To achieve this goal, it is essential for CPP to evaluate and improve efforts and progress. INNOVATIONS in Community Research and Program Evaluation (INNOVATIONS) supported the CPP evaluation during 2022-23 and provided an in-depth, mixed-method evaluation of preschool parents’, teachers’, and Providers’ experiences related to preschool education. A separate quantitative evaluation report shows the impact of CPP on preschool access, preschool progress, and kindergarten readiness, among other areas. The reports provide valuable insights that support CPP’s efforts and future initiatives. The findings have the potential to help CPP achieve its goal of creating a brighter future for Cincinnati's children by ensuring that children have a high-quality preschool education.

Evaluation and Results During the spring of 2023, INNOVATIONS conducted focus groups with 105 participants and collected 235 surveys from stakeholders. Focus group and survey participants were parents, teachers, and Providers from Tuition Assistance (TA) and Quality Improvement (QI) preschools in the CPP Community Provider Network, as well as prospective parents and Providers who are not formally connected to CPP but reside within the Cincinnati Public Schools (CPS) District geographic footprint. More than 70 unique preschool programs were represented within the sample of focus group and survey participants.

Participants were asked to share their experiences and perspectives on preschool and early learning, barriers to enrollment, and ways in which CPP could further support early learning within their family or preschool. Focus groups and surveys also included topics about preschool attendance, teacher retention and pay, student-teacher perspectives on future employment in early childhood education, parental trust in Providers, special education needs, preschoolers’ experience in preschool, satisfaction with CPP, and the impact of COVID-19. The evaluation report represents the experiences and views of the parents, teachers, and Providers that participated and provides information for many different audiences. Information in this report may be meaningful to the audiences described below: •

Preschool Administrators – use to understand aspects of quality, identify training and professional development needs, and understand factors impacting recruitment and retention of staff;

•

Preschool Teachers – use as a resource to see the impact of teaching on preschool progress and kindergarten readiness, identify trainings and resources to support professional development and child development, and assist in creating a parent engagement plan;

•

Parents and Families – use to clarify knowledge and skills that are important for preschool progress and kindergarten readiness;

•

Early Education Partners and Supporters – use to organize services and advocacy efforts and identify opportunities to expand supports for early educators, families, and children.

Summary of Key Findings from the Report Parents • • • • • • 3

Tuition Assistance Supports High-Quality Preschool Affordability and Access Prospective Parents Are More Aware of CPP Benefits Parents Express that Social-Emotional Learning is Important Parents Report Engagement in Their Child’s Learning In-School and At-Home Attendance During the Winter and Holiday Season Can Be Difficult Parents are Satisfied with Provider’s Communication

Teachers and Providers • • • • •

CPP Funds Impact Preschool Quality and Program Sustainability Prospective Providers are Aware of CPP but Need More Information Preschool Teachers and Providers Need Support to Enhance Social-Emotional Teaching Teachers and Providers are Educating Preschoolers with Special Needs Preschool Teachers and Providers are Empowered by CPP Support and Professional Development Opportunities

Recruitment, Retention, and Pay •

Insufficient Pay and Benefits Continued to Hinder Preschool Teacher Recruitment, Retention, and Program Sustainability

Ongoing Impact of COVID-19 •

COVID-19 Continues to Impact Preschools and Families

Recommendations, Next Steps, and Opportunities •

Leverage Community Partnerships to Enhance Services for Preschool Providers and Families: Work with new and existing community partners to promote the benefits of CPP to prospective Providers and families, such as professional development and networking for Providers and access to quality preschool and Preschool Chats information sessions for families. Providers and families mentioned that they could utilize services and training that support behavioral difficulties, mental health, social-emotional learning, and special needs, etc. Flexible training options including in-person, virtual, real-time, and self-paced learning can help make education a priority and accommodate complicated schedules and different learning styles.

•

Strengthen Messaging and Communications to Reach Prospective Parents: Provider messaging should address preschool safety and security, which prospective parents reported as top priorities and concerns for their children. Messaging strategies may also address socialemotional learning, which parents highly valued, and financial supports, which parents reported as a barrier to preschool enrollment.

•

Explore Opportunities to Expand and Promote Digital Resources: Share additional information and materials on the CPP website and other digital formats to support stakeholders with challenges and continued learning (e.g., parent engagement, at-home learning, child development, kindergarten readiness, finding and filling open preschool seats, community resources, quality, and safety standards of Providers in the Network, etc.). Encourage community partners and preschool staff to promote digital resources to peers and families, as they have the potential to help parents better recognize the benefits of CPP beyond TA and can assist with meeting the unique needs of stakeholders.

•

Connect Preschool Parents, Teachers, and Providers to Resources that Support a Successful Preschool Experience and Kindergarten Readiness: Provide preschool parents, teachers, and Providers with tools, resources, and opportunities to support children meeting developmental milestones and gaining social-emotional skills that are essential to success in kindergarten.

Additional Considerations for CPP and Early Education Partners • • • •

4

Consider Offering Peer Support Opportunities and Tools for Teachers and Providers Contribute to Equitable Access to High-Quality Preschool for Working Families Continue to Advocate for System Reform that Support Fair Wages for Teachers and Improve Access to High-Quality Preschool Continue to Advocate for and Champion the Value of the CPP Community Provider Network

FULL REPORT Cincinnati Preschool Promise (CPP) is a non-profit organization whose primary aim is to ensure all children in Cincinnati have equitable access to high-quality preschool, so they are prepared for kindergarten. INNOVATIONS in Community Research and Program Evaluation (INNOVATIONS), an entity of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, supported the CPP evaluation and implemented a mixed method evaluation to help CPP better understand the needs of its stakeholders and the level of impact the initiative made during the 2022-2023 school year on its strategic goals. This report summarizes focus groups and surveys that were conducted to collect inclusive data and feedback from eight stakeholder groups, including: preschool parents, teachers, and Providers (directors, administrators, owners/operators) enrolled in Tuition Assistance (TA) and Quality Improvement (QI) preschools within the CPP Community Provider Network. The evaluation also included prospective parents and Providers located within or near the Cincinnati Public Schools (CPS) geographic footprint who are not members of the CPP Community Provider Network or enrolled in preschool. A separate quantitative evaluation report shows the impact of CPP on preschool access, preschool progress, and kindergarten readiness, among other areas.

The TA and QI focus group and survey items focused on getting feedback on the following key evaluation areas: • Impact of Tuition Assistance on Families • Understanding of Child Development and Kindergarten Readiness • Barriers to Accessing Preschool and CPP Funding • Stakeholder Satisfaction with CPP Interactions and Supports • Effectiveness of Providers Communicating to Families about CPP The prospective stakeholder focus group and survey items were designed to address key evaluation areas such as: • Awareness of CPP • Understanding of CPP Benefits • Perspectives on Quality Early Learning and Kindergarten Readiness • Barriers to Preschool Enrollment and Attendance • Strategies for CPP to Engage Prospective Stakeholders Additional questions were asked to understand teacher recruitment, retention, and pay; studentteacher perspectives on future employment in early childhood education; aspects of parental trust in Providers; special education needs; preschoolers’ experience in preschool; and the on-going impact of COVID-19, among others.

The evaluators organized the focus group data by question and stakeholder type. Responses were then categorized into main ideas that emerged during the discussions. These main ideas and important quotes that expressed them were synthesized into useful information and reported alongside related survey data collected from a larger sample of the population. Qualitative feedback was cleaned for clarity and grammatical errors. By conducting focus groups using an online platform, the evaluation was not hindered by location, which participants expressed as a barrier to their participation. However, there is the possibility that not all participants responded to every question and documentation of nonverbal feedback was limited. Missing survey data were excluded from analysis.

The report reflects the unique perspectives of the participant sample as such that the results for TA, QI, and prospective stakeholders were reported separately given the different types of support and varying levels of engagement with CPP. Trend data were reported where available, and findings of the evaluation were used to make recommendations for CPP and its early childhood education community partners.

5

TUITION ASSISTANCE STAKEHOLDERS – EVALUATION AND RESULTS INNOVATIONS conducted focus groups with 18 parents, 20 teachers, and 16 Providers receiving TA from CPP. INNOVATIONS also collected surveys from 29 TA parents, 24 TA teachers, and 36 TA Providers.

Preschools that participate in CPP’s TA program have reached a high-quality three, four, or five-star rating from Ohio’s Step Up To Quality (SUTQ) child care quality rating system, which is a five–star quality rating and improvement system administered by the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) and the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS). CPP embraces the SUTQ program, which ensures Providers meet quality program standards that exceed licensing, health, and safety regulations. SUTQ program standards are based on national research that identifies standards that result in improved outcomes for children. 1 Findings from the TA focus groups and surveys are summarized below.

The majority (79.3%) of TA parents identified as Black/African American and reported having some college education or a college degree (86.2%) (Table 1). English was the primary language spoken at home by 93.1% of parent respondents. Fifteen parents had children under two years old.

Teachers and Providers represented 52 unique preschools with 41.7% from Family Child Care Providers (Type A and Type B Home Providers), 45.0% Single Site Centers, 10.0% from Multi-Site Centers, and 3.3% from School-Based Parochial Centers. Thirty-one (51.7%) TA teachers and Providers identified as Lead preschool teachers. Teachers and Providers reported membership to professional organizations including the Ohio Association of Child Care Providers (10.0%), Ohio Association for the Education of Young Children (26.7%), Southwest Ohio Association for the Education of Young Children (20.0%), National Association for Family Child Care (13.3%), and other organizations (20.0%) such as National Association for the Education of Young Children. Two in five (40.0%) TA Providers reported having no membership to a professional organization. Tables 2 and 3 show additional demographics.

Table 1. Tuition Assistance Parent Demographics (N=29) Survey Item

Response

Race/Ethnicity

White/Caucasian Black/African American Multiracial/Other Hispanic/Latino Less Than High School High School/GED Some College Associate Degree Bachelor’s Degree Master’s Degree Doctorate/PhD/JD/MD Full-Time Part-Time Stay Home Parent Student Disabled

Household Education Level

Employment Status

Count

Percentage

4 23 2 0 0 4 10 5 4 6 0 20 3 2 2 1

13.8% 79.3% 6.9% 0.0% 0.0% 13.8% 34.5% 17.2% 13.8% 20.7% 0.0% 69.0% 10.3% 6.9% 6.9% 3.4%

1 Ohio Department of Education. (2023, July 31). Step Up To Quality (SUTQ). https://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Early-

Learning/Step-Up-To-Quality-SUTQ

6

Other

1

3.4%

Incomplete responses and/or missing data were excluded. *Data interpretation and generalizability are limited given the small sample size.

Table 2. Tuition Assistance Teacher Demographics (N=24) Survey Item

Response

Race/Ethnicity

Education Level

Employment Status Years of Experience

Years at Current Preschool

Early Childhood Certifications**

Count

Percentage

White/Caucasian

8

33.3%

Black/African American

14

58.3%

Multiracial/Other

1

4.2%

Hispanic/Latino

0

0.0%

Prefer Not to Answer

1

4.2%

High School/GED

3

12.5%

Some College

3

12.5%

Associate Degree

6

25.0%

Bachelor’s Degree

8

33.3%

Master’s Degree

3

12.5%

Other

1

4.2%

Full-Time

21

87.5%

Part-Time

3

12.5%

Less than 1 Year

2

8.3%

1-2 Years

1

4.2%

3-4 Years

2

8.3%

5-10 Years

4

16.7%

10+ Years

15

62.5%

Less than 1 Year

2

8.3%

1-2 Years

9

37.5%

3-4 Years

3

12.5%

5-10 Years

5

20.8%

10+ Years

5

20.8%

CDA

8

33.3%

CPL

14

58.3%

Other

1

4.2%

None

6

25.0%

Incomplete responses and/or missing data were excluded. *Data interpretation and generalizability are limited given the small sample size. **Select all that apply

7

Table 3. Tuition Assistance Provider Demographics (N=36) Survey Item

Response

Race/Ethnicity

Household Education Level

Employment Status Years of Experience

Years at Current Preschool

Early Childhood Certifications**

Count

Percentage

White/Caucasian

9

25.0%

Black/African American

26

72.2%

Multiracial/Other

0

0.0%

Hispanic/Latino

0

0.0%

Prefer Not to Answer

1

2.8%

High School/GED

3

8.3%

Some College Associate Degree

7 7

19.4% 19.4%

Bachelor’s Degree

13

36.1%

Master’s Degree

6

16.7%

Full-Time

35

97.2%

Part-Time

1

2.8%

Less than 1 Year

0

0.0%

1-2 Years

3

8.3%

3-4 Years

3

8.3%

5-10 Years

9

25.0%

10+ Years

21

58.3%

Less than 1 Year

2

5.6%

1-2 Years

2

5.6%

3-4 Years

5

13.9%

5-10 Years

9

25.0%

10+ Years

18

50.0%

CDA

13

36.1%

CPL

25

69.4%

Other

2

5.6%

None

5

13.9%

Incomplete responses and/or missing data were excluded. *Data interpretation and generalizability are limited given the small sample size. **Select all that apply

8

Impact of Tuition Assistance on Families Most parents (89.3%) reported that their preschooler has been enrolled at their current CPP Provider for at least six months. Within this group, nine (32.1%) parents reported that their preschooler has been enrolled in CPP for two or more years. Nearly half (55.2%) of preschoolers have attended one preschool while 41.4% have attended two or three different preschools. Parents were asked, “Would you have been able to afford preschool if you had not received CPP TA?” and 62.1% said, “none of the cost” and 27.6% responded, “some of the cost” (Figure 1).

Figure 1. TA Parent Reported Ability to Afford Preschool If They Had Not Received CPP Tuition Assistance (N=29) 3.4% 6.9%

27.6% 62.1%

All of the cost

Most of the cost

Some of the cost

None of the cost

Parents, teachers, and Providers made the following comments about the impact of receiving TA: • “I didn’t qualify for any other benefits. Our daycare Provider told me about the program. It has made an extreme difference for us financially.” – TA parent • “It helped me keep my nephew in a private preschool for which I would have had to pay private pay. Being able to qualify for Preschool Promise really helped a lot. Because he was learning so much at this school, I really didn’t want to take him out, so that was good for me and him.” – TA parent • “Preschool Promise bridges the gap for middle-class, blue-collar people that maybe don’t qualify for Head Start but still can’t really afford the high tuition of a quality center.” – TA teacher • “I believe it really helps families. I feel like they can get quality care and they don’t have to go to whatever is in their budget and feel like they’re left out of certain areas.” – TA teacher • “A lot of the families at my school are working. Having Tuition Assistance really helps them be able to work and have their kids go to school. They don’t have to wait until kindergarten to get them ready for school.” – TA teacher • “The Tuition Assistance provides the majority of the budget for all aspects of our program.” – TA Provider

Perspectives on Preschool Enrollment, Quality, and Attendance Preschool Enrollment Examining parents’ decisions for infant and toddler care may help CPP understand how parents make decisions about preschool enrollment (Figure 2, Table 4). The top three reasons parents chose these places for infant/toddler care were the type of care “fit their child(ren)’s needs”, “the parent needed to work”, and the “Provider provided high-quality care”. A high-quality Provider was also important to parents when considering enrolling their child in preschool. Figure 3 shows that a “3-4-5 star rated Provider” (55.2%) was among the top two reasons parents enrolled their child in preschool. The top reason was “kindergarten readiness” (69.0%).

9

Figure 2. TA Parents Places for Infant/Toddler Care (N=29) 60%

51.7%

40% 17.2%

20% 0%

20.7%

31.0%

6.9%

Center-Based Non-Relative Care Care

Nanny/Sitter Care

Relative Care Parental Care

Table 4. TA Parents Reasons for Choosing Type of Infant/Toddler Care (N=29) Item

Count (%)

Fits my children’s needs

17 (58.6%)

They provide high-quality care

15 (51.7%)

I need to work

15 (51.7%)

I trust this Provider with my child(ren)

12 (41.4%)

Close to my home/job

11 (37.9%)

Flexible hours for my needs

10 (34.5%)

I have children of multiple ages

10 (34.5%)

I was referred to this Provider by someone I trust

3 (10.3%)

Affordability

2 (6.9%)

2023 (N=29)

33.3% 31.0%

48.0% 31.3% 53.3% 27.6%

2020 (N=93)

55.0% 62.5% 40.0% 37.9% Close to Work/Home

40%

63.0% 62.5% 53.3% 55.2%

Safe Nurturing Need to Work 3-4-5 Star Environment Rated Provider

60%

62.0% 64.6%

Kindergarten Preparation

44.8%

80%

66.0% 70.8% 66.7%

100%

82.0% 77.1% 80.0% 69.0%

Figure 3. TA Parent Reasons for Preschool Enrollment 2020-2023

20% 0%

10

2021 (N=48)

2022 (N=15)

Tuition Assistance Available

Provider Recruitment and Enrollment Supports Survey respondents were asked to describe ways that CPP could help preschools with enrolling new preschoolers in their preschool. Ideas shared included more advertisement, expanding the benefitseligible footprint, referring preschools to parents, enrollment events, financial assistance for marketing, application support for non-English speaking families, among others.

Preschool Quality On the survey, “kindergarten preparation”, “social skills development”, and “safety” were the top three aspects of quality preschool reported by parents before and after enrolling their child in preschool (Table 5). These aspects of quality preschool have been ranked within the top three since 2020.

Table 5. TA Parents on Meaning of Quality Preschool (N=29) Rank Before Enrolling in CPP After Enrolling in CPP Order 1 Kindergarten Preparation 79.3% 86.2% Kindergarten Preparation Child Learning Social Skills

75.9%

2

75.9%

Child Learning Social Skills

Safe Environment

72.4%

3

75.9%

Safe Environment

Highly Educated Teachers

62.1%

4

69.0%

3, 4, or 5-Star Rated Provider

3, 4, or 5-Star Rated Provider Child Learning Motor Skills Help with Fees

51.7% 37.9% 17.2%

5 6 7

65.5% 48.3% 20.7%

Highly Educated Teachers Child Learning Motor Skills Help with Fees

During focus groups, TA teachers and Providers were asked about what they determined to be indicators of high-quality preschool and the top three rated indicators of quality were “teacher characteristics and credentials”, “skills”, and “program environment”, as described in the quotes below: • “I think that it is a lot about having high-quality staff who are highly trained”.

• “For me, quality means teachers who are working to continue their education, go through trainings, not just getting set in their role. Many good teachers have been doing the same thing for many years and for me, quality teachers continue to learn the newest philosophies and strategies.”

• It’s about “having people who genuinely care and want to see children grown and learn…people who are passionate about what they are doing.”

• “I think social and emotional development should be number one. First of all, it teaches kids how to live in society. How to be a great friend and things like that. So social emotional development is very important.”

• “Yes, I think social-emotional makes a difference. Just giving the children the opportunity to express themselves, it teaches them skills to get ready for school as well.”

• “Safe/welcoming environment, developmentally appropriate practice, etc.”

• “I think quality child care means a safe environment for children.”

• “Making sure that children and their families are reflected in the learning environment.”

Other indicators of quality that TA teachers and Providers described included “student-to-teacher ratios”, “curriculum”, “SUTQ rating”, and “relationship with parents”.

Similarly, TA parents who participated in focus groups highly rated “skills” and “program environment” as indicators of high-quality preschool. Other quality indicators that were mentioned included “SUTQ”, “relationship with parents”, “curriculum”, and “teacher credentials and characteristics”.

11

Preschool Attendance Nearly three in four (72.4%) TA parents were aware that preschoolers who attend preschool regularly are significantly more likely to be ready for kindergarten and have much greater success later in life compared to preschoolers who do not attend regularly. According to parents, 89.6% “agree” or “strongly agree” that their preschool encourages them to have their child attend school every day.

Many (66.7%) teachers and Providers reported that their preschool is taking steps to improve attendance, although 16.7% were “unsure”. According to survey data, some ways that preschools are working to improve attendance include: • “Keeping the daycare clean so children take less sick days. Building a bond and friendship with the children and parents. And constantly checking in on them.”

• “Getting a bus soon.”

• “We do family welfare checks by calling parents to see if there are any problems with getting the child to school and if everyone is healthy.”

• “Incentives for the families.”

• “Consistent communication through Brightwheel.”

• “Discussing during parent meetings how important it is for children to come to school daily.”

All (100%) parents reported that having their preschooler attend preschool daily is important with 31.0% reporting their preschooler misses an average of “zero days” each month and 34.5% reporting their preschooler misses an average of “1-2 days” each month. Most (72.4%) parents also agreed that missing two days of preschool per month can negatively impact their child’s learning and socialemotional development. This finding is consistent with the results reported over the past two years.

Participants were asked to identify the barriers that prevent preschoolers from attending daily. Nearly half (48.3%) of parents reported that they do not have any barriers to preschool attendance. “Health related issues” has been the top barrier to daily preschool attendance over the past four years (Figure 4). And although only mentioned by one or two parents, “school climate/Provider trust” (6.9%), child’s adjustment to preschool” (3.4%), and “family challenges/shared parenting” (3.4%) were also reported as barriers to daily attendance.

Figure 4. TA Parent Barriers to Daily Attendance 2020-2023

Health Related Issues

Work Schedule

Lack of Child Stays at Transportation Home

2020 (N=93)

2021 (N=48)

Other Childcare Needs

2022 (N=15)

2.0% 0.0% 6.7% 0.0%

2.0% 2.1% 0.0% 0.0%

0%

2.0% 2.1% 0.0% 0.0%

10%

5.0% 10.4% 13.3% 10.3%

0.0% 6.9%

20%

10.0% 12.5% 13.3% 17.2%

30%

14.0% 14.6%

40%

27.0% 20.8%

50%

40.0% 34.5%

60%

Special Needs Not a Priority

2023 (N=29)

During one TA focus group discussion, parents talked about preschool attendance as follows: “I’m OK with my kid missing two to three times per month if I know she’s going to be doing something that promotes whole child development,” “my children go three to four days a week just because I like to spend time with them myself” and “mine was about choice…sometimes we just need a day where we are home and relaxing”.

12

Figure 5 displays the barriers to daily attendance as reported by TA teachers and Providers. Other barriers to attendance included “low parental understanding of the impact of attendance on learning and school readiness” (21.7%), “parent views preschool as babysitting” (20.0%), “holidays/vacations (18.3%), and “family challenges/shared parenting” (18.3%). However, TA Providers and teachers in the focus groups mentioned “program fit”, “siblings”, and “transportation” as factors that influenced regular attendance. For example, one TA teacher stated, “I only have one child that comes every other day. And that’s because he has older siblings and if they’re not at school, he’s not at school.

