Public Hearing Challenges Facing Child Care Community in New York State

1 BEFORE THE NEW YORK STATE SENATE

STANDING COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN AND FAMILIES 2 -------------------------------------------------- 3 PUBLIC HEARING 4 CHALLENGES FACING CHILD CARE COMMUNITY

IN NEW YORK STATE 5 ----------------------------------------------------- 6 7

Senate Hearing Room 8 250 Broadway, 19th Floor

New York, New York 9

December 12, 2011 10 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 11 12 PRESIDING: 13 Senator Diane J. Savino

Chair 14 15 SENATE MEMBERS PRESENT: 16 Senator Velmanette Montgomery 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1

SPEAKERS:PAGE QUESTIONS 2

Sara Vechiotti 5 18 3 Acting Deputy Commissioner for

Child Care & Head Start 4 NYC Administration for Children Services 5 Raglan George, Jr. 54 73

Executive Director 6 Carolyn Cox

Vice President, Head Start Employees, 7 Local 95

Mabel Everett 8 President of the Day Care Employees,

Local 205 9 Thomas Murray, Esq.

General Counsel 10 District Council 1707 11 Linda Manley 89 95

Legal Director 12 Lawyers Alliance for New York 13 Don Friedman 99 107

Member 14 Empire Justice Center 15 Kenneth Popler 109 119

President & CEO 16 Staten Island Mental Health Society 17 Betty Holcomb 125 136

Policy Director 18 Center for Children's Initiatives 19 Randi Levine 146 171

Staff Attorney 20 Advocates for Children of New York 21 Moira Flavin 146 171

Policy Assoc. for Early Childhood 22 Education, Education & Youth Services

Citizens Committee for Children of NY 23

Steven Antonelli 146 171 24 Administrative Director of Bank Street

Head Start 25 Bank Street College of Education 1

SPEAKERS:PAGE QUESTIONS 2

Denise Dowell 182 198 3 Director of Early Learning and

Care Programs 4 CSEA Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL-CIO 5 Tammie Miller 182 198

