By Georgia Goldburn, executive director, Hope for New Haven
On June 30 — Tuesday — the loans I received for my nonprofit child care center, Hope Child Development Center, from the Small Business Administration’s Paycheck Protection Program and my state-level emergency support will both run out. I don't know what I am going to do.
Unlike colleagues in some other states, I was fortunate that Gov. Ned Lamont and Connecticut Office of Early Childhood Commissioner Beth Bye took extraordinary measures to stabilize child care programs during the coronavirus shutdown, including providing assurance that child care subsidies — which make up 40 percent of Hope's revenue — would remain at March 2020 levels through the end of June regardless of child attendance. The state additionally provided child care facilities like mine with a bonus of up to $825 per week to provide hazardous duty pay to our staff.
And a program called CTCares for Frontline Workers provided a weekly benefit of $250 to $500 to eligible front-line workers for child care expenses for six weeks. That made it possible for Hope to remain open to serve our essential-worker parents, even though revised classroom sizes and a reduced capacity of 30 children — from a normal 77 — cut our capacity by about 60 percent.
These programs were made possible by Congress’ special $3.5 billion appropriation for child care in pandemic stimulus legislation. But that funding is nearly gone; many child care providers will not be able to cover expenses with the smaller class sizes mandated by social distancing or reduced demand due to many parents' slow return to their offices or to child care at all. Child care facilities whose families do not receive child care assistance and thus didn't receive gap funds have, in many cases, lost 100 percent of their revenue.
We are beginning to see the closures of some programs in my state, even as we are beginning a still-fragile reopening. Meanwhile, other providers around the country await the end of their state programs or federal funds, or already have seen their businesses break as funds ran out under stay-at-home rules or because they could not get one of the small business loans at all.
Simply put, this unfolding crisis in our child care system threatens to undermine our country's recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, as all those parents who must return to work cannot find care for their children after their provider closes, is serving fewer children or is forced to raise tuition.
This is why Congress must act.
Hope, like many child care businesses, has always been in a precarious financial position; the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic threatens to overwhelm us completely. Child care providers were paid poorly and working parents often couldn’t afford to pay more for care. According to the Center for American Progress, 51 percent of Americans lived in a child care desert — where there weren’t enough providers for the population — even before the pandemic.
Nationally, from 2005 to 2017, the number of small, licensed family child care homes declined by nearly 50 percent, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. While the reasons for these closures vary, in at least one state, providers named the increased costs of doing business, the lack of benefits and the simultaneous cuts to subsidies as factors driving them to close.
These structural inequities, due to chronic underfunding and benign neglect, are now more evident than ever.
A survey of Hope's families revealed that only 50 percent of them plan to return to our facility upon Connecticut’s reopening. Such a decline in enrollment will result in a $250,000 deficit — a $300,000 swing from the year before. Without further assistance, this deficit will prove insurmountable for us.
That comes as we’re faced with new expenses, such as the need for personal protective equipment and other supplies to keep staff safe. Continued shortages in cleaning supplies have further strained providers’ ability to provide staff with gloves, thermometers and masks.
Yet another threat is the critical shortage of staff, as many teachers report not feeling equipped to perform their jobs while remaining safe. It is, of course, impossible to socially distance while providing young children and babies with developmentally appropriate education and care — including attending to their social-emotional and cognitive development while providing comfort, feeding and hugs.
Given all of this, along with the new paradigms that cut child care facilities’ capacity by half, many providers are making the calculation that it is not economically sustainable to continue to operate and have already decided to remain permanently closed.
But if I, too, am forced to close for economic reasons, all of my families will be left scrambling. I am asking myself: Will a parent be forced to leave the workforce to care for their child — and what will that mean for their family’s economic security? Will they put their child in an unlicensed and unsafe setting? In 2016 and 2017, during a downturn in available child care subsidies in Connecticut, the Office of the Child Advocate found that six children died in unregulated child care settings.
This pandemic put in stark reality how the child care industry serves as our economy’s foundation — but that it was always riven with cracks. These new challenges from COVID-19 demand a deliberate and sustained federal response; there is no other way to find the $50 billion needed to shore up the child care infrastructure in the next six months.
One might wish to argue we cannot afford this, but ask our country's doctors, nurses and first responders who it was that cared for their children while they went to work saving lives and the vital role of child care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic will become clear. Not paying for child care can't help but cost our country magnitudes more than we imagine.
CERCLE Co-Founder, Georgia Goldburn, Explains Why The Time for Equity in Education in Connecticut Is Now
Why We Can’t Wait — Race and the Care 4 Kids Program
According to the United Way of Connecticut (the agency that administers the state's Care 4 Kids program) 4,424 fewer children were being served in December 2016 than in August 2016 when the program closed to most new applicants.
Families from cities like Bridgeport, Hartford, Waterbury and New Haven were hardest hit, with a combined 1,429 fewer children being served. These cities represent one-third of the total subsidies lost between August and December.
While Care 4 Kids (C4K) does not provide a racial breakdown of the children being served, estimates of the percentage of children of color enrolled in public schools in each of these cities, according to Edsite, suggest that 83% of them are children of color. The pattern holds for the next five towns hardest hit: Danbury, East Hartford, Meriden, New Britain and Norwich, where 862 combined fewer children were being served; estimates suggest that 66% of these are children of color.
Connecticut has the distinction of having the widest achievement gap in the nation. The reduction in racial isolation sought through the Sheff v. O’Neill case remains elusive and in CCJEF v. Rell, Judge Thomas Moukawsher ruled that Connecticut is defaulting on its constitutional duty to give all children an adequate education.