That’s mainly my issue.” Similarly, another TA Provider commented that transportation is important, “especially with multiple kids. If the older two are going somewhere, then they want to keep everybody together if they can. Just transportation and a lot of parents are starting to ask, do you drop off, do you pick up?”

10% 0%

Health Related Issues

Work Schedule

2020 (N=48)

Lack of Child Stays at Transportation Home

2021 (N=59)

Other Childcare Needs

2022 (N=34)

Special Needs

17.0% 5.1% 26.5% 23.3%

20%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

30%

20.0% 3.4% 11.8% 18.3%

40%

31.0% 44.1% 41.2% 23.3%

50%

42.0% 37.3% 41.2% 43.3%

60%

40.0% 30.5% 17.6% 30.0%

70%

56.0% 44.1% 50.0% 51.7%

Figure 5. TA Teachers & Providers Barriers to Daily Attendance 2020-2023

Not a Priority

2023 (N=60)

Regarding the impact of COVID-19 on preschool attendance, 0.0% of parents reported COVID-19 as a barrier that prevented their preschooler from attending preschool daily, a decrease of 40 percentage points from 2022. However, 34.5% of parents said that COVID-19 made them hesitant to send their child to preschool this year. Approximately one in four (23.3%) teachers and Providers felt that COVID-19 was a barrier that prevented daily attendance during the 2022-23 school year. This finding aligns with one TA Provider’s response during focus groups: “We had an outbreak of COVID in our center, so we had to shut down. We had to clean and quarantine. And a lot of kids I got to see, but probably a fourth of the children were still out after the quarantine. I don’t know if the parents were leery of sending them back.”

TA parents, teachers and Providers all commented on how general illness/sickness impacted the regular attendance of their preschoolers. However, TA teachers and Providers recognized the impact that the interaction between illness/sickness and time of year had on the attendance of their preschools: • “I would say right at the peak of each season change. Like everyone said, it's the allergies or the cold going into the hot. Everything is just a complete change, so that's where I feel like most of the kids miss school because of just being sick.”

• “When the seasons change. You start running into the allergies, the weather like now is just really back and forth.”

• “Maybe in the wintertime when they're sick, you know, if they're sick due to the change of weather or whatnot.”

• “The sick time of year. I don't know about anybody else, but this year has been the worst sick year I have ever experienced. From January until April. I mean, this month of March, I have 20 children enrolled and I have not had a single day with all of my children.”

13

Furthermore, when looking at school attendance records, data have shown that preschool attendance declines during the winter and holiday seasons.

When parents were asked on the survey, “What are the reasons that your child would miss preschool during this time” they reported “seasonal illness” as the top reason their preschooler misses school (Figure 6). Nearly one in three (36.0%) TA parents characterized the days their child missed as “not at all avoidable” while 36.0% and 28.0% said that their child’s absence was “somewhat avoidable” and “totally avoidable”, respectively.

Focus group participants were asked about the potential impacts of preschool absenteeism on preschoolers and the program. Teachers and Providers said that preschoolers’ “learning skills” are impacted the most. One TA Provider noted that “their learning is obviously impacted, especially if they’re chronically absent and that sometimes creates a challenge for us, especially with parents who maybe don’t have a very deep understanding of preschool or of child development in general.” TA parents also said that “keeping a child on schedule” was the top impact of absenteeism, as noted by one parent, “for kids, you have to keep them on the schedule to repeat things because if you don’t repeat it, they lose it. So, I definitely feel like going to school every day is important.”

Figure 6. TA Parents Reasons for Absence During Winter/Holiday Season (N=29) Seasonal Illness

65.5%

Inclement Weather

31.0%

School District Closed for Break

24.1%

Transportation Issues

24.1%

Chronic Illness/Hospitalization

24.1%

Vacation/Holidays Family Health Concerns

17.2% 10.3%

It’s also understood that some parents unenroll their preschooler before the school year ends. Half (52.5%) of TA teacher and Provider respondents have had a preschooler unenroll or not complete the full school year. Reasons for unenrolling or not completing the school year are shown in Table 6.

14

Table 6. TA Teacher/Provider Believed Reasons for Unenrollment (N=60) Item

Count (%)

Moved Residence

20 (33.3%)

Lack of Transportation

16 (26.7%)

No Longer Qualified for Voucher

14 (23.3%)

Preschooler Had Academic or Social Challenges

9 (15.0%)

Change of Work Schedule

8 (13.3%)

Parent Disagreement with School Procedures

6 (10.0%)

Cannot Afford Tuition

5 (8.3%)

Stays Home With Family

4 (6.7%)

Other

4 (6.7%)

Health Related Issues

3 (5.0%)

Child Care Needs of Other Children/Siblings

3 (5.0%)

Special Needs

3 (5.0%)

Attendance Supports Survey results indicated that “transportation” supports may help some parents increase preschool attendance, however, this finding represents a small portion of the overall population (Figures 7 and 8). In addition, three (10.3%) parent respondents reported that “parent education about the benefits of preschool attendance”, “resources for families experiencing chronic illness or serious health issues”, “increased parental involvement in school”, and “opportunities for parent-teacher-Provider engagement” would help increase their child’s preschool attendance. Other comments on this topic included: • “My child had a hard time when COVID arrived so that was and kind of still is our only barrier.

That is a little if a problem, but I try to get her to school most of the time.”

• “More of an effort to incorporate whole child learning principles, social learning, field trips/activities, environmental learning, language immersion (a black language for majority African descendent children), opportunities to learn outdoors, guest educators. I have a MSc in Environmental Science, and am passionate about forest school environments, but BIPOC children rarely have enough access to these environments. I'm working with my daughter's school to determine ways to increase access for her/classmates.”

• “He attends pretty regularly but transportation would be awesome. His health is the main reason he doesn't attend when he is out.”

• “I need to be on time more.”

• “They get sick often and Ms. S keeps a very clean class.”

15

Figure 7. TA Parent Reported Supports that Would Help Increase Preschool Attendance 2020-2023

0%

Transportation

2020 (N=93)

2021 (N=48)

Childcare Assistance for Other Children 2022 (N=15)

17.2%

20.0%

16.7%

3.4%

6.7%

24.0%

33.3%

Financial Incentive for Attendance

6.3%

10%

9.0%

20%

10.3%

12.0%

29.2%

31.0%

22.9%

30%

22.0%

40%

33.3%

50%

Flexible Start Time

2023 (N=29)

58.8%

10% 0%

Transportation

2020 (N=48)

Financial Incentives for Attendance 2021 (N=59)

2022 (N=34)

16.7%

20%

0.0%

15.0%

30%

11.9%

47.5%

52.0%

38.3%

40%

45.0%

50%

38.2%

60%

35.6%

70%

58.0%

Figure 8. TA Teachers & Providers Reported Supports that Would Help Increase Preschool Attendance 2020-2023

Flexible Start Time

2023 (N=60)

According to the survey data, additional supports that teachers and Providers believe would help increase preschool attendance included “parent education about the benefits of preschool attendance” (56.7%), “resources for families with chronic health issues” (25.0%), “opportunities for parent-teacher-Provider engagement” (23.3%), “increased parental involvement in school” (20.0%), and “improved communication around health/safety policies at school” (15.0%).

During focus groups, TA teachers and Providers discussed ways that they could promote preschool attendance. The top three mentioned ways to encourage attendance included “providing transportation”, “regular communication”, and “incentives”. Some Providers suggested bus passes or transportation fare as a support. Others commented that they transported children themselves.

Regarding regular communication, one teacher shared information about the tools (e.g., ChildPlus) that their program has used to track attendance and engage with families. Teachers and Providers noted that relationship-building and communication were key elements of engagement in regard to attendance: 16

•

•

“We have a receptionist who touches base with [absent] families every single day. We have ChildPlus that we take our enrollment in, so we try to really stay on top of recording those absence reasons. If we don’t hear from them then we’re reaching out and making those phone calls, which I do think creates an impact.”

“You just have to be empathetic. And build that relationship so that they will be willing to tell you what’s going on. Because sometimes, I think that parents feel ashamed or don’t want people too much in their business. But if you build every relationship from day one and communicate with them on a daily basis, that relationship building will help you.”

It is worth noting that on the topic of incentives, although much of the focus group discussion was on the potential benefits, one Provider raised the concern that focusing on incentives too much could misplace the value of education away from the child and onto receiving the incentive: • “Definitely incentives. I have heard this before, depending on how many days they come to school, we can reward the parents with a gas card. Or just a little gift that makes them know that we do appreciate them for at least trying to get their kids to school every day.”

• “The bus card maybe, but I don’t want a parent to forget that their child’s education is first and foremost. And when you start giving incentives, they forget about the child and start working towards the incentive.”

Barriers to Accessing Preschool and CPP Funding General Barriers to Accessing Preschool Parents were asked, “What barriers have you faced when accessing preschool?” One in three (34.5%) said they have not personally faced any barriers to preschool access, an improvement of 7.8 percentage points from the prior year. For TA parents who have faced barriers, the inability to afford preschool has been the top trending barrier to preschool access since 2020 (Figure 9). Parents were also asked, “What barriers have you heard that other parents with preschool-aged children have faced when accessing preschool?” “Could not afford preschool” (41.4%) and “lack of transportation” (41.4%) were reported as the top two barriers followed by “lack of quality options” (37.9%). These results vary slightly from 2022 when a higher percentage of respondents said that other parents could not afford preschool (66.7%) or lacked trust in preschool (40.0%). The percentage of parents reporting safety-related actions as a way Providers can build parental trust in their preschool program increased in 2023. Parents reported “secure building” (65.5%), “opportunities for classroom observations” (62.1%), and “safety policies” (62.1%) as the top three ways that Providers can build parental trust in their preschool program (Figure 10). Parents also reported additional ways that Providers can gain their trust including “communication, background checks, photos of teachers and their qualifications, sending notes or videos daily, and supporting learning and therapy for children with special needs.”

0%

Lack of Quality Options

Could Not Afford Preschool

2020 (N=93) 17

Lack of Trust

Too Far From Home/Work

2021 (N=48)

12.0% 12.5% 20.0% 17.2%

16.0% 16.7% 26.7% 17.2%

6.0% 6.3% 0.0% 3.4%

10%

0.0% 10.3%

20%

13.0% 18.8%

30%

10.3%

40%

31.0% 31.3% 26.7%

50%

42.0% 35.4% 46.7% 24.1%

60%

29.0% 37.5% 26.7% 20.7%

Figure 9. TA Parent Barriers to Accessing Preschool 2020-2023

Lack of Prek Transportation Too Much Awareness Paperwork

2022 (N=15)

2023 (N=29)

Figure 10. Ways TA Providers Can Gain Parental Trust (N=29) Secure building

65.5% 62.1% 62.1% 58.6%

Classroom observation Safety policies Meet one-on-one with teacher/director Provide Culturally Sensitive Program

48.3% 48.3% 41.4% 41.4%

Provider has years of experience Meet families enrolled in the preschool Background checks

Parents were also asked about their thoughts regarding parents who do not enroll their child in preschool but send their child to kindergarten. They explained that transportation, cost, seat availability, limited full day options, and work schedules influence their ability to enroll their child in preschool. They offered the following suggestions for changing parents’ minds about preschool: • “… One issue is that a lot of parents or moms that I know say their kids don't get enough outdoor time at school. The teachers are complaining that they just won't ‘sit down somewhere and be still like the other children…’ They're actually supposed to be learning through movement, through music or through still activities, especially specifically outdoors. They get way too much screen time, oftentimes in these child care centers because the teachers and the centers are understaffed. The teachers are underpaid. The teachers may not be trained in Montessori or Waldorf, or whole child development or play based for school environmental principles… advocating for more policy that supports outdoor classrooms.”

• “Eliminating a lot of the barriers we mentioned like with transportation and extending the hours maybe reducing the cost, just stuff like that, that will probably motivate parents to enroll their kids in preschool because it is expensive.”

Barriers to Accessing CPP Funding – Parents Parents were asked, “What barriers have you faced in receiving preschool Tuition Assistance from CPP?” The majority of this group reported having experienced very few barriers. Some (41.4%) parents also reported that they have not experienced any barriers and 34.5% reported that this survey item did not apply to them. These trends suggest that CPP’s efforts to support families and Providers who are eligible for TA are contributing to improved access to CPP TA funding (Figure 11).

18

2022 (N=15)

26.0% 27.1% 13.3% 13.8%

2021 (N=48)

17.2%

2020 (N=93)

0.0%

Provider Location/ Distance

11.0% 18.8%

Too Much Paperwork

4.0%

Insufficient Support

Preferred Provider Not Accepting

0.0% 0.0%

0%

10.0% 16.7% 6.7% 6.9%

10%

8.0% 8.3% 13.3% 3.4%

20%

13.0% 16.7% 6.7% 3.4%

30%

18.8%

Figure 11. Barriers to Accessing CPP Funding Reported by TA Parents 2020-2023

Lack of Transportation

2023 (N=29)

Lack of Information

Barriers to Accessing CPP Funding – Teachers and Providers CPP has continued to offer essential services and programs to support teachers and Providers with professional development, continuing education, coaching, and wage supplements. The initiative continually seeks new resources and partnerships to expand the services and programs they offer to their Community Provider Network. In 2023, 18 respondents stated they have personally received the TPG while 10 said they have not and three said they’re unsure. The latter respondents shared that they have not received the TPG for a variety of reasons including being unaware of the grant, unsure of the requirements, lack of information, and waiting on application approval. In addition, one teacher stated that they do not have preschoolers enrolled who qualify for Preschool Promise reimbursements due to family income, family address, or the child’s age. Other challenges with accessing CPP funding and supports were complications with TPG applications, meeting the program’s requirements, and delays in receiving preschool equipment.

Satisfaction with CPP Interactions and Supports CPP Communication Nearly 83.0% (82.9%) of Providers and 45.8% of teachers were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their communication with CPP staff. Parents rated their satisfaction with the ways in which their Provider communicates with them regarding CPP and the majority expressed high levels of satisfaction as shown in Figure 12.

Figure 12. TA Parents Responding "Satisfied" or "Very Satisfied" with Providers' Communication about CPP (N=29) 100%

92.3%

85.7%

82.7%

84.6%

Email

Phone

Newsletter/Flyers

80% 60% 40% 20% 0%

In-Person

When asked to rate their satisfaction with their CPP experience, 96.5% of parents were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with Provider communication in general. The specific types of information that teachers and Providers reported sharing with parents are displayed in Figure 13. Parents reported that their preschool has shared the following information about CPP: • “I learned that the program extended to the summer before the kids go to kindergarten so they will have a very healthy send off to the next school. It's like just a transition to one learning environment with fresh and positive thinking ahead.”

• “Preparing for kindergarten.”

• “CPP has helped me pay for my daycare service. It also allows my Provider to purchase learning materials that I will receive for my child to work on at home.”

• “Contact information on who I can reach out to with questions. When the reenrollment is happening. What preschool promise can do for me and help with.”

• “The resources.”

• “Renewal dates.”

• “Just that you assist with tuition. That was the only thing that I was told in the fill out the application and wait to hear back. That was all I got.”

19

• •

• •

“No, [I haven’t heard of those services for families]. What about ABC mouse? Cause I like that app, but it's just expensive after a while.”

“They actually don't give as much information. I did find out about preschool promise through the preschool, and then they recently told me about the I think it's like the extended learning, something that they're going to pay for the summer program. So, they gave me a handout about that too.”

“I am not [familiar with CPP services/resources for families], but I definitely would like to get very familiar. I love my resources.”

“It would be nice to get emails from Preschool Promise with information about just what's going on and what they what they do have.”

Figure 13. TA Reported CPP-Related Information Shared with Parents (N=60) Ways Preschool Has Been Supported by CPP

61.7%

Ways Preschool Teachers Have Been Supported by CPP

56.7%

CPP-Supported Family Resources

53.3%

Parent Education Presentations Preschool Chats No CPP Information to Share

36.7% 21.7% 15.0%

Note. Missing and “not applicable” responses were excluded from analyses.

Parents offered the following feedback about ways their preschool can improve its communication with them: • “More updates about Preschool Promise.”

• “Speak on the program more. [Providers should] know more about it instead of redirecting us, even though they are able to do that much. Make sure parents are aware if all their options and colorful flyers not plain white.”

• “More communication about my children.”

• “Host once per month parent/admin meetings. One during business hours and one after business hours. Connect parents with resources, poll parents for field trip ideas, fundraising ideas, ways to connect with one another. I'd love to split the cost to pay for visits from the Cincinnati Zoo, Aquarium, other wildlife encounters, visits to the Freedom Center, libraries, etc. This is why I don't mind keeping my kid out of school once a week; she needs that worldly exposure/education just as much as the structured classroom time with peers/teachers.”

Parent Satisfaction with CPP Experience Nearly all TA parents were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their child’s “preschool” (93.1%) and “teacher” (96.6%). Parents (89.7%) also affirmed that their preschooler has a positive, supportive, and consistent relationship with their preschool teacher and Provider. The majority (93.1%) of parents reported receiving feedback on their child’s preschool assessments (e.g., TS GOLD, Redleaf, etc.) with 84.6% receiving feedback three or four or more times per year. All (100%) parents who received feedback said that they understood the feedback and how to help their child to continue learning at home.

20

Additionally, parent satisfaction with CPP in the areas of the “application process”, “preschool center options”, “tuition assistance”, and “Provider communication” continued to increase in 2023, particularly in the latter category (Figure 14). New areas of parent satisfaction were assessed on this year’s survey with high percentages of parents reporting satisfaction with “opportunities for parent education and training” (92.8%) and “opportunities to connect with other parents (e.g., Coffee and Conversations, CPP Parent Facebook Group)” (79.3%).

80%

96.5%

73.3%

90.7%

89.0%

93.1%

86.7%

90.7%

92.0%

96.6%

86.7%

92.1%

97.0%

92.8%

86.7%

92.7%

100%

89.0%

Figure 14. TA Parent Satisfaction with CPP Experience 2020-2023

60% 40% 20% 0%

Preschool Center Options 2020 (N=93)

Tuition Assistance 2021 (N=48)

Application Process 2022 (N=15)

Provider Communication 2023 (N=29)

Stakeholders also reported a variety of ways that their preschool engages parents in their child’s education at school (Figure 15). Focus group participants shared that they engage parents in school through parent nights, field trips, volunteer activities (e.g., reading a book to the class), holiday parties, ReadyRosie, activity packets, parent meetings during the school day, and sending pictures, videos, and updates via preschool management programs like Procare or Class Dojo. Multiple TA teachers and Providers shared that offering an incentive (e.g., pencil) to the children has helped parents get involved in their child’s learning at home and benefited the classroom. Nearly 17% of teachers and Providers reported that, on average, 76-100% of their parents regularly participate in parent education and engagement programs. In contrast, 38.3% and 30.0% of respondents reported that the parents in their preschool participate 1-25% and 26-50% of the time, respectively.

One TA Provider who participated in the focus group pointed out that “CPP offers a few opportunities for parents to do trainings. And some of the classes we take are beneficial for parents as well. We’ve been able to pass along that information to parents. And even when there are things going on in the community that parents can be involved in, CPP sends that information over to us and we put it on our board and our door for the parents so that they can see what’s going on within the community”. On the other hand, another TA Provider noted that although CPP does offer trainings and resources for parents, “… a lot of my parents don’t attend them or take advantage of any of the resources or things that they [CPP] have”.

21

Figure 15. TA Stakeholder Reported Parent Engagement in School Parent-teacher conferences or meetings

65.6%

Discuss school days/events

65.6%

School events (e.g., field trips, family nights)

51.7%

Newsletter

41.4%

Parent education activities

Volunteer opportunities TA Provider/Teacher (N=60)

70.0% 61.7% 70.0%

41.4%

Student progress reports

37.9% 27.6%

85.0%

68.3%

48.3%

Recommends at-home learning activities

90.0%

60.0% 63.3%

TA Parent (N=29)

The following comments describe resources and supports that teachers and Providers believe parents need to be more involved with their preschooler’s learning, as noted in the survey: • “I think parents need to have any a flyer or milestone chart resources and support when children are born at infancy sometimes parents wait till their children are1 and 3 years old to get them into a learning environment as sometimes it's too late.”

• “Most of our families are non-English speaking families. Our program does not have a Spanish speaking adult at this time, so this hinders the gap between school and families.”

• “Hands on activities to do at home, apps that keep them involved.”

• “Materials and education on what their child should be able to do as well as what their child may not be ready for.”

• “Tools that would enable parents to buy into their children’s academic and social emotional progress.”

• “My parents work during school hours. I'm sure many parents would be more involved if they were not working during this time.”

The survey also aimed to measure parents’ relationships with their teachers and Providers using items adapted from the Family and Provider/Teacher Relationship Quality (FPTRQ) – Parent Measure. “Not applicable” responses were excluded from analyses. Overall, responses to the FPTRQ items were favorable (Tables 7 and 8).

22

Table 7. Frequency of TA Family and Provider/Teacher Relationship Building Interactions Since September 2022 (N=29) Item Very Often Sometimes Rarely Never Met individually with your child’s Provider/teacher 71.4% 17.9% 10.7% 0.0% Talked to your Provider/teacher about goals you 72.4% 20.7% 6.9% 0.0% have for your child Talked to your Provider/teacher about what to 69.0% 20.7% 10.3% 0.0% expect at each stage of your child’s development Talked to your Provider or teacher about how you feel about the care and education your child 72.4% 20.7% 3.4% 3.4% receives Participated in a parent activity at your child’s 69.0% 20.7% 6.9% 3.4% preschool Helped at your child’s preschool 50.0% 23.1% 19.2% 7.7% Table 8. TA Parent Reported Frequency of Provider/Teacher Doing Relationship Building and Learning Actions (N=29) Item Very Often Sometimes Rarely Never Ask you about your cultural values and beliefs 42.9% 32.1% 10.7% 14.3% Ask questions to show they care about my family 79.3% 10.3% 10.3% 0.0% Talk to you about your child’s safety at school 69.0% 17.2% 10.3% 3.4% Ask if you feel that your child is being challenged 57.1% 21.4% 7.1% 14.3% at school Ask questions about at home learning activities 55.2% 24.1% 13.8% 6.9% Offer books or materials on child development 58.6% 24.1% 3.4% 13.8% Offer ideas for practicing literacy learning at 72.4% 10.3% 13.8% 3.4% home Offer ideas for practicing math learning at home 62.1% 20.7% 6.9% 10.3% Offer ideas for practicing social-emotional 60.7% 25.0% 7.1% 7.1% learning at home

Teacher and Provider Satisfaction with CPP Experience Figure 16 shows trends in TA teachers’ and Providers’ satisfaction over the past four years. “Professional development” was the highest rated area among teachers and Providers in 2023. Figure 17 displays the professional development sessions rated most beneficial to respondents and their preschools. TA teachers and Providers said the following about what influences their decision to take professional development classes: • “For me, it’s just to make myself and my program better. I’m always open to learning new things.”