Chair of Child Care Providers Chapter 6 Carol Gersl

Member 7 UFT 8 James Matison 208 231

Executive Director 9 Brooklyn Kindergarten Society 10 Gregory Brender 208 231

Policy Analyst 11 United Neighborhood Houses 12 Lisa Caswell 208 231

(for Exec. Director Andrea Anthony) 13 Senior Policy Analyst

Day Care Council of New York, Inc. 14

Liz Accles 246 263 15 Senior Policy Analyst

Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies 16

Amy Cohen 246 263 17 Director of Government Contracts

Sandy Katz 18 Director of Early Childhood Services

Jewish Child Care Association 19

Cordelia Grand McNish 246 263 20 Member

Episcopal Social Services 21 22 Dr. Randi Herman 281 292

First Vice President 23 Council of School Supervisors &

Administrators 24 25 1

SPEAKERS:PAGE QUESTIONS 2

Jamila LaMont 293 298 3 Representative of

Area 145 Day Care Center 4

Howard Milbert 301 307 5 Co-Chair

NYS Association of Directors of 6 Not-For-Profit Child Day Care

Centers, Inc. 7 8 9 ---oOo--- 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Good morning, everyone. 2 I'm Senator Diane Savino. For those of you 3 who don't know me, I am the Chair of the 4 Senate Committee on Children and Families. 5 At some point today, I'm assuming we will be 6 joined by some of the other members of the 7 Senate Committee on Children and Families. 8 Senator Duane, perhaps; Senator Montgomery. We may 9 even have a visit from Senator Squadron, who's 10 upstairs on the 20th floor. 11 But, for now, since we're here, this hearing 12 is scheduled to start at 10 a.m. I believe that we 13 should proceed. 14 The subject of the hearing today is 15 child care; child care in New York City. And it 16 will take into consideration some concerns that 17 have come out of the child care and community, and 18 the day-care community, with respect to Early Learn. 19 Our first testimony will be presented by 20 Sara Vechiotti -- 21 SARA VECHIOTTI: Perfect. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Perfect. 23 -- who is the acting deputy commissioner for 24 child care and Head Start for New York City ACS. 25 Following Sara will be, Raglan George, for 1 District Council 1707; 2 And, behind them will be, Linda Manley, from 3 the Lawyers Alliance for New York. 4 Welcome, Sara; and you can proceed with your 5 testimony. 6 You don't have to read the whole testimony. 7 If you want to summarize it, that's fine. And, we 8 have a list of questions that we're prepared to 9 present to you, and I think you will be able to 10 answer many of the questions that we're going to be 11 presenting today. 12 So, go ahead, Ms. Vechiotti. 13 SARA VECHIOTTI: Thank you. 14 Good morning, Chair Savino, and members of 15 the Committee on Children and Families. 16 I am Sara Vechiotti, acting deputy 17 commissioner of child care and Head Start at the 18 Administration for Children Services. 19 On behalf of Children Services, 20 Commissioner Ronald E. Richter, I would like to 21 thank you for the opportunity to be here today to 22 speak with you about the issues involving 23 child care in New York City. 24 It is vitally important that the Committee on 25 Children and Families is holding this hearing to 1 focus on challenges facing child care in 2 New York State. 3 Child care and early education are important 4 supports for working families, and employment, in 5 New York. With those supports, many New Yorkers 6 could not be part of the workforce. 7 At the same time, child care and early 8 education provide children with a solid foundation 9 for appropriate development and education. The 10 lessons and skills learned by the children 11 prepare them for school, and generate benefits far 12 into their lives. 13 The State of New York needs to fully support 14 child care, to foster education and success of our 15 youngest citizens, and to enable parents to 16 continue to work, and, to reenter the job market. 17 Children Services administers one of the 18 largest publicly funded early care and education 19 systems in the country, serving approximately 20 120,000 children a year, which includes 21 child care, Head Start, and universal 22 pre-kindergarten. 23 Subsidized child care administered by 24 Children Services promotes family well-being, by 25 allowing parents to pursue and maintain 1 employment, and by promoting child development. 2 Currently, approximately 94,000 children are 3 enrolled in the City's subsidized child-care system. 4 The remaining children are served through the 5 Head Start system. 6 Of the families served in child care, 7 approximately 65 percent are working families, and 8 another 26 percent are families in education or 9 training programs. 10 Families are eligible for subsidized 11 child care if they're receiving cash assistance, are 12 served by the child-welfare system, are low-income 13 employed, and meet certain other criteria. 14 Child care is provided in a variety of 15 settings. 16 The largest percentage of children in 17 child care are being served in center-based 18 settings; followed by, informal family, friend, 19 and neighbor care; and then, finally, followed by 20 family child-care settings. 21 As you know, in the last several years, 22 Children Services has faced significant fiscal 23 challenges in our efforts to maintain high-quality 24 child care for families. 25 For the City fiscal-year 2012, ACS faced a 1 sizable deficit of $95 million due to dramatic 2 increases in the cost of providing child care and 3 the loss of federal stimulus dollars. 4 For example: Costs in the voucher system are 5 escalating, as families are increasingly using 6 regulated child care and more younger children, aged 7 infant to preschool, are being served. 8 While these are both positive trends that we 9 support, they are more costly. 10 Other challenges for the system include, 11 the new 2011 State child-care market rates, and 12 rising insurance costs for the contracted system. 13 At the same time, federal funding has not 14 kept pace with the rising costs. 15 As a consequence, Children Services faced a 16 critical situation, where we had no choice but to 17 reduce the number of child-care subsidies we can 18 fund by approximately 16,500 children. 19 In addition, Children Services, like other 20 City agencies, needed to fulfill its responsibility 21 to reduce spending to address the City's deficit; 22 and one of the solutions increased parent fees for 23 child care. 24 Due to the efforts and support of Mayor and 25 City Council, 82 million in one-time funding was 1 made available to the child-care budget. 