The closure of the C4K program follows in the sad tradition of unequal access to quality care and education for the state’s youngest children of color. The data is clear on the benefits of early care and education and it is equally clear about the school-to-prison pipeline.
The C4K program uniquely achieves the value of members on both sides of the aisle – in that it allows low income families, the majority of who are people of color, to go to work, which affords them the pride of providing for their families. Care 4 Kids gives these families the help they need to propel themselves from poverty and creates access to high quality learning experiences for their children while they work. For many, it is the only source of support that they access through the state to cover the cost of childcare, which is among the highest in the nation.
And while the decision to close the program will result in some forgoing work to stay at home, many will remain committed to their vision of economic independence – choosing instead, unreliable and low quality care, oftentimes in unregulated and unsafe settings. Regardless of the decision, the data and history have shown us that the impact will be the same: A life sentence for children of color to a second-chance rather than a first-chance society.
The fact is clear for families of color regardless of their economic means, but most profoundly for low income families. The pathway to achieve their vision of success for their children is profoundly impaired by their decision to raise their families in Connecticut.
The countervailing view will invariably be, “What can we do if there is no money? We cannot spend what we do not have. These are bad economic times for everyone.” But for many of Connecticut’s children of color, even in times of economic abundance their access to quality care and education remains deferred. And although some may see the decision to close the C4K program as a temporary measure, history has demonstrated the pernicious legacy of unequal and delayed access to quality care and education for children of color.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. wrote in his book Why We Can’t Wait, “The words ‘bad timing’ came to be ghosts haunting our every move … they did not realize that it was ridiculous to speak of timing when the clock of history showed that the Negro had already suffered one hundred years of delay.” Sadly, time appears to be standing still for children of color in Connecticut’s educational system.
It is for this reason that I urge legislators, on both sides of the aisle, and the governor, to look beyond the very narrow view of the current fiscal crisis and take a much broader perspective on how Connecticut can be proactive in ensuring success for children of color in its educational system.
I urge our elected officials to reopen the C4K program now and provide the funding needed today and into the future to ensure that Connecticut’s most vulnerable children begin on the right path from the very beginning. It is time to put our money where our mouth is.
We can no longer wait!
Georgia Goldblum is co-founder of CERCLE and director of Hope Child Development Center in New Haven.
Speaking Out Against the Cut!
The Connecticut Early Childhood Alliance spoke with NBC Connecticut News.
Watch the interview after the break. If you would like to share your story with CERCLE, click here.
Firsts are Worth Celebrating!
Last Tuesday evening, CERCLE hosted its first Community Forum on quality affordable child care in Connecticut. Reacting to the drastic changes in the Care 4 Kids subsidies announced in late May, CERCLE and CT Parent Power cosponsored the event bringing together families, child care providers and legislators.
In a quiet room at Hope Child Development Center, Parents impacted by the new requirements shared their stories with state representatives, alderpersons and other families attending to lend support even though the cut would have no effect on their ability to pay for child care services.
While, the forum was a great success for CERCLE as we continue to develop our voice in the early education community, Care 4 Kids families need us to do more now. In the coming weeks, CERCLE will continue to mobilize families, small business providers in the ECE industry, and other stakeholders to speak out against these cuts and their devastating effects on families in underserved communities.
If you would like to help, please consider volunteering. Email us at email@example.com for more information.
Make no mistake, prekindergarten education is critical to a child's future academic success. But not just any pre-K; instead, early education where quality is paramount accomplishes the long-term benefits that are sought.
As discussed in a recent New York Times op-ed, curricula that actively engage children's minds make the difference. Accordingly, preschoolers are more inclined to retain knowledge and learning techniques beyond their kindergarten years when they are immersed in an early-learning environment where, for example:
This is the case in Boston where research indicated that preschoolers there were four to seven months more advanced in reading and mathematics. These accomplishments were identified as factors contributing to the city's pre-kindergartners narrowing the achievement gap on Massachusetts' third-grade examinations: approximately 27 percent more scored "proficient" or better on the state's tests.
The successes in Boston are mirrored in other parts of the country: Michigan, North Carolina, and Tulsa, Okla. have noted comparable outcomes. More specifically, results from New Jersey showed that when children from low-income families attend quality preschool programs the achievement gap is reduced by up to 30 percent at the fifth-grade level when measured against the nationwide average. The benefit was more enduring in Chicago, Ill., where high school students who were enrolled in the city's Child-Parent Centers' pre-K program had a graduation rate 29 percent higher than their peers who were not.
Early education that is less rigorous does not produce similar long-term benefits, however. In Tennessee, for instance, children enrolled in state preschool programs made significant progress in reading, mathematics, and language. But none of these advantages was noticeable by the end of their kindergarten years. And they remained absent when the children were evaluated at the third-grade level.
There is a remarkable distinction in how preschool children in Boston and Tennessee are educated. Tennessee's method lacks a systematic strategy, and essentially, "each teacher is inventing pre-K on her own," observed Dale Farran, a Vanderbilt University professor and one of the researchers who conducted the study of the children enrolled in the state's preschool program. Conversely, Boston's approach is more wholesome. Teachers are trained in child development and mentored in their profession by more experienced educators. The city's commitment is equally evident in its curriculum, which emphasizes children's active participation in learning. "Too often, children sit in a circle and the adult does all the talking," chides Dr. Jason Sachs, Director of Early Childhood Education for Boston Public Schools.