• “Topics and continuing education, wanting to get more quality trainings. I’m always wanting to learn new things.”

• “Anything (related to) grant writing. They need to do more of that.”

• “Foundational education and training classes around the structure of running a small business and what all that entails, and business plans. That was something that caught my attention. I thought that it was really good.”

Additional data collected about satisfaction revealed that satisfaction with “SUTQ support” and “staff incentives” declined this year, however, other survey data and anecdotal evidence suggests that uncertainty and concerns around state-level changes to SUTQ requirements and significant challenges with recruiting and maintaining qualified staff likely influenced the lower ratings. As CPP continues to 23

enhance and expand their supports and partnerships to respond to the needs of their stakeholders, teachers and Providers expressed that CPP’s current supports are valuable and beneficial in the following ways: • “CPP covers beneficial trainings, coaching, and provides teacher incentives that adds value to my program and the children and families I serve. My communication has been great with the CPP staff.”

• “The amount of paperwork that is required for SUTQ can be overwhelming at times. The coaching support helps tremendously as the rules are always changing the guidelines to follow and requirements. The teacher incentives are extremely important as many teachers will probably be looking for employment elsewhere.”

• “The TA is integral to our ability to serve our population. This is the most beneficial part of the CPP partnership. We also have loved participating in the music and enrichment opportunities created through the partnership.”

• “They lessen stress and give ideas for improvement.”

• “Provide opportunities for further development and improvement for me and the families I serve.”

• “They help provide everything you need to be successful.”

Figure 16. TA Teachers and Providers Responding "Very Satisfied" or "Satisfied" with CPP Supports 2020-2023 100% 80% 60%

89.7% 78.2% 64.0%

70.2%

78.1%

84.4%

78.1%

79.6%

69.6% 55.1%

53.0%54.0%

40% 20% 0%

2020 (N=48)

2021 (N=59)

Professional Development

2022 (N=34) SUTQ Support

2023 (N=60)

Staff Incentives

Figure 17. TA Rated Most Beneficial Professional Development Sessions (N=60) Students with Disabilities Indicators of Kindergarten Readiness Parent Engagement/Learning at Home Parent Engagement at School Social-Emotional Learning OCCRA Business Classes Assessment Administration/Interpretation Classroom Management Whole Child/Early Learning Standards Child Development Student-Teacher Interaction

24

51.7% 48.3% 46.7% 45.0% 41.7% 35.0% 30.0% 30.0% 28.3% 25.0% 23.3%

When asked about additional supports or opportunities that would be helpful, some TA teacher and Provider survey respondents said “nothing” or “no complaints” while others said: • “Providing funding for extended learning in regard to higher education would be a benefit.

Dayton provides funding for master’s degree Programs that would be an excellent resource for Family Child Care Providers and Educators.”

• “Help with finding qualified staff.”

• “Financial assistance with providing health insurance or 401(k) for child care employees and increasing salaries.”

• “Professional development in the way of providing CDA's for CPP providers that way they are able to retain SUTQ and therefore maintain tuition assistance. Developing the staff to meet the requirements is vital if we are to be able to meet this standard with current available funds.”

Teachers and Providers also commented on the benefits of being part of the CPP Provider Network.

Participants of the Peanut Butter and Jam Musical Journeys Program reported that they enjoyed being part of the program. A sample of other comments made about the benefits of CPP are as follows: • “They held our hand through the quality improvement process and with SUTQ. They helped us get our five stars. They made the process so understandable and manageable. [They] gave us really good systems.”

• “I like the different cohorts they have like business education. I like the memberships that we have with the African American Chamber. Because that was very beneficial for me because that offers a plethora of resources once you get tapped in there.

• “I’m happy about it. Through that membership, my business became minority certified, I became women enterprise certified and certified through the State of Ohio. So that was a major benefit and that was all through CPP because I got that membership. And I tapped into those resources.”

Child Development, Kindergarten Readiness, and Special Education New to the 2023 evaluation, INNOVATIONS inquired about parents’, teachers’, and Providers’ awareness of child development and kindergarten readiness as well as their perspectives and experiences with children with special needs. In the survey, kindergarten readiness was described as “things a child should know and be able to do when they start kindergarten. These skills and abilities are related to different areas of child development including health and physical skills, motor skills, social and emotional development, language skills, approaches to learning, and general knowledge”. 2 Survey respondents were asked to keep in mind the Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute’s definition of special needs when answering related survey items. The definition is as follows: “the individualized care that a person with a disability – whether physical, mental, behavioral, emotional, or learning difficulties – requires to ensure safety, access to public amenities, or ability to succeed in certain contexts”. 3 Note, survey questions were adapted from a variety of early childhood education sources. 4,5,6,7,8,9

2 First Things First. (2023). Kindergarten readiness. https://www.firstthingsfirst.org/resources/kindergarten-readiness/ 3 Cornell Law School (2021). Special needs. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/special_needs

4 U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics (2023). ECLS-B

Preschool National Study: Early Care and Education Provider (ECEP) Interview. https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/birthinstruments.asp 5 U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics (2023). ECLS-B Preschool Parent Interview. https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/birthinstruments.asp.

6 Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) (2021). School-Based Staff Survey on Schoolwide SEL Implementation. https://schoolguide.casel.org/resource/tool-staff-family-and-community-partner-survey-on-selimplementation/.

7 Panorama Education (2023). Panorama Social-Emotional Learning Survey: Topics and Questions for Students, Teachers and Staff. https://www.panoramaed.com/.

8 Panorama Education (2023). Panorama Family-School Relationships Survey. https://www.panoramaed.com/.

9 Ohio Department of Education (2023). Ohio’s Whole Child Framework: A Collaborative Approach to Learning and Wellness. https://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Student-Supports/Ohios-Whole-Child-Framework.

25

Child Development and Kindergarten Readiness All (100%) TA parents rated their level of awareness about what it means for a child to be ready for kindergarten as “very aware” or “aware”. However, when focus group participants were asked about the ways that teachers assess their child’s progress in preschool and readiness for kindergarten, feedback indicated that some parents know that their child completes a progress assessment, but they did not discuss specific skills and knowledge that a kindergarten ready child should possess. Most parents referenced meetings with their child’s teacher and verbal updates about what and how well their child is doing in school as the way their child’s progress is assessed. All (100%) TA parents “strongly agreed” or “agreed” with the following statements: 1) as a parent/caregiver, I believe that I’m an important teacher in helping my child be ready for kindergarten, 2) it’s important to find activities and at-home opportunities for my child to practice information learned at school, and 3) I believe that social-emotional skills development in the first five years of a child’s life are necessary for learning and contribute to school readiness. Many (62.1%) also said, “yes” to being aware of the research-supported connections between social-emotional learning and long-term benefits for students while 27.6% reported they were “somewhat” aware. Table 9 shows how often TA parents reported doing activities at home that promote child development and learning. Parents shared the following challenges with continuing school-day learning at home: • “More resources for children with developmental delays.”

• “I work full time, and my hours have extended because of worker shortages.”

• “Challenges I will face is getting the other parent, aunt and grandparent on board how I am.”

• “Time and the energy to do it are my biggest challenges. I'm the only parent, I have two small children and little support.”

Table 9. TA Parent Reported Frequency of At-Home Learning and Development in the Past Month (N=29) More About A few A few than once times times Item once per per per per day day week month Play together with toys for building things (e.g., blocks, 51.7% 27.6% 17.2% 3.4% tinker toys, Legos, Lincoln Logs) Take child outside for a walk or to play in the yard, pard, or 58.6% 17.2% 13.8% 10.3% playground Read with your child 58.6% 27.6% 13.8% 0.0% Teach child about emotions and managing them 79.3% 13.8% 6.9% 0.0% Ask child questions about what they’re learning in 79.3% 17.2% 3.4% 0.0% preschool Help child dress themselves* 55.2% 20.7% 17.2% 0.0% Help child brush their teeth** 69.0% 17.2% 3.4% 0.0% Help child to bed 72.4% 24.1% 3.4% 0.0%

Note. * Two (6.8%) respondents reported “rarely” or “not at all”. ** Three (10.3%) respondents reported “rarely”.

Survey items were adapted from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Studies (ECLS) Program (2023), survey instrument “ECLS-B Preschool National Study: Early Care and Education Provider (ECEP) Interview” and the “ECLS-B Preschool Parent Interview,” https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/birthinstruments.asp.

26

In the past year, 86.2% of TA parents received “frequent” or “somewhat frequent” information about kindergarten readiness from their child’s preschool. While enrolled in preschool, teachers and Providers make special efforts to make the transition into kindergarten less difficult for their students (Figures 18, 19, and 20). When asked where students are enrolling in kindergarten, 11 respondents reported CPS. Twenty-two respondents said that their students will enroll in either a charter, private, or faith-based school or another school district such as Northwest Local School District. Twenty-seven respondents were unsure or didn’t list where their students will enroll into kindergarten.

Figure 18. Provide Information about Kindergarten to Parents (n=54) 13.0%

Figure 19. Support Visits to Kindergarten Before Enrollment in Kindergarten (n=53)

Figure 20. Invite Kindergarten Teachers to Visit Preschool and Talk with Parents (n=46)

13.2%

45.7%

54.3%

86.8%

87.0% Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

Note. ”Unsure” and “not applicable” responses were excluded from analyses. Survey items were adapted from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Studies (ECLS) Program (2023), survey instrument “ECLS-B Preschool National Study: Early Care and Education Provider (ECEP) Interview” and the “ECLS-B Preschool Parent Interview,” https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/birthinstruments.asp.

Social-Emotional Learning The development of strong social-emotional skills is highly important in early life, helping preschool children build relationships, understand, manage and express their emotions, and communicate their needs, all of which are also essential to learning and long-term success in school and life. The majority (89.7%) of teacher and Provider survey respondents “agreed” or “strongly agreed” with the statement, “I believe that social and emotional skills development in the first five years of a child’s life are necessary for learning and contribute to school readiness”. Thirty-seven (67.3%) respondents reported that they integrate social-emotional learning (SEL) into academic lesson plans and in the classroom “always or daily”. The top three rated SEL practices according to survey respondents included “program activities,” “teacher led strategies” and “classroom environment”. “Program activities” were defined as dependent or group-based activities designed to encourage students to directly or indirectly learn SEL skills. Survey respondents shared that their SEL program activities included story time, dramatic play, daily circle time, field trips/outings, open discussions about emotions and frustrations, breathing techniques and role play/puppets. “Teacher led strategies” included modeling appropriate behaviors, validating and respecting a child’s feelings, and “supporting them with the words to identify how they are”. “Classroom environment” involved the materials and spaces in the classroom that promote SEL learning. Many TA teachers shared that educational books and videos were an important part of SEL and the classroom environment. Interactive charts and feelings charts were also mentioned. Child-led activities and parent involvement were two other SEL strategies used by teachers and Providers.

27

To better understand social-emotional learning in the classroom, teachers and Providers were asked to rate how well they perform on a gamut of related actions and activities (Figure 21). While the majority of respondents rated their preschool as “well” or “very well”, the top three areas rated as “acceptable” or “very poor”, and where additional training and resources may be helpful, included “assessing for issues such as abuse, neglect, and bullying”, “assessing how cultural background, home environment, and family dynamics impact learning and development”, and “assessing if all students are being challenged academically and socially in the classroom”. When asked to rate their level of agreement with the statement, “I have the necessary support/resources to effectively teach social-emotional skills in the classroom”, 84.2% of respondents “agreed” or “strongly agreed”. When asked about what SEL supports they needed, teacher and Provider survey respondents said that “training and coaching” and “classroom materials” were what they needed the most. One survey respondent commented on the need for “resources to add to the program that supports their [the child’s] social-emotional skills, such as persona dolls, weighted vests, various fidgets, etc.” Another said, “Having a coach who could give us strategies after observing and working alongside us in the room.”

Figure 21. TA Teachers and Providers Rated How Well Their Preschool Does Social-Emotional Learning Activities (N=60) Assess how cultural background, home environment, and family dynamics impact learning and development

33.9%

51.8%

14.3%

Assess if all students are being challenged academically and socially in the classroom

36.4%

50.9%

10.9% 1.8%

Ask students questions about their decisions to strengthen critical thinking and problem-solving skills development

45.5%

43.6%

10.9%

Assess all students understanding and engagement with what youre teaching

46.4%

44.6%

8.9%

Assess for issues such as abuse, neglect, and bullying

49.1%

36.4%

14.5%

53.6%

7.1%

Teach coping skills, emotion management, and conflict resolution

39.3%

Tailor activities so that all students can apply learning according to their individual abilities and strengths

43.9%

50.9%

5.3%

Practice social-emotional learning along with academic lessons

45.6%

49.1%

5.3%

Tailor activities to meet all students basic social-emotional health needs

45.5%

47.3%

7.3%

Tailor activities to meet all students basic physical health needs

49.1%

45.6%

5.3%

Very Well

Well

Acceptable

Poor

Very Poor

Note. Survey items adapted from early education standards and competencies of Ohio Department of Education’s Whole Child Framework and Ohio’s Professional Development Network.

Special Education Some (20.7%) TA parents shared that their child has special needs and requires special education services and support. Most (79.3%) responded “no” or “prefer not to answer” to this survey item. Four TA parents reported that “speech/language screening” services are relevant to their child’s special needs. Three TA parents reported that “developmental screenings” and “assessments of social skills or behavior programs” are pertinent for their child’s special needs. Four (66.7%) parents with children with special needs “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that the services available through their child’s preschool meet some of their needs, but they do not meet the needs of their whole family. In comparison, nine 28

(42.9%) parents who did not report having a child with special needs responded in the same way.

These findings suggest that all families may benefit from additional support to meet their unique needs.

Teachers and Providers were also asked about students with special needs and 38.3% reported “yes” they have special needs students in their preschool. Moreover, 15.0% were “unsure”. Respondents who selected “yes” described the training and resources they possess to support students with special needs as receiving support from the parent and external therapy resources, completing trainings through 4C and OCCRA, partnering with local school districts, and utilizing Beech Acres’ The Character Effect™ program which is provided through CPP Plus. Comments indicated that heavy parent involvement is critical for children with special needs to receive the services they need to thrive. Other comments expressed concern about not having the appropriate training and skills and needing more training around autism, behavior management, trauma, fetal alcohol syndrome, and using medical or adaptive equipment (e.g., feeding tubes, sensory supplies). Forty-four (74.6%) teachers and Providers reported that they know how and where to submit a referral to a service provider or coordinator (e.g., Help Me Grow, Cincinnati Public Schools) if they or a parent suspects a student has special needs. To serve students with special needs, teachers and Providers also voiced need for the following: • “A liaison between various wrap around service agencies.”

• “CPS or the child’s school district.”

• “For professionals to come in to provide a training for our parents. Online help.”

• “I don't have any at this moment, but I would say if you do have a child with special needs, sometimes you need special equipment to be able to help that child so it would be equipment.”

• “More resources for parents.”

Additional evaluation is needed to understand if referrals are successful and relevant services are received and effective.

Provider Perspectives on Statewide SUTQ Changes Over the past year, the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS) has implemented changes to Ohio’s SUTQ program to assist Providers participating in SUTQ with maintaining their star rating and reducing the amount of associated paperwork, among others. The State Board of Education also adopted Ohio’s revised Early Learning and Development Standards for school readiness, which Providers are required to follow. Providers made the following comments about the impact of these changes on their preschools: • “I like having it as a guideline to adequately put those standards into place. I think sometimes it can be overwhelming to try to meet all of them [standards] as we are asked to and even possibly expect it to because you’re looking at a whole lot of different paperwork. But for me, I want to look at the child. I want to be able to meet the standards, but I need to look at the child as a whole. So yeah, the paperwork itself can be something that we refer to, but it can also be something that’s overwhelming.”

• “I think the Ohio early learning standards guide us to know what to teach the children. We switch out our areas monthly with a new theme.”

• “I wouldn’t say that our definition of quality has changed. A lot of the stuff that you’d have to do for Step Up is a lot of jumping through hoops and you may be able to do that and still not have quality. So being able to say you have a standard of quality that is independent of State rules or regulations is really important to us. That we have certain standards of quality that we’re committed to maintaining regardless of any changes in rules or paperwork.”

• “As a home Provider, before we had standards years ago (I’ve been doing this for 30 years), I was doing everything they were saying regardless of whether I put it on a piece of paper and submitted it or not. So just making sure that there is a balance of what is needed is important to me to make sure that nobody is feeling overwhelmed, because the teacher whose feeling overwhelmed is a teacher who is going to spill over into the quality of care she has for that classroom and students.”

• “Ours hasn’t changed very much and there are a lot of things that we use to define a quality environment.”

29

• •

“We’ve already been quality because a lot of us have given so much of our income and expenses and resources to run a well, purposeful business.”

“To answer your question about what is quality, I think the state defines that for us because like everybody has said about the rule changes and all that stuff, even though we were already doing quality things and we were already quality programs, the State really defines what that looks like for us when they make the changes to all of the different things.”

Cost of Quality Local, state, and national reports show that personnel costs, staff structure, student-to-teacher ratios, facility costs, and program offerings increase the cost of high-quality preschool programs. Workforce compensation and benefit costs are the greatest drivers of increased cost. To better understand the early childhood education systems issues that impact TA Providers’ cost of operating a high-quality preschool, TA Provider focus group participants were asked to reflect on factors that impacted their ability to operate a sustainable and high-quality program. The top four rated program elements (both financial and non-financial) that Providers commented on included “more funding” for compensation and other costs, “pay and benefits” for livable wages and insurance, “staff recruitment and retention” involving credentials, education, and job security, and lastly, “support and collaboration” with CPP and the Provider Network. Select quotes from these categories included: • “I think with quality, you can’t dissociate funding from quality or money. They go hand in hand, so we need more money in order to be quality.”

• “Finding staff is hard. It’s really difficult trying to keep people from going to a different profession or going somewhere else because the pay is more, and they offer benefits. I can’t offer benefits.

I pay for my own health insurance out of my pocket. Those are the things that I would like to be able to do – to offer health, dental and retirement. This is a good job. It is a profession. It is our livelihood.”

• “I think that is one thing CPP could do. Just put us together to not only support and have a safe space, but also to network because there may be something or some resources we can share.”

In the past year, 25.0% of TA Providers reported that they increased tuition and fees and, looking ahead, 38.9% of Providers reported that they plan to increase tuition and fees within the next year to help with increasing costs.

Current budget constraints and the inability to pay competitive wages have led to staff shortages and qualified teachers leaving early education. Ten (27.8%) TA Provider survey respondents reported that they have had to limit enrollment or close classrooms due to staffing challenges. Providers explained how their enrollment has been impacted by staffing challenges in the following quotes: • “We would like to expand the preschool and add a school age group.”

• “We lost over half of our enrollment.”

• “We can’t operate at full capacity until the proper staffing is obtained.”

• “Staffing challenges have resulted in less enrollment because we have to maintain 5-star ratio.”

• “Not accepting new families.”

• “Limited slots available due to the staffing shortage.”

• “I lost an employee because there wasn’t enough coming into support keeping her. That is the reason I had to reduce enrollment.”

30

•

“I have a waiting list, but I can’t open additional classrooms due to budget constraints of hiring more qualified Lead teachers.”

Impact of COVID-19 Temporary relief funding through local and state funded grants were made available again this year to assist Providers with operating costs, staff recruitment, and retention due to ongoing issues associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. The majority (32, 88.9%) of TA Providers applied for grant funds with 100% reporting that the grant funds supplemented the funds they receive from CPP. The grants provided critical funding for recruiting and retaining qualified staff, improving preschool facilities, purchasing classroom materials and technology, and more. Providers voiced immense concern when asked, “When temporary relief funding ends, how will your preschool be impacted?” They said: • “We will be struggling to replace the funds to maintain the raises that were given. Also, we will not be able to have new classrooms to serve more children or offer competitive pay rates for qualified teachers with associate degrees or CDA as well business expenses and cost of living increases, rent, gas, classroom materials.”

• “We will be greatly impacted. We lost over half of our enrollment but are slowly enrolling children.”

• “We will get a pay cut. This will ensure that we can stay open and maintain enrollment. We will not be able to hire any additional staff or buy equipment or do maintenance.”

• “When the relief funding ends, we will be seeking additional foundation dollars to supplement state vouchers and CPP Tuition Assistance. Our budget is not sustained at all by private pay dollars as 100% of our students qualify for assistance. Temporary relief funding allows us to meet our budget. When it ends, we will likely need to make cuts that will impact the quality of care.”

• “We won’t be able to buy more equipment or educational learning tools for our children and the wages of the teachers will decrease.”

Looking forward, only 69.4% of TA Providers were “completely confident” that their preschool will still be open within six months or at the start of the 2023-24 school year. Five (13.9%) were “fairly confident”, two (5.6%) were “somewhat confident”, and four (11.1%) “preferred not to answer”. The Providers who were not completely confident that they would remain open had concerns about low enrollment, inflation, increased business expenses, and paying higher wages to qualified staff. The greatest concern for the upcoming year among all TA Providers was “staff shortages” (27.8%) followed by “Publicly Funded Child Care (PFCC) amounts” (13.9%) and “lack of new enrollment” (13.9%).

Furthermore, nearly half (48.8%) of preschools reported that they are still affected by the pandemic, experiencing lower enrollment, staffing challenges, and behavioral issues. Respondents offered the following comments on this topic: • “We have a definite uptick in highly disruptive and social-emotional related behavior. Providing more information on to support at risk families, or bringing in more therapeutic supports could be beneficial.”

• “We had 130 children before the pandemic and now we have 60. Finding qualified staff is a priority.”