2 These one-time City-only funds were made 3 available to avoid reductions which had been 4 necessary, as the stimulus funds ended, insurance 5 costs and market rates continued to rise, without 6 corresponding increases in federal funds. 7 The restoration meant that all children who 8 benefited from child-care services, and were to be 9 affected by the service terminations, were offered 10 a funded alternative for child care in 11 fiscal-year 2012. 12 While many New York families were spared the 13 loss of critical child-care services for this year, 14 there is uncertainty about the fiscal 2013 budget. 15 At the federal level, we are anticipating 16 that there may be cuts in child care and Head Start, 17 as part of the overall deficit-reduction package, if 18 there is no agreement on appropriations. 19 Such a cut would only exacerbate the fiscal 20 pressures on child care and Head Start. 21 Despite these challenges, the City 22 continues to contribute more than its share 23 required by the Child Care and Development Block 24 Grant, as we provide child care to families 25 receiving cash assistance, and are committed to 1 providing child care to low-income families. 2 In order to sustain, and allow for its 3 sustainability of the system, it is essential that 4 there be additional State funding for child care 5 across New York. 6 In addition, we would like to work jointly 7 with you to advocate for federal funds, to prevent 8 further cuts, or maintain an increased federal 9 funding for the Child-Care Development Block Grant. 10 I would also like to say a few words about 11 Early Learn NYC. 12 While we are limited in what we can say at 13 this time because of the ongoing procurement and the 14 evaluations of the proposals processed, we are 15 excited about the response to our request for our 16 proposal, our "RFP," from providers who are 17 interested in administering Early Learn NYC. 18 Children Services received proposals for 19 more sites and seats than is our current 20 capacity. 21 We acknowledge, and research demonstrates, 22 that success in school, and in life, positively 23 associated with the experience of high-quality 24 child care. 25 As a result, Children Services strongly 1 believes that Early Learn NYC will strengthen 2 children's development and educational experiences 3 by setting higher standards to improve the program 4 quality, leading to positive outcomes for 5 children. 6 Although there are different program 7 requirements reflecting varying standards and 8 regulations, the primary goals of Early Learn NYC 9 are to better support working families and 10 parents, and to offer high-quality child care 11 regardless of program setting or design. 12 This means, that no matter where a child may 13 go for early care and education services, they'll be 14 receiving the same level of quality services. 15 We are currently reviewing proposals, and we 16 anticipate notifying proposers of awards in the 17 spring of 2012, with new contracts to begin 18 October of 2012. 19 A new innovative program is not necessarily 20 easy to launch, and we have heard some concerns 21 from members of the community. 22 While we face some challenges, we intend to 23 move forward with our commitment to implement 24 Early Learn NYC, and look forward to working with 25 community and our contractors to implement the 1 vision of Early Learn NYC. 2 I would now like to turn our attention to a 3 critical policy issue concerning comprehensive 4 background checks. 5 As you know, State law provides for subsidy 6 payments to providers of informal legally exempt 7 care, which is home-based child care not offered 8 through a program licensed by the New York City 9 Department of Mental Health and Hygiene. 10 While Children Services understands the 11 need for informal care, and that many of these 12 providers are family members, friends, and 13 neighbors, we do have concerns about the 14 potential health and safety risks of children in 15 such care. 16 State law prohibits Children Services from 17 fingerprinting an informal provider in order to 18 conduct a criminal-history records search, and from 19 requesting a search of the State Central Register; 20 or "SCR." 21 In contrast, such searches are conducted, and 22 required, for all licensed providers. 23 Currently, Children Services is limited to 24 the background checks of informal providers 25 allowed by State regulations. 1 State regulations only enable a child-welfare 2 search, which gives us information on whether a 3 child was removed from the provider's care, or 4 whether a provider's parental rights were terminated 5 for any children. 6 This search, however, does not tell us 7 whether a provider has an indicated report of abuse 8 or neglect against a child. 9 In order to obtain that information, we would 10 need to do a search of the SCR, which State law does 11 not allow. 12 In addition, while State regulations require 13 a search of the State Sex Offender's Registry to 14 identify whether a provider or anyone in the 15 provider home is a registered sex offender in 16 New York State, it does not include information from 17 other states. 18 Recently, at the request of 19 Children Services, the New York State Office of 20 Children and Families approved for New York City the 21 ability to do limited criminal-background checks. 22 These checks consist of searching the 23 New York State Office of Court Administration 24 database, to identify providers with a conviction 25 or arrest, especially for a violent crime or for a 1 crime against children in New York State. 2 To better ensure our children are taken care 3 of in a safe environment, however, there are 4 additional critical categories that we are still not 5 able to detect: Indicated reports of child abuse or 6 neglect, convictions of crimes -- of crimes 7 outside the state, and convictions by providers 8 using a false identity. 9 Children Services has very serious concerns 10 about the possibility that children may be cared for 11 in homes where the provider, and other adults in 12 the home, may have indicated reports of child abuse 13 and neglect, and may have been convicted of crimes 14 out of state, including, possibly, violent crimes. 15 Recent federal guidance from the Office of 16 Child Care supports Children Services' position that 17 we should be able to access this additional 18 information. 19 The U.S. Department of Health and Human 20 Services' Administration for Children and Families, 21 strongly recommends that all providers, regardless 22 of whether they are required to be licensed, undergo 23 comprehensive background checks. This includes, 24 fingerprinting, to check state and FBI 25 criminal-history records, as well as state child 1 abuse and neglect registries. 