• “The social-emotional skills of the ‘pandemic babies’ are low in comparison to my previous experience. I have many more children that cannot self-regulate without guidance.”

• “It has affected our staff as of recently which makes it difficult to have proper classroom coverage. We have not had any cases in children as of recently.”

• “Covid-19 is still relevant. Continued support with PPE equipment such as sanitizers, gloves, disinfectant is always welcomed and appreciated.”

• “Covid is still affecting our center. There are many parents who do not want to volunteer or attend parent engagement activities where there might be any type of crowding in fear of Covid and other illnesses.”

• “Children may miss more days than usual.”

31

Additional Feedback for CPP Feedback indicated that TA stakeholders have had an overall positive experience with CPP, and they feel that CPP’s supports and programs have been highly beneficial to families, teachers, and Providers.

The percentage of teachers and Providers who view CPP as a partner increased to 84.7% in 2023.

Although many respondents said they were satisfied or had no suggestions about ways that CPP could be a better partner, other respondents suggested that CPP could offer additional classroom materials, advertise more, facilitate monthly Provider/Director meetings, and support preschools with staffing challenges. Select quotes reflecting teachers’ and Providers’ satisfaction with CPP are listed below: • “Nothing at this time. They are excellent at providing us with materials. CPP is a wonderful program. I would recommend a family to contact them for support.”

• “At this present time, I just hope that they can continue what they’re doing. You’re doing a great job offering tuition assistance, offering free training, and offering resources to Providers and parents. I just hope that can continue.”

• “We really appreciate the professionalism and the swift responses to any questions that we have in the funding for equipment.”

• “Preschool Promise sends our children backpacks with materials to help them to be able to keep up with activities at home with parents. Preschool Promise supports us with many different types of books and programs to help children and teachers increase their social-emotional literacy and skills. Without the financial assistance and tuition assistance from Preschool Promise, my small business would probably be closed.”

• “I have received great support and am very happy to refer the program to others.”

• “I feel that CPP is a blessing to my program. CPP has provided many resources, coaching opportunities, training, and funding through the TA Program to enhance the quality of my program. This is a direct benefit to the children and families in which we serve.”

32

QUALITY IMPROVEMENT STAKEHOLDERS – EVALUATION AND RESULTS INNOVATIONS engaged stakeholders from preschools that participate in CPP’s SUTQ program. These QI preschools have received a one- or two-star rating or are unrated on Ohio’s SUTQ child care quality rating and improvement system. By participating in CPP’s SUTQ program, QI Providers receive tangible support and extended coaching from CPP and its partners to improve their quality and program standards. Specifically, Providers typically receive four to eight hours of coaching through 4C for Children, but as Providers in the CPP Community Provider Network, they receive extended coaching hours and continue receiving coaching after they become high-quality (three-, four-, or five-star) star rated. Supports to improve the preschools’ quality rating help Providers to become high-quality rated and thus, eligible to enroll preschoolers who receive CPP TA funding. QI Providers in the CPP Community Provider Network enroll hundreds of preschoolers in their programs, making it crucial to understand their viewpoints, experiences, and needs with regards to early childhood education and CPP. Given CPP’s vision is to make equitable, high-quality preschool accessible to all children, QI Providers partnering with CPP to improve their quality rating is critical to realizing this vision.

During the spring of 2023, a variety of outreach efforts took place to invite and encourage QI stakeholders to participate in focus groups and surveys. Small focus groups and interviews were held with one parent, four teachers, and 13 Providers. The one parent who participated in an interview also reported being a QI teacher, which is important to note when considering their feedback. Surveys were completed by four parents, five teachers, and 18 Providers. Results from the focus groups and surveys are summarized below. Missing data were excluded from calculations. Findings should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size.

Almost all (95.5%) QI participants were Black/African American. Additional parent demographics were excluded to protect participant confidentiality. Of the 23 QI teacher and Provider respondents, 78.3% identified as their preschool’s “Provider/Director”, with 47.8% also identifying as the “Lead preschool teacher” and 4.3% identifying as an “assistant preschool teacher”. The majority (95.7%) also reported “working full-time”. Fourteen (60.9%) reported that they have worked at their current preschool for “five or more years”. Nine (39.1%) reported that they have completed “some college” and 11 (47.8%) have completed either an “associate degree,” “bachelor’s degree,” or “master’s degree” (Table 10). Over half (52.2%) of the QI teachers and Providers were from “Single Site Centers” and 11 (47.8%) were “Type A” or “Type B Family Child Care Providers”.

Table 10. QI Teacher and Provider Demographics (N=23)* Survey Item

Response

Years as a Preschool Provider or Teacher

Years at Current Preschool

33

Count

Percentage

Less than 1 year

1

4.3%

1-2 years

3

13.0%

3-4 years

2

8.7%

5-10 years

4

17.4%

10+ years

13

56.5%

Less than 1 year

2

8.7%

1-3 years

5

21.7%

3-5 years

2

8.7%

5-10 years

4

17.4%

10+ years

10

43.5%

Race Gender Education Level

Early Childhood Certifications

Employment Status Role at Your Preschool

Professional memberships

Black/African American

22

95.7%

Do not wish to report

1

4.3%

Female

22

95.7%

Prefer not to answer

1

4.3%

High School/GED

3

13.0%

Some College

9

39.1%

Associate Degree

4

17.4%

Bachelor’s Degree

4

17.4%

Master’s Degree

3

13.0%

CDA

12

52.2%

CPL

15

65.2%

None

1

4.3%

Working Full-Time

22

95.7%

Working Part-Time

1

4.3%

Provider/Director

18

78.3%

Lead Preschool Teacher

11

47.8%

Assistant Preschool

1

4.3%

Other

1

4.3%

OAEYC

4

17.4%

NAEYC

2

9.0%

None

17

73.9%

Incomplete responses and/or missing data were excluded. *Data interpretation and generalizability are limited given the small sample size.

Perspectives on Preschool Enrollment, Quality, and Attendance Preschool Enrollment To better understand how preschool enrollment decisions are made, QI parents were surveyed about their child’s enrollment including reasons for their child’s enrollment in previous infant and toddler care and their current preschool choice. The four QI parent respondents selected multiple places that their child received infant/toddler care on a regular basis with “relative care” being top place, followed by “center-based care”, “non-relative Provider”, and “parental care”. Common reasons for choosing those types of infant and toddler care were “fits my child’s needs”, “I need to work”, and “trust in the Provider”.

When asked about the length of time enrolled in their current preschool, most parents said that their child has been enrolled for more than six months. Many of the parents also said that their children have only attended “one” preschool Provider. Parent survey respondents indicated that “preparing their child for kindergarten” and “providing a safe and nurturing environment for their child” were reasons for enrolling their child at their current preschool.

34

During focus groups, QI teachers and Providers were asked what they had heard from families about why they decided to enroll in a community-based or family child care program over other programs.

The most common response was that they provide more attention given the smaller groups of children.

Program hours (e.g., offer full time, part time, and early or late hours), preparing children for kindergarten and school, and transportation (e.g., program provides or easy access to bus line) were also common responses.

Provider Recruitment and Enrollment Supports QI teachers and Providers were asked about the number of 3–4-year-olds who have enrolled and attended their preschool since August 2022. License capacity varies by Provider type, with some Providers enrolling more preschoolers than others. Seven respondents enrolled between one and three total preschoolers while nine enrolled between seven and 20 total preschoolers. One Provider had no preschoolers enrolled in the past year and six did not provide a response. Of the 17 teachers and Providers who offered a response, 70.6% reported having between two and 17 vacant seats available for preschoolers.

QI Providers discussed challenges that families faced in accessing or enrolling in preschool during the focus groups, which included finding programs with available seats and compatible hours. QI teachers and Providers were asked to describe ways that CPP could help preschools with enrolling new students in their preschool.

Survey respondents suggested advertising and marketing, hosting enrollment events, assistance with finding staff, helping with transportation, and sharing information about the importance of early learning.

Preschool Quality The QI parent respondents agreed that quality preschool involves their child being taught in a safe environment, learning social and motor skills, and being prepared for kindergarten. They also indicated that highly educated teachers are important. The interviewed parent echoed these findings by indicating that a quality program should include: “basic knowledge as far as being able to identify and spell his name and at the same time, identify basic shapes and numbers and letters.” When asked, “What does quality preschool mean to you?”, this parent replied, “The level of education that each teacher may have. The food, the curriculum or whatever they use to teach…that’s what quality is.”

The QI parent suggested that preschool Providers share information and resources on social media to increase parent awareness of the benefits of enrolling their children in high-quality preschool.

QI teacher and Provider focus group participants also commented on quality in their classrooms and factors that impact a program’s ability to operate a sustainable and quality program. One indicator of quality that was commonly mentioned was “curriculum”, which encompassed meeting the developmental and learning needs of different aged children and classroom activities being incorporated at home to encourage learning. Another indicator frequently mentioned was “program environment”, or the physical and emotional characteristics of the program and classroom.

35

Preschool Attendance and Related Barriers Most of the QI parent survey respondents reported being aware that preschoolers who attend preschool every day are more likely to be ready for success in kindergarten and beyond. Many of them “strongly agreed” that missing two days of preschool per month can negatively impact their child’s learning and social-emotional development. However, COVID-19 continued to impact their child’s attendance this year.

QI teachers and Providers identified barriers to daily preschool attendance, including “lack of transportation to preschool” (34.8%), “work schedule” (30.4%), “stays home with family” (26.1%), and “family challenges/shared parenting” (26.1%). “Time of year” was also identified as a barrier to daily preschool attendance in the QI teacher and Provider focus groups. For example, one QI teacher stated: “…during the winter months there’s low attendance due to illness. But then sometimes in the summer, if the kids have older siblings, then sometimes they don’t come because older siblings are on summer break, so they’re staying home.”

Preschool data has shown that attendance declines during the winter and holiday seasons. QI parents were asked to comment on the reasons their child might miss preschool during this time. The top three reasons included “chronic illness/hospitalization”, “inclement weather”, and “seasonal illness”. These QI parents described their child’s absences during this time as “somewhat avoidable” and “not at all avoidable”.

Variation in regular attendance can also be a result of students unenrolling or not completing the whole year at their preschool. Half (52.2%) of surveyed QI teachers and Providers indicated that they have had students unenroll or not complete the whole year. “Change of work schedule”, “stays home with family”, and “no longer qualified for voucher” were the most common reasons for disenrollment or dropping out (Figure 22). However, focus group participants had different responses when asked about reasons that parents withdraw or stop sending their child to preschool. Like common reasons endorsed in the QI teacher and Provider survey, QI teachers mentioned “transportation” and “family move/relocation” as reasons. Uniquely, QI Providers discussed “time of year”, specifically school breaks, as a reason that parents may withdraw or stop sending their child to preschool. One QI Provider mentioned, “Spring break for us was low. Summertime can be hit and miss like that,” and another Provider shared, “…sometimes what they’re doing around Christmas break or spring break.”

Figure 22. QI Teacher/Provider Reported Reasons for Unenrollment/Withdrawal (N=23) Change of work schedule

26.1%

Stays home with family

26.1%

No longer qualified for voucher

26.1%

Lack of transportation

21.7%

Moved

21.7%

Parent disagreement with school procedures

13.0%

Childcare needs of other children/siblings

13.0%

Cannot afford tuition

13.0%

Preschooler academic or social challenges

36

8.7%

Not applicable

4.3%

Other

4.3%

Special needs

0.0%

Health related issues

0.0%

Preschool Attendance Supports Many (65.2%) QI teachers and Providers reported that their preschools are taking steps to improve attendance, including increasing awareness of the importance of attendance, consistently communicating with families, and finding help with transportation. Parents also echoed these efforts being made by their Providers. Teachers, and Providers also identified supports to address barriers and help increase preschool attendance (Figure 23). Like survey respondents, QI teacher and Provider focus group participants mentioned “providing transportation” as a potential support. For example, one QI Provider stated, “They have a problem with transportation. They always ask, “Do you transport?

And I have to say, unfortunately, not at this time. And then they continue to look elsewhere.” Uniquely, these QI teachers and Providers also suggested “resource support”, such as providing and/or connecting families to supports for mental health, medical care, food, housing, utilities, laundry, or child care vouchers. One QI Provider shared, “We do a family resource day monthly where we have a diaper giveaway that always seems to help… So every third Friday my attendance is at 100% most of the time.

Even though preschoolers are mostly potty trained, they have younger siblings enrolled and parents make sure they come and bring everybody, so they don’t miss those diapers.”

Figure 23. QI Teacher and Provider Reported Supports to Help Increase Attendance (N=23) Transportation

65.2%

Parent education about the benefits of preschool

43.5%

Financial incentive for daily attendance

43.5%

Opportunities for parent-teacher-provider engagement

26.1%

Improved communication around health/safety policies

26.1%

Flexible start time Increased parental involvement at school

21.7% 17.4%

Unsure

13.0%

Resources for families experiencing health issues

13.0%

Barriers to Accessing Preschool and CPP Funding General Barriers to Accessing Preschool Common barriers that QI parents experienced when trying to access preschool for their child included “lack of trust”, “lack of quality options”, and being “unable to afford preschool”. Affordability, paperwork, and preschool options were also barriers mentioned by QI focus group participants.

“Safety policies” were reported as the top way for preschool Providers to gain parents’ trust in their preschool. “Provider having years of experience” and “background checks for all staff” were also important to QI parents. Other strategies for building trust included “secure building” and Providers “seeking to provide culturally sensitive programming that fits families’ preferences and experiences”.

37

Barriers to Accessing CPP Funding – Teachers and Providers CPP and its early education partners supply a variety of programs and services that support QI teachers and Providers as professionals and with program quality improvement. Six (33.3%) QI Providers reported that they have received Staff Support Funds (SSF) from CPP, using the funds to “increase wages” (66.7%), “fund professional development” (33.3%), “ensure staff with similar titles receive equivalent pay” (16.7%), and “provide staff benefits” (16.7%). Reasons QI Providers have not received SSF included not being aware that the funds were available, not applying, or not having staff.

Figure 24 shows QI teachers’ and Providers’ general awareness of CPP programs and services. Focus group participants reported minimal issues with accessing CPP support and benefits.

Figure 24. QI Teacher/Provider Awareness of CPP Programs/Supports (N=23) Professional development opportunities

82.6%

Coaching support

78.3%

Learning materials

60.9%

Teacher educational resources

47.8%

Outdoor/gross motor equipment

39.1%

Provisional TA program Substitute teacher

30.4% 17.4%

Satisfaction with CPP Interactions and Supports CPP Communication QI teachers and Providers were asked, “What CPP information do you share with your preschool parents?” to understand if QI parents are receiving information about CPP resources and supports that are available to all CPP parents (e.g., CPP website resources, Preschool Chats, etc.) Most (87.0%) teachers and Providers reported that they share information about CPP with parents. Respondents indicated that the top two types of information that they share about CPP were the “ways their preschool has been supported by CPP” (52.2%) and “parent education presentations” (34.8%) (Table 11). Parents reported satisfaction with their Provider’s communication regarding CPP. Table 11. CPP Information QI Teachers/Providers Share with Parents (N=23)

38

Item

Percent

Ways your preschool has been supported by CPP (e.g., learning materials, playground equipment, special programming, Staff Support Funds)

52.2%

Parent Education Presentations

34.8%

CPP-supported family resources (e.g., Beech Acres, Smart Start, Books Alive, ABC Mouse)

30.4%

Ways your preschool teachers have been supported by CPP (e.g., education, professional development)

30.4%

Preschool Chats

21.7%

I don’t have CPP information to share

13.0%

Parent Satisfaction with CPP Experience The four QI parent survey respondents were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their preschooler’s preschool and teachers. Specifically, parents liked that the preschool is very clean and that the teachers are communicative. Parents indicated that their child has positive, supportive, and consistent relationships with their preschool teacher and Provider, as well.

Furthermore, the parents reported receiving feedback on their child’s preschool assessments (e.g., TSGOLD, Redleaf, etc.) one or more times per year, and conveyed that they understood it and how to help their child continue learning at home. Parents described a variety of ways that their preschool engages them in school, including “parent-teacher conferences or meetings”, “discussing school days/events”, and “school events (e.g., field trips, family nights)”. Teachers and Providers also reported the ways their preschool engages parents in school (Figure 25). Some teachers and Providers (13.0%) reported that, on average, about 76-100% of their parents regularly participate in parent education and engagement programs.

Figure 25. QI Teacher and Provider Reported Parent Engagement in School (N=23) Discuss school days/events

73.9%

School events (e.g., field trips, family nights)

73.9%

Parent-teacher conferences or meetings

65.2%

Newsletter

60.9%

Recommends at-home learning activities

43.5%

Parent education activities

43.5%

Volunteer opportunities Preschool progress reports

39.1% 30.4%

QI preschool teachers and Providers described what they believe parents need to be more involved in their child’s learning in the comments below: • “A better understanding that education is important even at the preschool level and that it starts at home.”

• “I think many of our parents have a lot going on so anything that is simple and easy to access will benefit the families.”

• “Knowing where their child is and where they are heading.”

• “Sit down at home with children and practice work that is sent home.”

• “Just more participation.”

• “Daily discussion, recap of learning, and/or areas for improvement; local libraries; field trips; active involvement.”

• “Time, hot meal to take some of the burden, after hours care.”

39

The survey also sought to measure parents’ relationships with their teachers and Providers using items adapted from the Family and Provider/Teacher Relationship Quality (FPTRQ) – Parent Measure. Across the four respondents, most parents consistently reported that they along with their teachers and Providers have “very often” or “sometimes” interacted to build a quality relationship in the following ways: • Met individually with your child’s Provider/teacher, • Talked to your Provider/teacher about goals you have for your child, • Talked to your Provider/teacher about what to expect at each stage of your child’s development, • Talked to your Provider or teacher about how you feel about the care and education your child receives, • Participated in a parent activity at your child’s preschool, • Helped at your child’s preschool, • Asked you about your cultural values and beliefs, • Asked questions to show they care about my family, • Talked to you about your child’s safety at school, • Asked if you feel that your child is being challenged at school, • Asked questions about at home learning activities, • Offered books or materials on child development, • Offered ideas for practicing literacy learning at home, • Offered ideas for practicing math learning at home, • Offered ideas for practicing social-emotional learning at home.

Teacher and Provider Satisfaction with CPP Experience The highest three rated areas of satisfaction for QI teachers and Providers were “SUTQ coaching and support”, “learning materials”, and “professional development opportunities”, with 68.2% teachers and Providers responding as “very satisfied” or “mostly satisfied” to each (Figure 26). Awareness of CPP programs and services could have impacted satisfaction ratings even though a “not applicable” response option was listed for respondents who were not knowledgeable about every area.

0%

Professional Development

Learning Materials

Coaching Support

Staff Support Outdoor Teacher Funds Gross Motor Educational Equipment Resources

2022 (N=9)

40

2023 (N=23)

0.0%

20%

27.8%

55.6% 22.2%

40%

26.4%

22.2%

60%

60.0%

66.7%

68.2%

66.7%

68.2%

77.8%

80%

68.2%

100%

88.9%

Figure 26. QI Teachers and Providers Responding "Very Satisfied" or "Satisfied" with CPP Supports 2022-2023

Substitute Teacher Support

QI teachers and Providers described the benefits of CPP supports in the following ways: • “Having someone to call when you are stuck on a situation.”

• “It keeps my program running smoothly.”

• “The professional development opportunities help maintain the qualification needed to operate a professional daycare.”

• “Help the center train our teachers.”

• “Provides more equipment and knowledge to run an efficient child care center.”

• “These supports cover the building and overhead cost necessary to run the child care program.”

• “The classroom supplies have been very beneficial.”

When asked about support or opportunities that would be helpful or could be improved, some teachers and Providers did not have a comment or were unsure. However, other respondents shared: • “Networking with other teachers/directors of similar programs.”

• “We are missing a network that allows us to provide health, dental, and vision plans to our employees.”

• “More supports/funding for necessary repairs and maintenance.”

• “I would like to see a better way of communicating all that CPP has to offer.”

• “Pay the Lead teacher more.”

• “We need more teachers.”

• “Transportation.”

• “Create a stronger parent partnership with their daycare.”

• “Materials and SUTQ support.”

Regarding professional development, QI teachers and Providers identified “classroom management” (65.2%), “how to work with students with disabilities” (52.2%), and “child development” (52.2%) as topics that would most benefit them or their preschool (Figure 27). Most focus group participants took professional development courses to fulfill the 20-hour biennial requirement and stay updated with changes in the field. Timing and convenience (e.g., format or location) were the common challenges that teachers and Providers encountered in taking professional development courses.

Figure 27. QI Rated Most Beneficial Professional Development Sessions (N=23) Classroom Management

65.2%

Students with Disabilities

52.2%

Child Development

52.2%

OCCRA Business Classes

47.8%

Assessment Administration/Interpretation

47.8%

Indicators of Kindergarten Readiness

43.5%

Social-Emotional Learning

39.1%

Parent Engagement/Learning at Home

39.1%

Parent Engagement at School

34.8%

Whole Child/Early Learning Standards

34.8%

Student-Teacher Interaction Other

30.4% 4.3%

QI preschool teachers and Providers also rated their interactions with their SUTQ coach as “very satisfied” and “mostly satisfied” (Figure 28). Respondents provided the following feedback on their coaching experience and the impact that coaching had on their preschool: • “I have had nothing by great coaches with CPP. Very informative, knowledgeable, and available.”

41

• • • • • •

“My coach is in contact with me all the time and understands my needs and comes to me with helpful resources.”

“At one point I was working towards my third star, but it was too challenging considering the times available to help with the needed work.”

“It has been a struggle.”

“We haven’t had adequate coaching since the pandemic.”

“Very helpful when I call them with questions.”

“Very professional and knowledgeable.”

Figure 28. QI Teachers and Providers Rated their Interactions with their CPP Coach (n=20) Level of expertise

65.0%

Responsiveness

60.0%

Frequency of contact Following up

15.0%

50.0% 45.0%

Very and Mostly Satisfied

20.0%

20.0% 25.0%

20.0% 25.0%

35.0% Neutral

20.0%

Very and Somewhat Dissatisfied

When asked to describe the benefits of being part of the CPP Community Provider Network, QI teachers and Providers said: • “Gaining access to materials that maybe I couldn’t afford on my own to enhance and improve the program and make learning more exciting to the kids. They feel like they’re really going to school because they have their desk and everything they need in their cubbies.”

• “I got a good education coach. She comes and gives me good ideas and feedback; she brings me back to where I need to be to have a quality classroom.”

• “And then the other day, my boss said come and look and it was a classroom full of gifts from CPP. We have basketball hoops, little trinkets for the kids to play with, dance and movement bikes, all kinds of goodies. So, I appreciate CPP, y’all hooked us up. Y’all gave us a big old sandbox and the kids really enjoyed the outside and things like that. So, I thank you all for the resources.”

• “Let’s say you decide to get a curriculum outside the TS GOLD or outside of Creative Curriculum.

They’ll help pay for your curriculum when you choose a different one. I’m a family child care as well so there is a family child care national conference in Atlanta. They put a scholarship out to pay for that conference.”

• “…me and my coach are very interactive; I feel like I talk to her every single week…I’m getting my five stars and she helped with a lot of that. And just like implementing different things, especially with my staff. She brought out questionnaires to help with delegating by doing it in a way that fits their personality styles.”

• “It’s just little simple things like that give us freedom to be able to teach the children and then get all the beautiful gifts that help to enhance their learning. So, it’s been great.”

• “I had a few parents mention they found the center through CPP. I know that’s an added bonus and then some preschoolers have the grant or what you guys do to help pay.”

42

Child Development, Kindergarten Readiness, and Special Education As previously described in the other stakeholder sections of this report, a deeper dive into parents’, teachers’, and Providers’ awareness of child development, kindergarten readiness, and their perspectives with children with special needs were new aspects of the 2023 evaluation. The same definitions for kindergarten readiness and special needs were referenced in all surveys, including the QI surveys for which this section of the report summarizes. Survey items were adapted from a variety of early childhood education sources as cited in the Tuition Assistance Stakeholders section of this report.4,5,6,7,8,9

Child Development and Kindergarten Readiness All surveyed QI parents were “aware” or “very aware” of what it means for a child to be ready for kindergarten. They also “strongly agreed” or “agreed” with the following statements: 1) as a parent/caregiver, I believe that I’m an important teacher in helping my child be ready for kindergarten, 2) it’s important to find activities and at-home opportunities for my child to practice information learned at school, and 3) I believe that social-emotional skills development in the first five years of a child’s life are necessary for learning and contribute to school readiness. In addition, most of these QI parents indicated that, over the past year, their Provider has shared information with them about their child’s kindergarten readiness somewhat frequently.

QI parents were “aware” or “somewhat aware” of the research-supported connections between social-emotional learning and long-term benefits for students. All four parents reported engaging daily in a variety of at-home learning and development behaviors such as teaching their child about emotions and managing them; helping their child brush their teeth, dress themselves, and go to bed; and ask their child questions about what they’re learning in school. Reading with their child, outdoor activities, and playing together with toys occurred daily for some but less frequently for others. Parents shared the following challenges with continuing school-day learning at home: • “I’m open to any and all help.”

• “It’s a lot to continue knowing I have to cook dinner and get ready for the next day.”

43

The majority of surveyed QI parents received “somewhat frequent” information about kindergarten readiness from their child’s preschool in the past year. Figures 29, 30, and 31 show the ways that teachers and Providers support families with children transitioning into kindergarten. When teachers and Providers were asked where their preschoolers are enrolling in kindergarten, they reported CPS, a charter school, a magnet school, and another school district. Thirteen (13) respondents were unsure or didn’t list where their students enrolled in kindergarten.

Figure 29. Provide Information about Kindergarten to Parents (n=15)

26.7%

Figure 30. Support Visits to Kindergarten Before Enrollment in Kindergarten (n=16)

Figure 31. Invite Kindergarten Teachers to Visit Preschool and Talk with Parents (n=15)

31.2% 53.3% 68.8%

73.3%

Yes

No

46.7%

Yes

No

Yes

No

Note. ”Unsure” and “not applicable” responses were excluded from analyses. Survey items were adapted from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Studies (ECLS) Program (2023), survey instrument “ECLS-B Preschool National Study: Early Care and Education Provider (ECEP) Interview” and the “ECLS-B Preschool Parent Interview,” https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/birthinstruments.asp.

Social-Emotional Learning It is very important for young children to develop strong social and emotional skills early on. Preschools are an ideal environment to learn how to build relationships, control emotions, understand others, and communicate effectively. These skills are not only important for doing well in school but also for being successful in life overall. The majority (81.8%) of QI preschool teachers and Providers “agreed” or “strongly agreed” with the statement, “I believe that social and emotional skills development in the first five years of a child’s life are necessary for learning and contribute to school readiness”. Nine respondents (40.9%) reported that they integrate social-emotional learning into academic lesson plans and in the classroom “always or daily”. QI teachers and Providers commonly incorporated SEL practice and feedback opportunities for their preschools through “program activities”, which are independent or group-based activities that directly or indirectly promote students’ development of SEL skills.

Examples of program activities include asking open-ended questions, teaching self-regulation and empathy, playing with games or puppets, singing songs, and reading books. In addition, some teachers and Providers used “teacher-led” strategies, like daily engagement with students, applauding students’ skill levels independently, or providing emotional language, to provide students with SEL learning opportunities.

To gain deeper insight into social-emotional learning in the classroom, QI teachers and Providers were asked to rate their proficiency in a range of related behaviors and tasks (Figure 32). Overall, most respondents rated their preschool’s performance as “well” or “very well” on these activities. The top two areas rated as “acceptable” or “poor” were “assessing how cultural background, home environment, and family dynamics impact learning and development” and “assessing if all students are being challenged academically and socially in the classroom”. When asked to rate their level of agreement with the statement, “I have the necessary support/resources to effectively teach socialemotional skills in the classroom”, 61.9% of respondents “agreed” or “strongly agreed”. To help their preschoolers develop SEL skills, QI teachers and Providers suggested needing the following: 44

• • • • •

“Understanding the cultural background of each family.”

“Provide more care and nurturing.”

“Outreach program that comes to the classroom and model/show preschoolers thru creative performances.”

“Parent classes.”

“Everyday conversation from a simple hello and a hug.”

Figure 32. QI Teachers and Providers Rated How Well Their Preschool Does Social-Emotional Learning Activities (N=23) Assess how cultural background, home environment, and family dynamics impact learning and development

23.8%

33.3%

Assess if all students are being challenged academically and socially in the classroom

27.3%

27.3%

Ask students questions about their decisions to strengthen critical thinking and problem-solving skills development

4.5%

40.9%

4.5%

31.8%

27.3%

36.4%

14.3%

28.6%

Assess all students understanding and engagement with what youre teaching

45.5%

27.3%

22.7% 4.5%

Assess for issues such as abuse, neglect, and bullying

45.5%

31.8%

22.7%

Teach coping skills, emotion management, and conflict resolution Tailor activities so that all students can apply learning according to their individual abilities and strengths

45.5%

Practice social-emotional learning along with academic lessons

40.9%

Tailor activities to meet all students basic social-emotional health needs

40.9%

Tailor activities to meet all students basic physical health needs

Very Well

Well

Acceptable

22.7%

40.9%

27.3%

54.5% Poor

27.3%

9.1%

22.7% 4.5% 31.8%

22.7% 31.8% 18.2%

4.5%

27.3% 27.3%

Very Poor

Note. Adapted from the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) (2021). SchoolBased Staff Survey on Schoolwide SEL Implementation. https://schoolguide.casel.org/resource/tool-staff-familyand-community-partner-survey-on-sel-implementation/. Missing and “not applicable” data excluded.

Special Education The QI parent respondents did not report having children with special needs who require special education services and support. However, 10 (45.5%) QI teachers and Providers had preschoolers with special needs in their preschool and two (9.1%) were “unsure”. Half (50.0%) of QI teachers and Providers reported they knew how and where to submit a referral to a service provider or coordinator if they or a parent suspects a preschooler has special needs; the rest were only “somewhat” (14.0%) or “not at all/unsure” (37.0%) what steps to take. In addition, some respondents shared that they had received speech, autism, and OCALI resources and training to support the needs of their preschoolers with special needs. Other respondents had no special training but had worked with parents and the preschoolers’ care team to meet their needs.

45

During focus groups, QI teachers and Providers shared how they connect with families of preschoolers with expected or documented special needs. Commonly, Providers used the Ages & Stages assessment tool and focused on making parents aware of concerns early on while teachers focused on connecting families to resources or arranging for services to come to their program. Yet, programs still need additional supports and resources to meet the needs of preschoolers with special needs, including: • “Requesting the parent take the child to their primary pediatrician.”

• “Parent interaction is vital to learning and understanding the needs of the child. Understanding what has occurred in the child’s life, and the involvement of all parties.”

• “Help Me Grow outreach programs to come to my program and speak with parents.”

• “More skilled teachers.”

• “Community partnering and accessible materials for diverse students.”

• “Information about autism.”

Additional evaluation is needed to understand if referrals are successful and relevant services are received and effective.

Provider Perspectives on Statewide SUTQ Changes As stated previously in the TA section of the report, in early 2022, the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS) announced changes to Ohio’s SUTQ program aimed at reducing paperwork and making the renewal of a Provider’s star rating easier through “continuous ratings” for existing Providers as well as “pre-star payments” for new, unrated Providers that accept Publicly Funded Child Care (PFCC). QI teachers and Providers made the following comments about the impact that these discussions have had on them and the services they provide: • “I like it because it’s like a blueprint for me. I like to have a blueprint that I follow. That way I know that I’m always in compliance. We know things always change and sometimes we’re not aware of the change until it’s in our face. So, I just like to have a blueprint of what and how we’re supposed to do things and then you can always put your own twist on it.”

• “Although I still feel like Step up to Quality is still lots of paperwork, they changed it where it’s not so much, but it’s still so much. And I feel like even when I’m off the clock I’m still working when I get home. I’m basically doing homework just for work on top of being a mother and student working towards her degree. It really does take time away and makes your days longer.”

• “…I feel very overwhelmed sometimes because it is a lot. When you get the five stars and even have Preschool Promise, it is a lot. But I know what I want for my program. I know what I want people to see because we already do the things. It’s just putting it on paper, having it there, and showing it. We were already doing portfolios before we were even supposed to do it. So, it’s just having the time. I’m the owner, admin, plus Lead teacher. I have Lead teachers too, but it’s just delegating and teaching how you want things but not being overbearing.”

• “To me, it’s longer days because it takes more planning time. So, it’s more cleaning time, it’s more paperwork. I think it’s kind of hard. I have a family child care, so I’m teaching plus doing paperwork, communicating with parents, making sure everything is in order… Then, I have a family. It’s just it makes a longer day.”

QI teachers and Providers were asked if their preschool experienced any barriers to achieving a threeto five-star SUTQ rating that allows preschools to offer the CPP TA program. While most respondents did not face any barriers, some noted barriers or difficulties in deciding whether to pursue another star, keeping or finding staff with enough education, and coaching support with paper submittal. To address these barriers, QI teachers and Providers suggested support around “staff recruitment and retention”, “professional development”, and “time and support” to complete SUTQ requirements.

46

Cost of Quality To understand early childhood education systems issues and drivers of increased preschool costs, QI teachers and Providers were asked about the true cost of providing a quality preschool and child care program during focus groups. In addition, Providers were asked about the top factors that affect their ability to operate a sustainable quality program and business. The top program elements, financial and non-financial, that teachers and Providers commented on included “pay and benefits”, “staff recruitment and retention”, and “support and collaboration” with CPP and other programs in the Network. Exemplary quotes from these categories include: • “The average pay right now is around $13 an hour so for us to be able to stay competitive, we will have to increase our minimum pay for that amount.”

• “And we discussed how our staff is grossly underpaid as well as the cost per child that we are actually making is grossly under… How are we serving the eligible community but also being eligible? It’s not fair and we can’t consider it a true profession if we don’t even get benefits.”

• “It would be helpful for us just to have them already ready with their basic credentials like a child in danger, communicable disease, CPR, orientation, and background check… because they come sometimes, they don’t even have a high school diploma. And then you have to take them, send them to the Dohn Center or somewhere to get their GED and work on the other classes as well. But that’s taking up time and you still don’t have that employee.”

• “By having someone to call when you are stuck in a situation.”

Budget constraints and the inability to pay competitive wages have led to staff shortages and qualified teachers leaving the early education field. Out of the 18 QI Providers who responded to these questions, 27.8% reported that they have had to limit enrollment or close classrooms due to staffing challenges. For example, one participant mentioned “For a while, we could not accept many children under 2 due to not enough staff” and another shared “I have had to unenroll students due to not having enough staff”. In addition, 66.7% reported that they have raised teacher wages to retain staff, respond to the increased cost of living, or because a raise was deserved. Providers (33.3%) that have not raised wages did not have the funds to cover wage increases. On a related note, most (77.8%) QI programs did not increase tuition and fees this year which could help offset budget constraints and support teacher wages. But looking forward, many QI programs (61.1%) plan to increase their tuition and fees in the next year.

Impact of COVID-19 Grants from both local and state sources have been instrumental in providing vital temporary relief funding to programs due, in part, to the ongoing challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Almost all (18, 94.4%) of QI Providers applied for grant funds with 52.9% reporting that the grant funds supplemented the funds they received from CPP. The grant funds helped Providers purchase equipment, furnishing, and supplies, meet their program’s financial needs, and hire new staff. When asked, “When temporary relief funding ends, how will your preschool be impacted? Providers shared: • “We will be impacted financially, operationally, and possibly with enrollment as well.”

• “My parents may have a harder time with payment.”

• “We may face difficulties while hiring new staff without the income to supplement their pay.”

• “No funding to help with payroll.”

Of the 18 QI Providers that responded, 83.3% were “completely confident” that their preschool will still be open within six months or at the start of the 2023-2024 school year. Providers’ confidence in the continuation of their preschool was driven by their belief in the quality of the program they and their staff operate along with families’ satisfaction and connection to the program. For instance, Providers shared, “I just believe that we do good work and families are pleased and will continue to bring their children” and “The quality of the program speaks for itself.” For the upcoming year, QI Providers’ greatest concerns were “staff shortages” (44.4%) and “staff wages” (27.8%).

47

Most preschools (70.0%) indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic was not affecting their program.

However, some programs continued to be affected by the pandemic as illustrated by the following remarks: • “Lost a lot of kids due to COVID-19. Went from 11 down to 4.”

• “Workers are refusing to come back to work in this field because of salary. Salary expectations improved in other fields by not this one.”

• “I’m finding parents are finding payment challenging.”

• “Parents still express concern with their children engaging with others.”

• “Yes, it is still affecting the health and the safety of our preschool with children being out sick and constantly getting sick.”

Additional Feedback for CPP Feedback indicated that QI stakeholders had an overall positive experience with CPP, and they feel that CPP supports and programs benefit families, teachers, and Providers. “Kindergarten readiness” and “sharing updated information” were identified as the most important things for CPP to know about a child and family’s needs and their expectations for early learning and preschool. A QI parent shared: “I just think overall it's a good program with a bunch of different resources. So, if your center is involved, or you personally get involved with CPP, then I feel like you will have a lot of benefits.” Most (78.3%) QI teachers and Providers “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that they viewed CPP as a partner. Many respondents were satisfied or had no suggestions for how CPP could be a better partner. These respondents shared, “Nothing, I love the program as is,” and “Keep doing what you’re doing.” Still, other respondents suggested that CPP could keep them better informed about their offerings, provide more support, and expand their work outside of the CPS footprint.

48

PRESCHOOLER SURVEY RESULTS For the second consecutive year, teachers were asked to administer an 11-item survey to their 3- and 4-year-old preschool classrooms. Preschoolers were instructed to raise their hand if they agreed with the statement about their preschool experience. Three practice questions about siblings were asked to help the preschoolers understand how to respond and to show them that they may respond differently than their classmates. The survey items and administration process were developed in collaboration with the Evaluation Advisory Panel.

A total of 143 preschoolers from 15 different classrooms representing 12 different preschools responded to the survey. Ten were TA and two were QI preschools. Given the preschoolers’ ages, some of them may not have fully understood the questions or responded to every question. Survey responses are summarized in Table 12. Select comments from the preschoolers are also listed below.

Table 12. Preschoolers Showing Agreement with Aspects of Preschool Experience (N=143) Survey Item

Count (%)

I have a sister.

84 (59%)

I have a brother.

89 (62%)

I do not have a sister or brother.

34 (24%)

I like playing with friends at school.

120 (84%)

I like to play outside at school.

125 (87%)

I feel safe at school.

129 (90%)

School teaches me to be nice (or kind).

131 (92%)

School teaches me to “take turns”.

133 (93%)

Coming to school makes me happy.

126 (88%)

Teachers asked their preschoolers to tell them, “What is something new you learned today/this week?”

• “ABCs, I learned about animals, wheels on the bus.”

• “Gardening, planting seeds, and colors of the rainbows.”

• “I learned how to share in the housekeeping area. I can write and trace my name.”

• “Parts of plants. We made Mother's Day cards. I learned new words. I can write my name. I can tie my shoes.”

• “Clouds bounce. Vegetables are healthy, and your plates should have all the foods. When you go “back and forth you make a pattern.”

• “All about guitars and how we play them. We learned about flowers and warm weather.”

• “Take turn and share with my friends.”

Preschoolers also shared their favorite thing about coming to school.

• “To play and see friends and spending time with Ms. M and seeing friends.”

• “Playing in class, playing with magnets, creating, playing in the block center, helping other friends and doing calendar.”

• “Eating lunch, listening, going outside to Ms. E’s music class, playing outside.”

• “My kitchen, the cars and toys, my friends and teacher.”

• “Playing with my friends, playing laundry in the house area, coloring.”

• “Singing songs, painting my hand, running outside, playing kitchen, Legos, baby dolls, dances.”

• “I learn to write, eat good food, seeing the dance teachers, finding my name letter's, going outside, when we have number parties.”

49

TEACHER AND PROVIDER RETENTION, AND PAY

RECRUITMENT,

In order to work efficiently with young children, it is crucial to possess specialized knowledge, skills, and attitudes that can only be acquired through education and ongoing professional development. These competencies enable professionals in the field to provide proper care and developmentally appropriate guidance to children, ensuring their overall growth and development while also enabling parents to work. Without these competencies, it would be difficult for early childhood educators to provide the level of care that young children require. However, despite their qualifications, experience, and importance to families and the economy, early childhood education professionals, especially those from Family Child Care preschools, are oftentimes paid low wages with few employer benefits, leading to challenges with hiring and retaining qualified staff. To understand challenges with pay and benefits as well as hiring and retaining qualified staff, TA and QI teachers (Lead and assistant preschool teachers) and Providers (preschool directors, administrators, owners/operators) were invited to share their views and experiences with staff recruitment, retention, pay, benefits, their work environment, and job fit. The feedback collected from focus groups and surveys sheds light on the ongoing challenges faced by the child care sector and offers potential solutions for better supporting preschool teachers and Providers.

Stakeholders responded to survey items by selecting a response option on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Scores were averaged for each item with an average value greater than three indicating satisfaction and a value below three indicating dissatisfaction.

Stakeholders represented Single Site Centers, Multi-Site Centers, Type A, Type B, and School-Based Parochial preschools (Table 13). Results are presented below by program type (Tables 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20). Missing and not applicable data were excluded from analyses.

Table 13. Preschool Types Represented by Stakeholders

Stakeholder Group TA (N=60) QI (N=23) Total (N=83)

Single 27 (45.0%) 12 (52.2%) 39 (47.0%)

Multi-Site 6 (10.0%) 0 (0.0%) 6 (7.2%)

Type A 13 (21.7%) 4 (17.4%) 17 (20.5%)

Type B 12 (20.0%) 7 (30.4%) 19 (22.9%)

SchoolBased Parochial 2 (3.3%) 0 (0.0%) 2 (2.4%)

Work Environment Satisfaction Tables 14 and 15 present the survey results on teachers’ and Providers’ satisfaction with their work environment. Respondents’ ratings were generally positive and above the midpoint, suggesting satisfaction with their work environment. However, respondents reported an average score below three on their rating for work-related stress, indicating they are dissatisfied with the amount of workrelated stress they have experienced. Survey findings around teacher and Provider dissatisfaction with work-related stress have remained consistent since 2021. These findings highlight the need to identify solutions to reduce work-related stress and ensure a healthy and productive work environment where teachers and Providers want to remain employed.

50

Table 14. Average Satisfaction of Teacher Work Environment TA Teacher Average QI Teacher Rating Average Rating Survey Item N=24 N=5 My workload is manageable 4.25 4.20 The children I teach are well behaved

3.21

3.60

I have little work-related stress

2.88

2.80

I am happy at work

3.96

4.00

I receive effective coaching

3.63

4.40

I receive on-going professional development

4.38

4.60

I receive administrative support I have time to reflect on successes/areas for improvement I have a strong relationship with my preschool director My facility is adequate

3.75

4.40

4.08

4.40

4.09

4.60

4.29

3.80

I have time for lesson planning I am comfortable with the student-teacher ratio My work environment is pleasant

3.83

4.00

4.08

4.20

4.17

4.20

I am satisfied with my work environment My satisfaction with my work environment impacts my decision to stay with my employer

4.21

4.00

4.22

4.60

Table 15. Average Satisfaction of Provider Work Environment TA Provider Average QI Provider Rating Average Rating Survey Item N=36 N=18 My workload is manageable 3.94 3.61

51

The children I teach are well behaved

3.87

3.50

I have little work-related stress

2.86

2.88

I am happy at work

4.39

4.00

I receive effective coaching

4.24

4.00

I receive on-going professional development

4.56

4.17

I receive administrative support I have time to reflect on successes/areas for improvement I have a strong relationship with my preschool director My facility is adequate

4.09

3.88

4.14

3.67

4.18

4.00

4.31

3.83

I have time for lesson planning I am comfortable with the student-teacher ratio

3.75

3.71

4.42

4.00

Survey Item My work environment is pleasant I am satisfied with my work environment My satisfaction with my work environment impacts my decision to stay with my employer

TA Provider Average Rating N=36 4.64

QI Provider Average Rating N=18 4.11

4.50

4.00

4.61

3.87

Job Fit Satisfaction According to the survey results shown in Tables 16 and 17, respondents were satisfied with their job fit, on average, which is important for employee retention. This data aligns with comments made during focus group regarding job-fit satisfaction and the dedication to educating young children, even while experiencing workplace stressors and other challenges.

Table 16. Average Satisfaction of Teacher Job Fit TA Teacher Average Rating Survey Item N= 24 I want to continue working in early childhood 4.67 education My actual job duties match my job expectations 4.17 I have the education and training needed to do 4.58 my job well I have a positive impact on children in my 4.71 preschool I am satisfied with my job fit 4.46 My satisfaction with my job fit impacts my decision 4.17 to stay with my current employer Table 17. Average Satisfaction of Provider Job Fit TA Provider Average Rating Survey Item N=36 I want to continue working in early childhood 4.56 education My actual job duties match my job expectations 4.36 I have the education and training needed to do 4.56 my job well I have a positive impact on children in my 4.65 preschool I am satisfied with my job fit 4.56 My satisfaction with my job fit impacts my decision 4.47 to stay with my current employer

52

QI Teacher Average Rating N=5 4.60 4.20 4.40 4.20 4.00 4.40

QI Provider Average Rating N=18 4.39 4.29 4.33 4.39 4.28 4.31

Pay and Benefits Satisfaction Feedback gathered from focus groups and surveys revealed that teachers and Providers are not content with their current pay and benefits. This is further supported by the data presented in Tables 18 and 19. Anecdotal evidence suggests that several factors, including inflation, the high cost of living, and low payments rates, contribute to the lack of fair wages for preschool staff.

Table 18. Average Satisfaction of Teacher Pay and Benefits TA Teacher QI Teacher Average Average Rating/Salary Rating/Salary Survey Item N=24 N=5 a I receive an adequate salary 3.04 2.40b I receive adequate benefits (medical, retirement, 3.58 2.00 other) I am satisfied with my pay and benefits 2.83 2.20 My satisfaction with my pay and benefits impacts 4.00 3.00 my decision to stay with my employer a Seven respondents reported that a salary between $37,000-75,000 (mean=$51,777) per year would be considered as a living wage for teachers. b Three respondents reported that a salary between $33,000-40,000 per year would be considered a living wage for them.

Table 19. Average Satisfaction of Provider Pay and Benefits TA Provider Average Rating/Salary N=36 3.17a

QI Provider Average Rating/Salary N=18 2.61b

I receive adequate benefits (medical, retirement, other)

2.72

2.00

I am satisfied with my pay and benefits My satisfaction with my pay and benefits impacts my decision to stay with my employer

2.91

2.28

3.34

2.81

Survey Item I receive an adequate salary

a Twelve respondents reported that a salary between $32,000-80,000 (mean = $48,633) per year would

be a satisfactory wage. b Nine respondents reported that a salary between $30,000-100,000 (mean = $53,444) would be a satisfactory wage.

The survey also asked teachers and Providers about their employment benefits. Results were similar to the previous year in that QI teachers and Providers are less likely to receive benefits compared to TA teachers and Providers. For example, 50.0% of TA teachers reported that they receive medical benefits while no (0.0%) QI teachers reported that they receive medical benefits (Table 20).

53

Benefit Medical

Table 20. Benefits Received by Teachers and Providers % TA % QI % TA Teacher Teacher Provider Receiving Receiving Receiving Benefit Benefit Benefit (N=24) (N=5) (N=36) 12 (50.0%) 0 (0.0%) 8 (22.2%)

% QI Provider Receiving Benefit (N=18) 2 (11.1%)

Dental Retirement

8 (33.3%) 12 (50.0%)

0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%)

7 (19.4%) 12 (33.3%)

1 (5.6%) 1 (5.6%)

Paid time off Performance Bonus

19 (79.2%) 9 (37.5%)

1 (20.0%) 0 (0.0%)

20 (55.6%) 11 (30.6%)

5 (27.8%) 4 (22.2%)

Other

1 (4.2%)

0 (0.0%)

1 (2.8%)

0 (0.0%)

No Benefits

3 (12.5%)

4 (80.0%)

13 (36.1%)

13 (72.2%)

Teacher Promise Grant Funds Impact CPP provides Teacher Promise Grants (TPG) of up to $4,000 directly to individual Lead preschool teachers at TA preschools, including Type A and B owners who occupy both roles, as a method to supplement teacher wages and support retention and recruitment. Of the 24 TA teachers and 36 TA Providers, 31 (51.7%) were in a Lead teacher role and potentially eligible to receive the TPG. Twentyone (58.3%) TA Providers reported that a teacher in their preschool has received the TPG and 18 (58.1%) respondents stated they have personally received the TPG. Among the 18 Lead teachers who reported receiving the TPG, four (22.3%) “agreed” or “strongly agreed” and six (33.3%) “neither agreed nor disagreed” that the TPG has impacted their decision to stay with their employer. Teachers reported using TPG funds to help pay for staff wages, classroom supplies, first aid training, and bills.

When asked if teachers receiving the TPG had their wages reduced or adjusted, three (14.3%) Providers responded “yes”. Reasons for a “yes” response revealed that one Provider adjusted wages by increasing a teacher’s pay for earning a CDA while the other Provider adjusted wages in order to have funding to plan parent engagement events, purchase materials, and make changes to the building.

Fourteen (77.8%) teachers said they view the TPG as a wage supplement, but nine (50.0%) said the TPG is not enough to retain teachers. Other supports or changes that would aid teacher recruitment and retention were described by teachers and Providers in the following quotes: • “Things to help keep current preschool teachers to preschools by offering life insurance, medical insurance, and more support from Administrators in handling problem children.”

• “The rate of pay should be increased, and benefits need to be competitive with local school districts.”

• “Support with children who need extra services, speech, therapy, OT, etc.”

• “Higher wages & benefits package.”

• “Better wages and free quality professional development (on-site).”

Some (30.6%) Providers have used the TPG as a promotional or recruitment tool for hiring and retaining teachers.

• “Advising teachers that the TPG can help supplement their income.”

• “Encouraged our second Lead teacher to apply as a retention tool as she supplements her lessons from her own money on a regular basis.”

• “I include it as a line item in our Lead teacher (preschool) benefit flyer.”

• “I send qualified teachers the information and encourage them to apply. These grants have provided the necessary salary increase some teachers need to remain in the field.”

54

Staff Support Funds Impact CPP awards Staff Support Funds (SSF) to preschools, with the amount determined by the number of staff (up to $3,000 per Lead teacher not to exceed $18,000 per site). Funds can be used to support staff wages, health benefits, and education. Six of the 18 QI Providers reported that they have received SSF. As described in the QI Barriers to Access CPP Funding – Teachers and Providers section, Providers reported primarily using SSF to “increase wages” (66.7%) and “fund professional development” (33.3%).

Reasons QI Providers have not received SSF because they were not aware that funds were available, not applying for funds, or did not have staff.

Tuition Assistance Funds Impact Tuition assistance remained an essential support that benefits parents, teachers, and Providers and preschool quality and access. Providers reported that they have used TA funds for “classroom materials” (48.3%), “supplement teacher wages” (45.0%), “SUTQ” (40.0%), “improve their facility” (36.7%), “professional development opportunities” (33.3%), “durable outdoor equipment” (28.3%), and “hire more teachers/staff” (18.3%). Providers who responded to the survey also made the following comments about the benefits of receiving TA: • “Tuition assistance reduces costs to parents. It does not provide extra funding to our budget.”

• “Tuition assistance provides the majority of the budget for all aspects of our program.”

• “Tuition assistance is integral to our ability to serve our population. This is the most beneficial part of the CPP partnership.”

Needed supports, as suggested by Provider survey respondents included: “another stabilization grant,” “support in income if we have infants and toddler,” and “teacher incentives for part-time teachers”.

One Provider commented that, “Preschool Promise is an awesome partner. If they are able to help us increase the salaries for teachers to keep preschools open that would be awesome”.

Furthermore, the following two TA teacher and Provider focus group participants commented on quality, when asked about the impact of Tuition Assistance funds on their programs: • “I think the advantage [of Tuition Assistance] is more indirect in that the quality of our program has just gone up. So the ability to hire teachers and pay them what they deserve and then supplement their pay with things like the Promise grant, it just makes a better learning environment”.

• “It’s been a great experience, especially for those who are now over the income guidelines for JFS. Preschool Promise has allowed me to use, with my discretion, paying for their fees.”

Focus Group and Survey Findings Focus group participants were asked about factors that impacted their ability to operate a sustainable quality program and business. One TA Provider reflected on the intersection of staff recruitment and retention with adequate pay and benefits. They said, “finding staff is hard. It’s really difficult trying to keep people from going to a different profession or going somewhere else because the pay is more and they offer benefits. I can’t offer benefits. I pay for my own health insurance out of my pocket. Those are the things that I would like to be able to do – to offer health, dental and retirement. This is a good job. It is a profession. It is our livelihood.” QI teachers and Providers recognized “pay and benefits” as a top factor that affects their ability to operate a quality program. Like TA stakeholders, QI teachers and Providers made comments about the impact that “pay and benefits” has on “staff recruitment and retention”. One QI Provider shared, “People cannot even afford to make minimum wage or even a little bit more than that. People need livable wages, so being able to provide that has been a struggle because it’s either you have to pay that or you don’t have staff. So, it’s like a lose-lose situation sometimes.”

55

TA Provider survey respondents made the following comments about pay and benefits: • “It would be great if we could partner with their health care and dental program.”

• “Financial assistance with providing health insurance or 401(k) for child care employees and increased salaries.”

• “With the job being incredibly stressful, I would ideally like to make enough so that I wouldn’t have to have another job and could spend more time planning for my students in school.”

QI teachers and Providers shared the following about pay and benefits: • “We are missing a network that allows us to provide health, dental, and vision plans to our employees.”

• “Competitive wages.”

• “Higher wages.”

• “Being able to pay the staff more.”

• “Staff wages that are a livable wage.”

• “Wage negotiation.”

• “But what I was just saying too, if they do that, they’re going to want higher compensation.

They’re not going to want just $10 there. That’s bad. But I can go to Target and make you see, you know? So that’s been a dilemma that I’ve seen not from other people, too. They’ll say, well, too low. I can’t work for that.”

• “And we discussed how our staff is grossly underpaid as well as the cost per child that we are actually making is grossly under and the reason why. How are we serving the eligible community but also be the eligible? It’s not fair and we can’t consider it a true profession if we don’t even get benefits. And so that was one of the things that we discussed. We asked to be put on the government’s benefit package because I am going back to lobby…”

Influence of Wages on Teacher Recruitment Over half (61.1%) of the QI teacher and Provider survey respondents mentioned higher or competitive wages when asked about supports or changes that would keep current preschool teachers teaching or attract new teachers to preschool. On the other hand, only 46.3% of TA teachers and Providers mentioned higher or competitive wages. When asked, “What could CPP do to recruit new well-trained teachers to the field?”, one QI teacher said: “I honestly feel like the money issue is the biggest concern cause starting out in a new career if it’s not going to support your living or habits then that’s something that’ll steer you away.” Similarly, one TA Provider commented: “finding staff is hard. It’s really difficult trying to keep people from not going to a different profession, going somewhere else because they pay more and they offer benefits”. Aside from pay and benefits, other teachers and Providers mentioned the advantage of working at well-resourced preschools with a good work environment as important factors of teacher recruitment and retention.

Teacher Wage Changes in Response to Labor Shortages and Inflation Eighty-six percent (86.1%) of TA Providers raised teacher wages in response to labor shortages or inflation. Reasons for raising teacher wages included: • “In order to hire qualified teachers and to compete with Walmart and Target who all start at $15 hour.”

• “Inflation and because it is the right thing to do! Our teachers deserve a professional wage.”

• “Just to be able to be competitive and maintain quality staff.”

• “I wouldn't say this was the reason why. Our teachers received a raise two years ago. The highest is paid $14. She has an AA and 29 years of experience. This is nowhere near what she should be getting paid, or the other teachers.”

• “Providing sign on bonuses to attempt to attract candidates that meet SUTQ requirements. It is practically impossible to find Leads at CPL3.”

• “I want to show the teachers that I value them. The cost of food and living is going up therefore, I wanted to help as well.”

• “Incoming staff is asking for a higher wage to accept employment.”

56

Fourteen percent (13.9%) of TA Providers did not raise teacher wages. Reasons for not raising TA teacher wages included: • “We don't have additional funds to raise wages.”

• “Our school's budget council did not approve a raise in wages.”

• “I'm the only employee, and I can only increase my on wages when my pay has increased.”

• “Currently, I don't have any teachers that I employ.”

Sixty-seven percent (66.7%) of QI Providers raised teacher wages in response to labor shortages or inflation. Reasons for raising teacher wages included: • “Because I work really hard.”

• “I raised teachers’ wages to meet the cost of living rates.”

• “In an attempt to retain staff.”

• “Inflation.”

• “They deserve so much more.”

• “To attract teachers and to keep them.”

• “To ensure staff stability.”

• “To make sure my staff can help out with their bills.”

• “To retain current employees and hire new.”

• “We are required to do more work which I feel deserves more pay.”

Thirty-three percent (33.3.%) of QI Providers did not raise teacher wages. Their reasons included: • “Can’t afford to.”

• “Funding.”

• “It’s only me.”

• “Not able to currently.”

• “Not enough funds yet.”

• “We are told the company doesn’t have it.”

57

Emerging Teacher Perspectives on Early Childhood Education Profession As one of its workforce and talent-pipeline initiatives, CPP partners with Cincinnati State Technical and Community College’s Early Childhood Education program to connect early childhood education college students with formal experience and mentoring through student-teaching placements at preschools in the CPP Community Provider Network. In 2022-23, three students were placed, and each received a stipend funded by CPP but distributed by the Cincinnati State Foundation – Teacher Completion Grant. Interviews were conducted with two of the students enrolled in the studentteaching placement program to gain insight into the experiences and expectations of emerging early childhood education teachers. Their feedback shed light on the perceived benefits and challenges of working in the field of early childhood education and may inform ways to support the employment pipeline for preschool teachers.

Student-Teaching Placement Experience and Satisfaction •

• • • •

One interviewee was drawn to exploring early education as a career choice because of their love for helping children and getting to see how they develop as people. The other entered the field by chance and reported “falling in love” with the field of early education while providing part-time lunch support for a daycare.

The emerging teachers were highly satisfied with their student-teaching placement experiences and agreed they made a positive impact on the children in their preschool placement.

Both students agreed that they had the education, training, and support to do their job well.

One student gained valuable experience observing their Lead Teacher working with children with autism. The others benefited from practicing their skills during art and story time.

The interviewees liked their work environment in general but shared it could be improved by clearer communication about the student’s work schedule and better preparation for managing difficult child behaviors.

They each received a $2,000 stipend and both reported the amount was fair, but the process for receiving the funds was slow.

Preparing Teachers for Teaching Preschoolers •

•

Suggestions for improving the student-teaching placement program and how to better prepare emerging teachers for teaching in a preschool setting included: o training on how to navigate miscommunications among co-workers, o education and training on managing difficult child behaviors, o additional practice and feedback developing and implementing lesson plans, and o managing expectations about teaching children who are skill developing basic skills.

Looking forward at their career goals, one interviewee reported that they see themselves as a preschool teacher in the public school system while the other envisions working in a school district as a paraprofessional or with a teaching certification but not in preschool.

Student-Teachers’ Perspectives on Preschool Teacher Recruitment and Retention •

• • • • 58

Ensuring competitive pay and benefits is crucial for attracting and retaining teachers. o Interviewees reported $17-20 per hour is an acceptable living wage for preschool teachers. One student said the reason they are seeking employment in a school district is for the benefits.

Managing challenging child behavior is becoming more and more difficult.

Having sufficient staffing, maintaining a high level of staff professionalism, ensuring proper site organization, and providing adequate support to staff members are crucial in attracting new teachers to the field of preschool education.

The current state of politics pertaining to education is a cause for concern.

The presence of a healthy work environment and job that aligns with an individual’s passion for teaching children is important for them to remain engaged and committed to their work.

PROSPECTIVE STAKEHOLDERS – EVALUATION AND RESULTS Gaining insight into the perspectives and experiences of potential stakeholders regarding early learning is important for CPP to make well-informed decisions that align with their values and expectations. This understanding can also enhance CPP's ability to cultivate trust and active participation among prospective stakeholders, leading to an expansion of the Community Provider Network and improved access to services and high-quality preschool. Thus, this section of the report aims to summarize the views and experiences of prospective stakeholders to support CPP's decision-making process and foster more robust engagement with the initiative. Throughout the prospective stakeholders’ section of the report, prospective parents will be referred to as “parents” and prospective Providers will be referred to as “Providers.” A total of 19 parents and 14 Providers participated in focus groups. Surveys were completed by 101 parents and 18 Providers. The results of the focus groups and surveys are summarized below.

More than half (58.4%) of parents were Black/African American and 34.7% were White. The majority (94.1%) of parents had preschool aged children (3-4 years old) and 59.4% had children between the ages of 0-2 years old. Fifty-nine (58.4%) parents reported a household income below $50,000 (Table 21).

Among Providers, 66.6% reported five or more years working at their current preschool, and 77.8% reported working 10 or more years as a preschool educator (Table 22). Six (33.3%) Providers reported a three-, four-, or five-star Step Up To Quality (SUTQ) rating through Ohio’s Child Care Quality Rating System1, and 10 had between one and seven vacant seats for 3 to 4-year-olds. Many (55.6%) Providers reported that they have completed the “Child Development Associate (CDA)” certification and have achieved a “Career Pathways Level (CPL)”, which is a professional designation that documents formal education, experience, and credentials for Ohio’s early care and education professionals and quantifies their qualifications for meeting the education requirements for child care staff. Providers reported involvement with various professional organizations, including the Ohio Association for the “Education of Young Children (OAEYC)” (16.7%), the “National Association for Family Child Care (NAFCC)” (16.7%), “Southwest Ohio Association for the Education of Young Children (SWOAEYC)” (11.1%), and the “Ohio Association of Child Care Providers (OACCP)” (5.6%), but 66.7% reported having “none”. Additional preschool characteristics are reported in Table 23.

59

Table 21. Prospective Parent Demographics (N=101) Survey Item

Response

Count

Percentage

Primary Language

English Other White/Caucasian Black/African American Asian Multicultural/Multiethnic Hispanic/Latinx Prefer not to answer Less Than High School High School/GED Some College Associate Degree Bachelor’s Degree Master’s Degree Doctorate/PhD JD/SJD Working Full-time Working Part-time Stay at Home Parent Student Unemployed Other Prefer not to answer Less than $20,000 $20,000-$34,999 $35,000-$49,999 $50,000-$74,999 $75,000-$99,999 $100,000 or more Prefer not to answer Zero One Two Zero One Two Three or More Mother Father Legal Guardian Grandparent

100 1 35 59 2 2 1 2 2 27 26 16 14 14 1 1 37 20 23 8 8 1 4 29 18 12 9 7 18 8 41 46 14 6 80 13 2 98 1 1 1

99.0% 1.0% 34.7% 58.4% 2.0% 2.0% 1.0% 2.0% 2.0% 26.7% 25.7% 15.8% 13.9% 13.9% 1.0% 1.0% 36.6% 19.8% 22.8% 7.9% 7.9% 1.0% 4.0% 28.7% 17.8% 11.9% 8.9% 6.9% 17.8% 7.9% 40.6% 45.5% 13.9% 5.9% 79.2% 12.9% 2.0% 97.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%

Race

Highest Level of Education in Household

Employment Status

Household Income

Number of children (0-2 years old)

Number of preschool aged children

Relationship to the Child

Incomplete responses and/or missing data were excluded.

60

Table 22. Prospective Provider Demographics (N=18) Survey Item

Response

Role as a Provider Gender Race/Ethnicity

Years as a Preschool Educator

Years at Current Preschool

Education Level

Count

Percentage

Director/Provider

16

88.9%

Lead Teacher

2

11.1%

Female

18

100%

Male

0

0%

White/Caucasian

2

11.1%

Black/African American

15

83.3%

Hispanic/Latinx

1

5.6%

1-2 years

1

5.6%

3-4 years

3

16.7%

10+ years

14

77.8%

Less than 1 year

1

5.6%

1-2 years

3

16.7%

3-4 years

2

11.1%

5-10 years

4

22.2%

10+ years

8

44.4%

Some College

7

38.9%

Associate Degree

5

27.8%

Bachelor’s Degree

3

16.7%

Master’s Degree

3

16.7%

Incomplete responses and/or missing data were excluded. *Data interpretation and generalizability are limited given the small sample size.

Table 23. Prospective Provider Preschool Demographics (N=18) Survey Item

Response

Preschool Typea

Length of Preschool Operation

Step Up To Quality (SUTQ) Star Ratingb

61

Count

Percentage

Type A Home/Family Child Care

1

5.6%

Type B Home/Family Child Care

14

77.8%

Single Site Center

3

16.7%

1-2 years

4

22.2%

3-4 years

1

5.6%

5-10 years

4

22.2%

10+ years

9

50.0%

1 Star

11

61.1%

2 Stars

1

5.6%

3 Stars

2

11.1%

4 Stars

0

0.0%

5 Stars

4

22.2%

Children’s Race/Ethnic Communities

Languages Spoken at Home

Financial Assistance Attendees Receivee

Education Level of Staff Majority

Number of Full-Time Employees

Number of Part-Time Employees

Open Teacher Positions

White/Caucasian Black/African American Asian Multicultural/Multiethnic Hispanic/Latinx Prefer not to answer English Spanish Hindi Head Start Publicly Funded Child Carec Ohio Department of Educationd Private Pay Other None High School/GED Associate Degree Bachelor’s Degree Other Prefer not to answer 0 1 2 8 11 28 0 1 2 0 1 8 12

8 15 1 5 2 1 18 3 1 1 18 0 10

44.4% 83.3% 5.6% 27.8% 11.1% 5.6% 100.0% 16.7% 5.6% 5.6% 100.0% 0.0% 55.6%

1 6 4 3 4 1 1 13 1 1 1 1 5 10 3 11 3 1 1

5.6% 33.3% 22.2% 16.7% 22.2% 5.6% 5.6% 72.2% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 27.8% 55.6% 16.7% 68.8% 18.8% 6.3% 6.3%

2

11.1%

Incomplete responses and/or missing data excluded from calculations. *Data interpretation and generalizability is limited given the small sample size. aType A and Type B Providers are Family Child Care Providers who serve children in their homes. bStep Up To Quality (SUTQ) is a five-star quality rating system for child care Providers in Ohio.1 cPublicly Funded Child Care (PFCC) is a child care voucher program for parents in Ohio. dOhio Department of Education (ODE) is responsible for licensing early care and education programs. eRespondents could select more than one choice. Cumulative total may exceed 100%.

62

Prospective Parent and Provider Awareness of CPP Around half (52.5%) of parents surveyed were familiar with CPP prior to completing the survey, which is slightly higher than in 2022 when only 46.8% were aware. Parents who were familiar with CPP first learned about the initiative through “word of mouth” (16.5%) or “CPS staff or other Provider” (13.4%) (Figure 33). “Other” (7.2%) ways parents reported first learning about CPP were through “email” and “Children’s Hospital notifications”.

Figure 33. How Prospective Parents First Learned about CPP (N=97) 40% 30%

26.8% 16.5%

20%

13.4%

10%

12.4%

8.2%

7.2%

5.2%

5.2%

3.1%

0%

1.0%

1.0%

Most (83.3%) Providers had heard about CPP prior to completing the survey, which is similar to 2022 results where 81.0% Providers had heard about CPP. The top two ways Providers first heard about CPP were by “word of mouth” (33.3%) and “flyers” (22.2%) (Figure 34).

Figure 34. How Prospective Providers First Learned about CPP (N=18) 40% 33.3% 30% 22.2%

22.2%

20% 11.1% 10%

0%

63

Word of Mouth

Flyer

Friend/Family Member

CPP Staff/Other Provider

5.6%

5.6%

CPP Website

Other

Prospective Providers’ Understanding of CPP Benefits Even though most Providers were aware of CPP before they participated in the evaluation, feedback suggested that Providers aren’t fully aware of CPP’s eligibility requirements. Only nine (50.0%) reported that they knew the steps to take to join the CPP Community Provider Network. Related comments from Providers included: • “I was familiar with it, but I don’t know how to qualify.”

• “I don’t know if I qualify because I do non-traditional hours.”

• “Are there certain areas that are not allowed? I’m not CPS.” Seven (38.9%) Providers reported that they have received resources, training, or information from CPP by attending trainings and talking with specialists (i.e., CPP staff). Many Providers were connected with or received information, training, or programming from other local early learning initiatives and organizations including “4C for Children” (100%) and Cincinnati Public Libraries (61.1%) (Figure 35). The CPP supports that would benefit Providers who are experiencing challenges at their preschools are described in the Provider Challenges and Barriers Engaging with CPP section.

100%

Figure 35. Prospective Providers' Connections to Other Local Initiatives and Organizations (N=18) 100.0%

80% 61.1%

60% 40%

27.8%

20% 0%

4C for Children

Cincinnati Public Librarires

Community Action Agency

22.2%

Cincinnati Public Schools

16.7%

Every Child Succeeds

5.6%

5.6%

Best Point

Beech Acres

Increasing Awareness of CPP Benefits Parents said that “email” (68%) is the best way for CPP to share information with them. They also reported that “meeting teachers and other staff” (60.4%), “information sessions about TA” (54.5%), and “preschool site visits during school hours” (52.5%) could encourage them to consider a CPP Provider for their child (Table 24). Parents offered additional ideas about ways in which CPP could increase awareness of CPP benefits.

• “Maybe an open house where they explain everything and help you sign up for grants and stuff.

I didn’t send my oldest to preschool, I kind of need someone to walk me through everything and tell me how everything works.”

• “We utilize our neighborhood library. I would love just like brochures or pamphlets or maybe a representative from Preschool Promise to be posted at the library or have an information session.”

• “I think just using public spaces like libraries and grocery stores to post information would be great.”

• “My other kids are older, so if there is someone in the schools that could reach out to parents and connect them with resources or connections to get into schools.”

64

Many of these ideas have been implemented by CPP over the past 14 months in response to feedback collected from parents and Providers in previous evaluation. The feedback from prospective parents and Providers in this year’s evaluation will enhance efforts in the future.

Table 24. Ways CPP Could Encourage Prospective Parents to Consider a CPP Preschool Provider for their Child (N=101) Item

Percent

Meet teachers and other staff

60.4%

Information session about Tuition Assistance

54.5%

Offer preschool site visits during school hours

52.5%

Opportunity to review curriculum

48.5%

Opportunity to review safety protocols

42.6%

Meet families currently enrolled in a CPP Preschool

41.6%

Table 25 shows the ways in which CPP can promote and connect Providers with the supports and programs it offers. The top two responses were “information about grant opportunities” (72.2%) and “virtual trainings” (66.7%), both of which were the top two responses last year.

Table 25. Ways CPP Can Promote and Connect Prospective Providers with Supports and Programs Offered? (N=18) Item

Percent

Information about grant opportunities

72.2%

Virtual trainings

66.7%

Virtual information session about CPP

50.0%

Opportunity to meet CPP Providers

44.4%

Coaching/Mentoring

44.4%

Support applying for licensing

33.3%

Support to maintain SUTQ rating

22.2%

Opportunity to meet CPP staff

16.7%

None, I do not wish to engage with CPP

11.1%

When asked what professional development sessions would be most beneficial for themselves and their preschool, Providers’ top responses included topics on the “indicators of kindergarten readiness” (66.7%), “how to work with students with disabilities” (66.7%), and “OCCRA approved business classes” (61.1%) (Table 26).

65

Table 26. Beneficial Professional Development Sessions for Prospective Providers (N=18) Item

Percent

Indicators of kindergarten readiness

66.7%

How to work with students with disabilities

66.7%

OCCRA approved business classes

61.1%

Parent engagement at school and learning at home

55.6%

Whole Child Framework and early learning standards

55.6%

Social-emotional learning

44.4%

Classroom management

38.9%

Child development

27.8%

Assessment tool administration and interpretation

16.7%

Student-teacher interaction

5.6%

Perspectives on Early Learning and Preschool Enrollment Preschool Enrollment Parents’ decisions for infant and toddler care shed light on valued aspects of early care that may influence future behaviors related to early learning and preschool enrollment. Parents were asked about where their child received infant or toddler care on a regular basis and “center-based care” (46.5%) and “parental care” (40.6%) were the top two places (Figure 36). Parents selected these places of care because they “need to work” (48.5%), it “fit their child’s needs” (47.5%), and they “trust the Provider with their child” (45.5%) (Table 27).

Figure 36. Prospective Parents Places for Infant/Toddler Care (N=101) 50% 40% 30%

46.5% 40.6% 28.7%

20% 10% 0%

66

5.9%

Center-based Parental care Relative care Non-relative Provider care (e.g., sibling, grandparents, aunt/uncle)

5.9%

5.0%

Other

Nanny or sitter care

Table 27. Prospective Parent Reasons for Choosing Type of Infant/Toddler Care (N=101) Item

Count (%)

I need to work

49 (48.5%)

Fits my child's needs

48 (47.5%)

Trust this provider

46 (45.5%)

Affordability

35 (34.7%)

High-quality care

31 (30.7%)

Children at multiple ages

29 (28.7%)

Flexible hours

24 (23.8%)

Close to my home/job

23 (22.8%)

Referred by someone I trust

8 (7.9%)

Regarding preschool preferences, 60.4% of parents reported needing a program that offers extended hours. Many (57.4%) parents preferred “public preschool” for their preschool-aged child while others preferred community-based or family care. Specifically, 18.8% preferred “private preschool,” 11.9% preferred “church-based preschool”, and 8.9% preferred “home” for early learning (Figure 37). The majority (71.1%) of parents preferred a “full-day program” rather than a “part-day program” (28.9%).

Nearly two in five (40.6%) parents reported that preschoolers need two years of preschool to be prepared for kindergarten (Figure 38).

Figure 37. Preferred Place for Early Learning (N=101) Public Preschool

3.0%

Private Preschool

8.9% 11.9% 18.8%

Figure 38. Years of Preschool Needed to be Kindergarten Ready (N=101)

57.4%

3.0%

11.9%

Church-Based Preschool Home Other

1 year 44.6%

40.6%

2 years 3 years None

Although recruitment materials explained that INNOVATIONS was seeking to engage parents of preschool-aged children not enrolled in preschool, when parents were asked about their preschoolaged child’s current early learning environment, 39.6% of parents indicated that their child attends “full-day preschool” while 19.8% were enrolled in “part-day preschool,” followed by 17.8% who received “family member care” (Figure 39). Parents also reported that their preschool-age child has had additional early learning experiences with “Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library program” (82.2%), “local library programs” (42.6%), and “ABC Mouse” (30.7%) selected most frequently.

67

50% 40%

Figure 39. Current Early Learning Environment of Prospective Parents' Children (N=101) 39.6%

30% 19.8%

20%

17.8% 9.9%

10% 0%

Full-day preschool

Part-day preschool

Family member care

8.9%

None

Other

4.0% Babysitter

Parents reported “fits my child’s needs” (52.5%), “I need to work” (42.6%) and “I trust the provider” (36.6%) as the top three reasons they enrolled their preschool-aged child in their current early learning environment (Figure 40). The top four ways that parents learned about their current early learning environment included “word of mouth/other parents” (31.7%), “preschool/staff” (12.9%), and “website” (10.9%) and “other” (10.9%). The parents who responded with “other’ indicated that they first learned about their current early learning environment through “friends”, “professionals” (social worker from doctor’s office, early intervention specialist), “drove by the school”, and “already familiar with schools in the area”.

Figure 40. Prospective Parent Reasons for Current Enrollment Program or Arrangement (N=101) Fits my child's needs

52.5%

I need to work

42.6%

I trust the provider

36.6%

High-quality care

32.7%

Affordability

31.7%

Prepare for kindergarten

26.7%

Close to my home/job

26.7%

Children at multiple ages

25.7%

Flexible hours Referred Other

68

21.8% 7.9% 3.0%

Providers believe that families enroll in their preschools because they offer a “safe and nurturing environment” (94.4%) and “they trust the Provider” (94.4%) (Figure 41), which have been the top two reasons for the past three years.

Figure 41. Prospective Provider Reasons Families Enroll at Their Preschool (N=18) Safe and nurturing environment for child

94.4%

They trust the Provider

94.4%

Child is learning important skills

83.3%

They need to work

83.3%

To prepare their child for kindergarten

66.7%

Close to their home/job

61.1%

Flexible hours for their needs

50.0%

Curriculum aligns w/ values/expectations

44.4%

SUTQ rating

44.4%

Not sure

5.6%

Perspectives on Preschool Quality Almost all (97.0%) parents said a quality early educational experience is “important” or “very important” for child(ren) and 79.0% have been “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their child’s early learning and preschool experiences thus far. Parents identified “safe environment” (92.1%), “social skill development” (86.1%), and kindergarten readiness” (84.2%) as the top three aspects of what a quality early educational experience means to them (Figure 42). Parents commented that quality means: • “You always want the best for your child. I like to talk to the teachers and see how much experience they have, how long they’ve been doing their job.”

• “I feel like it’s important they are teaching them some type of social-emotional activities and communication.”

• “Following the state or local curriculum.”

• “Cleanliness and safety.”

• “Teachers are invested in the kids learning and wellbeing and have genuine relationships with them.”

When prospective Providers were asked what quality preschool means to them as Providers, the top four responses were “social skill development” (77.8%), “teachers are credentialed” (77.2%), “kindergarten readiness” (72.2%), and “safe environment” (72.2%) (Figure 42). Providers were also asked what quality preschool means to families in their preschool, to which the top two responses were “safe environment” (88.9%) and “social skill development” (83.3%).

69

Figure 42. Prospective Stakeholder Views on Quality Preschool 100% 80% 60% 40%

84.2%

77.2% 61.1%

72.2%

66.7%

92.1%

86.1% 77.8%

72.2%

72.2% 65.3%

Safe Environment

Teachers are Credentialed

41.6%

20% 0%

Motor Skill Provider is SUTQ Kindergarten Development Rated Readiness Prospective Provider (N=18)

Social Skill Development

Prospective Parent (N=101)

Similar to their perspectives on quality, parents reported “social-emotional growth” (91.1%), “safe and positive learning environment” (87.1%), and “academics” (77.2%) as the top three aspects of early learning and preschool that they value (Figure 43). These were also the most valued aspects reported in 2022.

Figure 43. Aspects of Early Learning and Preschool Valued by Prospective Parents (N=101) Social-Emotional Growth

91.1%

Safe and Positive Learning Environment

87.1%

Academics Diverse and Inclusive Environment

70.3%

Well-Qualified Teachers

70.3%

Motor Skill Development

67.3%

Outdoor Play Learning

65.3%

Meaningful Family Involvement

70

77.2%

62.4%

Barriers to Preschool Enrollment and CPP Engagement Prospective Parent Concerns and Barriers to Enrollment Parents were asked, “Have you selected a preschool for your child to attend in the fall?” As of spring 2023, more than half (55%) of parents had selected a preschool for their child to attend beginning in the fall of 2023. The specific type or name was not asked. The top two reasons given by the 45 parents who had not chosen a preschool for their child were “waitlist for a program of choice" (31.1%) and "other" (31.1%) (Figure 44). Parents who responded “other” had various reasons including “trouble signing up”, “behavior/potty issues”, “moving”, “issues with accommodating for Autism Spectrum Disorder symptoms and speech delay”, “unable to afford program”, “unsure of convenient programs”, “want to do online schooling”, “unsatisfied with current preschool and looking for something that aligns with our values”, and “homeschool”.

Figure 44. Factors Preventing Prospective Parents From Selecting a Preschool for Their Child to Attend in the Fall of 2023 (n=45) Wait-List For Program of Choice

31.1%

Other

31.1%

Finances/Cannot Afford

20.0%

Child is Going to Kindergarten

17.8%

Child Stays Home w/ Family

13.3%

Available Seats Do Not Align w/ Values

11.1%

Work Schedule Conflict

11.1%

COVID-19 Child is Going to Babysitter

4.4% 2.2%

When asked, “What concerns do you have about enrolling your child(ren) in preschool?”, parents reported concerns with the “safety of the facility” (64.4%) followed by the “teacher-child ratio” (51.5%) (Figure 45). Comments from parents on other types of concerns and barriers included: • “The thing I am most challenged with is (transportation) getting him there.”

• “I have concerns about how she will socialize with others. I want to make sure she is in an environment where she can learn and feel comfortable with others.”

• “It’s hard to know what programs are around locally.”

Likewise, Providers were asked, “What barriers do your families face in accessing preschool?” The top four reasons that impact families’ ability to access prospective Providers’ preschools included “they cannot afford preschool” (66.7%), “lack of transportation to preschool” (61.1%), “work schedule” (55.6%), and “lack of trust/safety concerns” (55.6%) (Figure 46). During focus groups, parents discussed barriers they faced in accessing any type of preschool. Parent feedback included: • “Financial, transportation, and especially social and emotional. He is on the spectrum, and I don’t feel like he’s ready or that I can trust many of the centers to take care of him properly.”

• “We need before care coverage or aftercare coverage because of the hours.”

• “Hours of preschool. My son isn’t ready for full-time preschool. There are some places that offer part-time enrollment, but only like six hours a week and that doesn’t feel like enough time.”

• “Location has been a challenge. Finding the right program in the right location.”

• “Openings and waiting list.”

• “Difficulty getting certain documents for my kids to go to school.”

71

Figure 45. Prospective Parent Concerns About Enrolling Their Child in Preschool (N=101) Safety of Facility

64.4%

Teacher-Child Ratio

51.5%

Behavior Management

40.6%

Hiring Practices/Staff Screening

37.6%

Child Gets Upset/Separation Anxiety

27.7%

COVID-19

23.8%

Curriculum is too Demanding

15.8%

Attendance Requirements

13.9%

Prefer Not to Answer

7.9%

Figure 46. Prospective Provider Reported Barriers Families Face in Accessing Preschool (N=18) They cannot afford preschool

66.7%

Lack of transportation to preschool

61.1%

Lack of trust/safety concerns

55.6%

Work schedule

55.6%

Childcare needs of other children

44.4%

Lack of awareness about preschool

38.9%

Lack of quality options

33.3%

Health or disability/special needs

27.8%

Prefer homecare

27.8%

Enrollment requirements Other

16.7% 5.6%

To increase parental trust in preschool Providers, most (75.2%) parents shared that addressing “safety policies” would be helpful, followed by “secure buildings” (73.3%) and “opportunities to meet one-onone with their preschooler’s teacher or director” (72.3%) (Figure 47). Parents provided additional feedback on ways that Providers can gain their trust in preschool programs during the focus groups: • “Background Checks of teachers and staff”.

• “Transparency. Open and honest communication of expectations”.

• “Video cameras that parents can access”.

• “Ongoing communication about what is happening at the school and what is happening with my child”.

• “Good teacher to student ratio”.

72

Figure 47. Prospective Parent Reported Ways Providers Can Gain Parental Trust in Preschool (N=101) Safety policies

75.2%

Secure building

73.3%

Opportunities to meet one-on-one with my child's teacher/preschool director

72.3%

Opportunities for classroom observations

66.3%

Background checks for all staff

65.3%

Provider had years of experience

54.5%

Opportunities to meet famliies enrolled in the program Provide culturally sensitive and responsive programming

53.5% 50.5%

Seventy-six percent (76.2%) of parents reported that TA would help resolve the “financial/cost of tuition” barriers to preschool enrollment (Figure 48).

Figure 48. Barriers TA Would Help Resolve Among Prospective Parents (N=101) Financial/Cost of tuition

76.2%

Access to desired preschool

36.6%

Convenient location

32.7%

Support obtaining documents Other

17.8% 2.0%

Prospective Provider Challenges and Barriers Engaging with CPP Providers were asked, “What challenges are you facing as a preschool Provider?” In Figure 49, Providers revealed a variety of challenges including “tuition or payment by parents” (38.9%), “home/site repairs” (33.3%), “parent engagement” (33.3%), and “publicly funded child care” (33.3%). These challenges are in line with the top three areas where Providers expressed that CPP support would be beneficial in meeting their requirements to become part of the CPP Community Provider Network (Figure 50). In addition, Providers were asked, “If CPP could provide financial support to you, what type of supports would be most helpful?” According to the survey, “teacher wage grants” (72.2%) would be the most helpful financial support (Figure 51). These responses were consistent with the 2022 evaluation. Another challenging area for Providers is staffing as 16.7% of Provider respondents reported that they have had to limit enrollment or close classrooms due to staffing challenges.

73

Figure 49. Prospective Provider Challenges (N=18) Tuition or payment by parents

38.9%

Home/site repairs

33.3%

Parent engagement

33.3%

Publicly Funded Child Care

33.3%

Classroom materials

27.8%

Trouble filling open seats/Enrollment

27.8%

Staff training/education

22.2%

Meeting SUTQ requirements

22.2%

COVID-19

16.7%

Staff shortages

16.7%

Other

11.1%

Not applicable

11.1%

Administering child assessments

11.1%

Finance management and reporting

11.1%

Space for new 3-4 year old children

11.1%

Obtaining required documentation from parents

5.6%

Figure 50. CPP Supports Helpful in Meeting Prospective Providers' Needs (N=18) Tuition Assistance enrollment help

61.1%

Parent enducation opportunities

44.4%

Teacher educational resources

44.4%

Learning materials

44.4%

Quality improvement coaching support

44.4%

Technology training & access

38.9%

SUTQ support

33.3%

Budgeting/Financial training

33.3%

Support for children with special needs

27.8%

Licensing compliance or complaint issues

22.2%

I'm not interested in joining the CPP Network

5.6%

Other

5.6%

Banking/electronic fund transfers

74

0.0%

Figure 51. Most Helpful Financial Supports for Prospective Providers (N=18) Teacher wage grants

72.2%

Outdoor/Gross motor equipment

66.7%

Rent/Utilities

61.1%

Classroom supplies

50.0%

Technology and Software

50.0%

SUTQ coaching

38.9%

Staff training

38.9%

Substitute teacher support

33.3%

Teacher materials

33.3%

Other Prefer not to answer

11.1% 5.6%

Child Development, Kindergarten Readiness, and Special Education A new element added to the evaluation in 2023 was to engage parents, teachers, and Providers about their awareness of child development and kindergarten readiness, as well as their experiences with children with special needs. In the survey, kindergarten readiness was described as “things a child should know and be able to do when they start kindergarten. These skills and abilities are related to different areas of child development, including health and physical skills, motor skills, social and emotional development, language skills, approaches to learning, and general knowledge”.2 Survey respondents were asked to keep in mind the Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute’s definition of special needs when answering related survey items. The definition is as follows: “the individualized care that a person with a disability – whether physical, mental, behavioral, emotional, or learning difficulties – requires to ensure safety, access to public amenities, or ability to succeed in certain contexts”.3 Note, survey questions were adapted from a variety of early childhood education sources as cited in the Tuition Assistance Stakeholders section of this report.4,5,6,7,8,9

Child Development and Kindergarten Readiness The majority (88.0%) of respondents said that they were “very aware” or “aware” of the meaning of kindergarten readiness and 4.0% were “unaware” and “very unaware” of the concept. Many (67.0%) parents reported an awareness of the extensive advantages of an education that promotes socialemotional learning during childhood and the long-term benefits throughout life. A large body of research on social-emotional learning has shown benefits in the areas of academic performance, behaviors, attitudes, skill development, school and community engagement, employment, and financial stability. This finding highlights the recognition among parents regarding the long-term positive impact of social-emotional learning on multiple areas of their children's lives. While 25.8% said that they were somewhat familiar with this research, 7.2% said they were not familiar.

Almost all parents “strongly agreed” or “agreed” with the following statements: 1) I believe that socialemotional skills development in the first five years of a child’s life are necessary for learning and contribute to school readiness (98.0%), 2) it’s important to find activities and at-home opportunities for my child to practice information learned at school (99.0%), and 3) as a parent/caregiver, I believe that I’m an important teacher in helping my child be ready for kindergarten (98.0%). Comments from parents included: 75

• • • • • • •

“I do believe that parents are children’s first teachers, and the majority of the learning that is instilled in them is essentially coming from home.”

“The child can be home schooled and be at the same level and ready.”

“Until they are a year away from kindergarten, I feel like most learning can take place at home.”

“I am the primary educator of my child. I want to know what’s being taught to my child and ensure that values are aligned.”

“I feel like early learning is important and while I did early learning at home, not all parents have the same luxury. Programs like this are amazing and needed.”

“Knowing how to help my children at home is important.”

“Social-emotional development is more important than academics at this stage.”

Similarly, 94.4% of Providers “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that social and emotional skills development in the first five years of a child’s life are necessary and contribute to school readiness. Provider views on having the necessary supports and resources to effectively teach social emotional skills in the classroom were mixed, with 77.7% “strongly agreeing” or “agreeing” with this sentiment and 16.7% “neither agreeing nor disagreeing” and 5.6% “disagreeing”.

Special Education A notable portion of the prospective parent sample acknowledged having children with special needs who rely on special education services and support. Among the 13 parents with special needs children, seven (53.9%) “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that the services available through their child’s early learning environment partially meet their needs, but do not meet the needs of their whole family. In comparison, 47.6% of the 86 parents who did not report having children with special needs responded in the same way, suggesting that families with and without children with special needs could benefit from additional services to support their children’s learning and meet their families’ needs. Figure 52 shows services that parents said are relevant to their child’s special needs. Additional comments from parents included: • “My child has a speech problem she can't say certain words and she doesn't understand what you’re asking her to do most of the time.”

• “My child has autism, sensory processing disorder, ADHD, food intolerance, is non-verbal, and has a developmental delay.”

• “He is on the spectrum, and I don’t feel that he’s ready or that I could trust many of the centers to take care of him properly.”

Figure 52. Services Relevant to Prospective Child's Special Needs* (n=13) Developmental examinations or screenings

84.6%

Speech/language examinations or screenings

76.9%

Assessments of social skills or behavior programs

69.2%

Sick child-care on an as-needed basis

15.4%

Vision examinations or screenings

15.4%

Hearing examinations or screenings

15.4%

Dental examinations or screenings

15.4%

Note. Survey items were adapted from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Studies (ECLS) Program (2023) “ECLS-B Preschool National Study: Early Care and Education Provider (ECEP) Interview” and the “ECLS-B Preschool Parent Interview,” https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/birthinstruments.asp. *”Relevant Services” does not necessarily mean that the child receives those services.

76

Parent Engagement in School and at Home Providers were asked about how they engage parents in their child’s education (Figure 53). Survey findings indicated that “parent-teacher conferences or meetings” (77.8%) were the most commonly offered in-school engagement opportunity, followed by “seeking input from parents about school readiness goals” (66.7%) and “recommending at-home learning activities” (66.7%). Providers also recognized the importance of “discussing school days and events” (66.7%) in their engagement efforts.

Survey results highlight room for improvement in parental engagement, as a large (50.0%) proportion of parents were reported to be minimally engaged (i.e., the average percent of parents who regularly participate in parent education and engagement program was between 0-25%). On the positive side, 22.2% of parents reported being highly engaged (76-100%).

Figure 53. Ways Prospective Preschools' Engage Parents in School (N=18) Parent-teacher conferences or meetings

77.8%

Ask for input from parents about school readiness goals

66.7%

Teacher recommended at-home learning activities

66.7%

Discuss school days and events

66.7%

Newsletters/updates and reminders

55.6%

School events

50.0%

Student progress reports

44.4%

Parent education activities

44.4%

Opportunities to volunteer in school

27.8%

When asked, “What resources or supports do you think parents need to be more involved in their child’s learning?” Providers offered the following suggestions: • “More interactive materials to take home.”

• “More resources on help with school readiness.”

• “The parents should be able to help give input on the curriculum that's used in teaching our preschoolers.”

• “We offer online advice as time is very sensitive with parents.”

• “Easily ready resources; More time away from work.”

Parents were also asked about their engagement with their child’s early learning experiences (Table 28). The survey data indicated that many parents discuss their child's development and learning with early learning professionals. Since September 2022, approximately half (51.0%) of the parents reported having such discussions “very often”, indicating active involvement in their child's education. Similar results were observed for parents discussing goals for their child with an early learning professional.

Visiting the child's Provider to observe their learning occurred less frequently, with around one-third (36.7%) of parents indicating that they do so “very often”. However, a notable proportion of parents do not find this applicable, suggesting there may be possible limitations in their ability to observe their child's learning environment physically. When discussing their child's development and learning with other parents, 41.4% of parents reported doing so “very often”. Participation in parent activities at the child's Provider or early learning program shows moderate involvement with 42.4% of parents participating “very often”.

77

Table 28. Prospective Parent Engagement with their Child’s Early Learning Experiences

Item

Very Often

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

Not Applicable

Discussed child’s development and learning with an early learning professional (n=100)

51.0%

23.0%

8.0%

3.0%

15.0%

Discussed goals for child with an early learning professional (n=98)

51.0%

21.4%

10.2%

3.1%

14.3%

Visited your child’s Provider/caregiver to observe them learning (n=98)

36.7%

20.4%

13.3%

12.2%

17.3%

Discussed your child’s development and learning with other parents (n=99)

41.4%

23.2%

13.1%

12.1%

Participated in a parent activity at your child’s Provider or early learning program (n=99)

42.4%

19.2%

6.1%

15.2%

10.1%

17.2%

Note. Survey items were adapted from the Panorama Education (2023) “Panorama Family-School Relationships Survey”, https://www.panoramaed.com/family-school-relationships-survey.

Table 29 shows that parents reported participating in home activities promoting child development and learning. Survey results indicated that parents are actively engaged in their child's learning experiences across various domains. The high levels of participation observed in play, outdoor activities, reading, emotional education, and active learning demonstrate parents' commitment to supporting their child's development. Parents shared the following challenges with continuing schoolday learning at home: • “It's not enough time to do any learning at home because of my late 2nd shift that I work.”

• “Time at home since I am a working parent with minimal support system.”

• “Working full time makes it hard to keep up. Knowing what books to supplement.”

• “It would help me more if his preschool program sent items home for him to work on.”

• “Time management” Table 29. Prospective Parent Reported Frequency of At-Home Learning and Development in the Past Month More than once per day

About once per day

A few times per week

A few times per month

Rarely

Not at all

Play together with toys for building things like blocks, tinker toys, Lincoln Logs, or Legos (N=100)

54.0%

17.0%

23.0%

4.0%

2.0%

0%

Take your child outside for a walk or to play in the yard, park, or playground (N=100)

41.0%

33.0%

23.0%

2.0%

1.0%

0%

Read with your child (N=100)

52%

27%

18%

2%

1%

0%

Teach child about emotions and managing them (N=99)

65.7%

21.2%

10.1%

2.0%

1.0%

0%

Item

78

Ask child questions about what they’re learning (N=100)

61.0%

29.0%

6.0%

1.0%e

3.0%

0%

Help child dress themselves (N=100)

49.0%

28.0%

10.0%

2.0%

9.0%

2.0%

Help child brush their teeth (N=98)

55.1%

25.5%

9.2%

2.0%

6.1%

2.0%

Help child to bed (N=100)

42.0%

45.0%

6.0%

1.0%

5.0%

1.0%

Note. Survey items were adapted from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Studies (ECLS) Program (2023) “ECLS-B Preschool National Study: Early Care and Education Provider (ECEP) Interview” and the “ECLS-B Preschool Parent Interview,” https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/birthinstruments.asp.

Parents indicated they are generally satisfied with their child's early learning experiences with 79.0% expressing "very satisfied" or "satisfied" ratings. However, it is important to note that a small percentage of parents expressed dissatisfaction or neutrality in their assessment. Parents provided additional comments related to their satisfaction with their child’s early learning experience. Comments included: • “I am so glad that I was able to enroll him in the preschool promise program to help him learn the things that he needs to know before he goes to kindergarten.”

• “I wish there were more affordable high-quality options with flexible schedules for working parents, especially those with more challenging schedules (long work hours, weekends)” • “This center goes above and beyond to provide an enriching educational experience every day for our son. He is and will stay an only child so it is important for us to have him in an environment where he can learn to speak up for himself, share, and socially problem solve. I am an educational administrator in an elementary building, and I have high standards and this center meets and exceeds all of our expectations and needs.”

• “I wish they offered full time preschool.”

The additional comments provided by parents offer further insights into specific aspects of their child's early learning experiences that contribute to their satisfaction or dissatisfaction and can provide valuable feedback for program improvement and address parents' concerns or suggestions.

Understanding parents' perspectives and their level of satisfaction is crucial for early childhood education programs to continuously improve and meet the needs and expectations of children and their families.

By considering parental feedback, Providers can work towards creating positive early learning experiences that support children's growth, development, and overall well-being.

79

Provider Perspectives on Statewide SUTQ Changes The Ohio Department of Education (ODE) and the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS) administer the Step Up to Quality (SUTQ) rating system, a five-star rating and improvement system that recognizes early education programs that meet quality standards and exceed health and safety licensing requirements. In 2022, changes were made to the SUTQ program to help Providers maintain their star rating and reduce the burden of paperwork. Additionally, the State Board of Education adopted Ohio's revised Early Learning and Development Standards for school readiness, which Providers must follow. Prospective teachers and Providers were asked about the importance of SUTQ star ratings, as well as their awareness on how the changes to the SUTQ and Ohio’s Early Learning and Development Standards impacted their preschool: • “I think the Step Up to Quality can be a bit much, but it’s been a very good resource.”

• “I love gaining knowledge. I love being star rated. I think some of it is excessive. It’s redundant. I love teaching but if I have to get this Step Up to Quality paperwork done, I’m not [teaching].”

• “The Step Up to Quality and the Early Learning Development Standards guide you to have a curriculum and activities to help the child get to where they need to be and to help them get ready for kindergarten readiness programs.”

• “I have one star and my parents love me… I’m no different from somebody who has five stars.

Five stars is a lot of paperwork... It’s so much work for a little money.”

Cost of Quality CPP wanted to understand the early childhood education systems issues that impact the cost of operating a quality preschool. Local, state, and national reports show that personnel costs, staff structure, student-to-teacher ratios, facility costs, and program offerings increase the cost of highquality preschool programs. Workforce compensation and benefit costs are the greatest drivers of increased cost. Prospective Providers were asked to comment on the cost of providing high-quality preschool. Regarding staffing, although the majority (68.8%) of prospective Providers survey respondents reported that they currently do not have open teacher positions in their preschools, 31.3% said that they have one or more open positions (Table 3). Challenges prospective Providers have faced with hiring teachers included “having a diploma”, “low interest due to pay”, “no credentials, not vaccinated, not passing drug tests or background checks”, and “I’m a Provider, it’s just me”.

Furthermore, three prospective Providers (23.1%) reported that they have had to limit enrollment or close classrooms due to staffing challenges. Providers explained how their enrollment has been affected by staffing challenges in the following quotes: • “We currently have seven rooms closed because we have no staff to cover the classrooms.”

• “With no support, my hours and availability are limited.”

• “Not being able to financially support having additional staffing has affected my ability to acquire new enrollments resulting in loss of business and a need for outside employment.”

Prospective Providers said the following when asked about supports or changes that would help retain or attract new teachers to their preschool: • “Having a livable wage.”

• “I would love to see an increase in pay for the staff who work in the early childhood field.

Although there has been a push, we still need more, especially for those who have degrees.”

• “Increase benefits, tax write-offs, exemptions, more financial assistance, to support quality programming, supplies, and transportation.”

• “More training and better pay for experienced educators.”

• “Consider that FCC Providers have not been supported through the financial hardships due to inflation and staffing issues.”

• “Advertising” • “Being able to provide for more slots for children.”

80

Other factors have impacted prospective Providers’ ability to operate a sustainable and quality program. The top four rated program elements (both financial and non-financial) that Providers commented on included “pay and benefits”, “more funding”, “professional development and support”, and “enrollment, recruitment, and retention of students”. Select quotes from these categories include: • “You have to have materials and supplies and things like that. I’ve been in the business long enough that I have too many supplies. But, a lot of people coming in, they have to get a curriculum, assessments, toys and activities, books and training, and that’s a lot. You have 4C for Children and different organizations. Preschool Promise does have available funds and grants and things that will assist new Providers or people just getting into the field.”

• A suggestion regarding support for professional development opportunities, “someone had mentioned earlier about not being able to attend trainings because you might be taking care of kids that day. I was thinking if it were possible to have a database that Providers head to for substitutes who already have a background check.”

• “Due to teaching in my home, the wear and tear can be tremendous. Some grants do not assist in home repair. It would be nice to have those available to apply for.”

• “Just credentialed staff. Definitely livable wage for staff.”

• “I would need help recruiting more children.”

Impact of COVID-19 This year, only 23.8% of prospective parent survey respondents said that COVID-19 was a concern for them when enrolling their child in preschool, which is down from the 63.0% reported in 2022 and the 40.9% reported in 2021. In comparison, parents ranked “safety of facility” (64.4%), “teacher-child ratio” (51.5%), and “behavior management” (40.6%) higher than COVID-19 as a concern in 2023 (Figure 45).

Similarly, COVID-19 ranked low in the list of factors preventing prospective parents from selecting a preschool for their child to attend in the fall of 2023 (Figure 44). Similarly, with prospective Providers, COVID-19 ranked low on the list of challenges they faced as a Provider (Figure 49).

Additional Feedback for CPP Prospective parents were asked for their feedback on “the most important thing(s) CPP should know about their child’s and family’s needs and expectations about early learning and preschool”. Broadly, response topics addressed learning skills (e.g., social-emotional learning and out-of-school learning), community resources, financial constraints, time constraints, relationships with parents, and the program environment. Comments from parents are listed below: Prospective Parent Recommendations • “Social emotional development more important than academics at this stage.”

• “…I struggle in knowing if what I am doing is helping. I would love to have free access to physical and online resources to better prepare my children from home. Also, a home-based curriculum or a guide that parents could follow would be amazing!”

• “The extended hours are the most important obstacles that I face because I am a single mom and a nurse.”

• “Schedule that works with working parents, additional or access to outside assistance for children that struggle (sensory needs, behavior, emotional regulation, etc.).”

• “Some parents don’t like to separate themselves from their kids at such an early age.”

• “Parent-teacher relationship, intentional teaching, and seeing my child’s progress. Resources to help improve barriers we may be experiencing with life. Events involving child literature activities, tasks sent homework that parents can see what our children are learning and the evidence.”

• “They should teach parents how to handle certain child emotions by using pamphlets.”

• “Quality of food is essential to our school choice.”

81

• • • •

“It’s really important that there is clear communication with the staff and the children feel safe where they are.”

“Awareness of the child’s emotional traumas and how the staff are trained when it comes to mental health awareness.”

“Assistance for new parents who might have a little more difficulty figuring out how to go about getting all the needed resources to begin school…and getting the needed supplies.”

“Transportation is a big thing to consider and that not everyone has the same access to it.”

Similarly, prospective Providers were asked for their feedback on what they thought was most important for CPP to know about early educators’ needs and expectations. Comments from Providers are listed here: Prospective Provider Recommendations • “Staff development.”

• “Due to teaching in my home, the wear and tear can be tremendous. Some grants do not assist in home repair. It would be nice to have those available to apply for.”

• “I need help with transportation and a teacher’s aide.”

• “I would like to take advantage of the opportunities like CPP and others, but I feel like I need more space. It has been challenging to relocate, but I feel more space would allow me to love and educate more children.”

82

KEY FINDINGS, NEXT STEPS, AND OPPORTUNITIES Key Findings Parents •

Tuition Assistance Supports High-Quality Preschool Affordability and Access: Nearly 62% of TA parents reported that they would not be able to afford any of the costs of preschool without CPP TA. Preschool affordability was a top barrier to enrollment for QI and prospective parents.

Most (76.2%) prospective parents indicated that TA would help to address affordability of preschool.

•

Prospective Parents Are More Aware of CPP Benefits: Prospective parents' awareness of CPP increased from 2022 to 2023. Prospective parents want a better understanding of CPP (e.g., TA information sessions, meetings with teachers/staff, and preschool site visits) to consider enrolling their children in CPP. Parents shared that safety and security are top priorities and concerns for their children when considering a quality preschool.

•

Parents Express that Social-Emotional Learning is Important: Most parents were aware of the connection between social-emotional learning, child development, and kindergarten readiness, and reported it as a valued aspect of quality preschool. Despite this, feedback indicated that parents’ knowledge of developmentally appropriate markers for school readiness may be limited, offering opportunities for promotion and awareness.

•

Parents Report Engagement in Their Child’s Learning In-School and At-Home: Many parents reported having frequent relationship-building interactions with their child’s preschool teacher or Provider and being engaged in their child’s education through parent-teacher meetings, school events, and preschool management apps. School-day engagement and the continuation of learning at home is a challenge for some parents due to work inflexibility and having limited free time and access to resources. Flexible options (e.g., virtual programs, inperson, phone, etc.) can eliminate barriers and potentially boost school involvement and athome learning, according to parents.

•

Attendance During the Winter and Holiday Season Can Be Difficult: Nearly one in three TA parents characterized their child’s absences during this time as “not at all avoidable”. The top reasons for absences include seasonal illness and inclement weather. Other structural barriers, such as finances, work schedules, program operating hours, and transportation, impact enrollment, attendance, and retention of preschoolers throughout the year.

•

Parents are Satisfied with Provider’s Communication: Almost all TA and QI parents expressed high satisfaction with their Provider’s communication. Most commonly, Providers shared with parents the ways that CPP has supported their preschool (e.g., professional development, equipment, and classroom supplies).

Teachers and Providers

83

•

CPP Funds Impact Preschool Quality and Program Sustainability: Grants allowed TA and QI Providers to increase wages, recruit teachers, purchase program materials, and fund professional development. Teachers and Providers indicated that the grant funds provide crucial support for their staff and programs.

•

Prospective Providers are Aware of CPP but Need More Information and Details: Most prospective Providers were aware of CPP but only half knew the eligibility requirements for joining the CPP Community Provider Network. To promote connection with CPP supports and programs, Providers indicated that CPP should consider providing more information about grant opportunities, virtual training, and CPP, in general. Providers indicated that the best way to share this information is through email.

•

Preschool Teachers and Providers Need Support to Enhance Social-Emotional Teaching: Teachers and Providers expressed a need for support to effectively teach and assess socialemotional skills in the classroom, specifically in the areas of assessing abuse, neglect, and bullying; cultural background, home environment, and family dynamics; and students being academically and socially challenged in the classroom.

•

Teachers and Providers are Educating Preschoolers with Special Needs: All stakeholder groups reported a notable percentage of preschoolers with special needs who require special education services and support. Concerns were raised about teachers having the appropriate training and skills to support preschoolers with special needs. Teachers and Providers reported needing help with service referrals and resources for parents of preschoolers with special needs.

•

Preschool Teachers and Providers are Empowered by CPP Support and Professional Development Opportunities: Professional development, learning materials, and coaching support were highly rated areas of satisfaction for TA and QI teachers and Providers. These supports have helped preschools maintain or increase their quality, increase staff qualifications, and enhance program offerings. Additional opportunities to learn about managing difficult behaviors and teaching students with special needs are desired.

Recruitment, Retention, and Pay •

Insufficient Pay and Benefits Continued to Hinder Preschool Teacher Recruitment, Retention, and Program Sustainability: On average, teachers and Providers across all stakeholder groups expressed satisfaction with their job but dissatisfaction with their pay and benefits. Teachers and Providers reported that their satisfaction with their pay and benefits impacts their decision to stay with their employer, which influences preschool quality and sustainability.

Ongoing Impact of COVID-19 •

COVID-19 Continues to Impact Preschools and Families: Enrollment continued to be interrupted by staffing shortages and pandemic-related challenges with nearly 25% of Providers reporting having to close classrooms and being unable to accept new students or open new classrooms, as a result. Few parents were still hesitant to send their children to preschool because of COVID19; thus, it was also reported as a barrier to attendance by teachers and Providers. Although inflation and the cost of quality have increased substantially over the past two years, most Providers were completely confident that their preschool will remain open for the 2023-23 school year. Many Providers plan to increase their tuition and fees to help with increasing costs.

Recommendations, Next Steps, and Opportunities

84

•

Leverage Community Partnerships to Enhance Services for Preschool Providers and Families: Work with new and existing community partners to promote the benefits of CPP to prospective Providers and families, such as professional development and networking for Providers and access to quality preschool and Preschool Chats information sessions for families. Providers and families mentioned that they could utilize services and training that support behavioral difficulties, mental health, social-emotional learning, and special needs, etc. Flexible training options including in-person, virtual, real-time, and self-paced learning can help make education a priority and accommodate complicated schedules and different learning styles.

•

Strengthen Messaging and Communications to Reach Prospective Parents: Provider messaging should address preschool safety and security, which prospective parents reported as top priorities and concerns for their children. Messaging strategies may also address socialemotional learning, which parents highly valued, and financial supports, which parents reported as a barrier to preschool enrollment.

•

Explore Opportunities to Expand and Promote Digital Resources: Share additional information and materials on the CPP website and other digital formats to support stakeholders with challenges and continued learning (e.g., parent engagement, at-home learning, child development, kindergarten readiness, finding and filling open preschool seats, community

resources, quality, and safety standards of Providers in the Network, etc.). Encourage community partners and preschool staff to promote digital resources to peers and families, as they have the potential to help parents better recognize the benefits of CPP beyond TA and can assist with meeting the unique needs of stakeholders.

•

Connect Preschool Parents, Teachers, and Providers to Resources that Support a Successful Preschool Experience and Kindergarten Readiness: Provide preschool parents, teachers, and Providers with tools, resources, and opportunities to support children meeting developmental milestones and gaining social-emotional skills that are essential to success in kindergarten.

Additional Considerations for CPP and Early Education Partners

85

•

Consider Offering Peer Support Opportunities and Tools for Teachers and Providers: It would benefit teachers and Providers to have access to a space to share resources, ideas, and peerprovided guidance for navigating challenges in the field. Consider providing a platform (e.g., blog, shared drive) and regularly occurring opportunities across a variety of settings (e.g., inperson, online) to foster a supportive peer network for preschool staff.

•

Contribute to Equitable Access to High-Quality Preschool for Working Families: Help ensure working families who have children have access to high-quality preschool by assessing the needs of programs that offer non-traditional hours. Promote resources and advocate for systems changes that support their vitality.

•

Continue to Advocate for System Reform that Support Fair Wages for Teachers and Improve Access to High-Quality Preschool: It is still necessary to implement policy changes at the state level to ensure that preschool teachers and providers receive a fair salary and benefits. Share updates on advocacy initiatives and advancements being made at the local, state, and federal levels with the CPP Network.

•

Continue to Advocate for and Champion the Value of the CPP Community Provider Network: It would benefit CPP to inform all stakeholders, especially those who are not closely connected to CPP or early education efforts, of the quality education that community Providers provide, the SUTQ standards in which program aligns, and their integral role in making access to high-quality preschool possible for all children in Cincinnati.