2 Moreover, fingerprinting is the only certain 3 tool able to detect possible fraud by providers, 4 who may be using false identities, social security 5 numbers, and other documentation. 6 We, therefore, appeal to the 7 State Legislature to amend the State Social Services 8 Law, to allow local-services districts to: 9 One: Conduct an SCR clearance, to determine 10 whether individuals applying to be legally exempt 11 child-care providers, and persons older than 12 18 living in the provider home, have an indicated 13 report of child abuse or neglect; 14 And, two: Fingerprint the same, so that a 15 criminal-background check can be done that would 16 include convictions outside of New York State. 17 Children Services has also concerns about 18 safeguarding the rights of providers. 19 Children Services would ensure that background 20 checks be conducted in compliance with the 21 New York State Human Rights Law. 22 The ability to do these checks should not 23 be an unfunded mandate. Just as critical to 24 ensuring the health and safety of children, is the 25 commitment to provide the resources to meet that 1 goal. 2 We urge the Legislature to amend the State 3 law, so that children cared for in all types of 4 child-care settings, including care exempt from 5 licensing, receive the same level of protection. 6 Safe and high-quality child care is a primary 7 concern for parents trying to maintain their 8 jobs and support their families. 9 As the State invests in job growth, it is 10 equally important to invest in child care to support 11 parents in their efforts to work. 12 Children Services and the City of New York 13 are committed to providing sufficient high-quality 14 child care to meet the needs of families in the city 15 that require child care. 16 We are requesting funding from the State to 17 keep pace with increasing costs we have described, 18 so that we are able to continue to serve the 19 children currently in care, and are not faced with 20 another overwhelming deficit that would force us to 21 eliminate large numbers of child-care subsidies. 22 Furthermore, we would welcome the opportunity 23 to work with you, to advocate in Washington for 24 additional federal funding for child care. 25 We know that the State Senate shares the 1 City's commitment to providing high-quality 2 child care to all families that require it. 3 We look forward to working with you, with the 4 Legislature, to address challenges, and the issues 5 that I have described today. 6 Thank you for the opportunity to speak here 7 today before you, and I am happy to answer any 8 questions you may have. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Ms. Vechiotti. 10 I'm glad to hear that the administration is 11 committed to working with the Senate, and I'm 12 assuming, the Assembly, in trying to advocate for 13 more child-care funding. 14 You're absolutely correct in the assertion, 15 that, the role of government, right now, seems to be 16 in job creation. 17 And I said this very clearly to the 18 Governor's Office, that, you cannot have a 19 job-creation program that doesn't also have the 20 supports in place that make work pay. 21 Child-care -- accessed, affordable, 22 subsidized day care -- is critically important to 23 that effort. 24 So, I'm a little concerned, though, about 25 this movement towards informal day care. I think 1 that's a count -- I think that's actually 2 counterproductive. 3 And while I realize it has a role to play in 4 day care, I think we need to do more to expand 5 access to subsidized day care, and grow it, as 6 opposed to shrink it. 7 But let's -- let's get to the -- before we 8 get to the issues on Early Learn, which is what so 9 many people here, today, really want to hear about, 10 in an effort to maintain the subsidized day-care 11 slots for working families, which we all agree is 12 critically important, especially for low-wage 13 working women, I have a piece of legislation that 14 I've been working on for the past year, that would 15 exempt women who are on public assistance, with 16 children under the age of 1, from participating in 17 work -- in the workfare, because, as you pointed 18 out, they are the only people that are guaranteed 19 subsidized day care. 20 It would save the State of New York a 21 considerable amount of money in day care, which 22 would help plug the holes for your agency, and 23 other county organizations around the state; and it 24 would preserve subsidized day care for working women 25 who so desperately depend upon it. 1 So, while I'm looking forward to working with 2 you guys on trying to get more money from the 3 federal government for day care, I hope you will 4 work with me in convincing the Legislature and the 5 Governor that this is the right step to take. 6 So, we'll talk about that more in the future, 7 but let's get to Early Learn. 8 We submitted to the -- for those of you in 9 the audience, we submitted to the Commissioner, a 10 series of questions around the Early Learn program. 11 Many of those questions came from the provider 12 organizations that are here, with some concerns. 13 The agency has responded to the vast majority 14 of them, to the best of their ability. They feel 15 that there's some ethical issues around the fact 16 that there is an active RFP process out there. 17 But, I think they gave us some -- many 18 comprehensive answers, and we're going to go through 19 them right now. 20 So, that being said, the first question that 21 we did submit to you, was: Was there a list of 22 organizations that had submitted proposals, and 23 would this meet this current system capacity? 24 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, Early Learn NYC is a 25 competitively sealed procurement. And, currently, 1 ACS is reviewing their proposals that we received 2 for Early Learn; and, so, therefore, the list of 3 proposals cannot be made public. 4 But we can tell you, that the total capacity 5 that was proposed, in terms of unique proposers, 6 in terms of the number of sites and the number of 7 seats, actually exceeds the current system 8 capacity we have today. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: What is the system capacity 10 today? Do you know? 11 SARA VECHIOTTI: In terms of the number of 12 center-based slots? 13 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 14 SARA VECHIOTTI: One second. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: If any of them know? 16 You have some people. 17 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: [Inaudible.] 18 SENATOR SAVINO: You're looking for it there, 19 Mr. Cartieri (ph.)? 20 [Laughter.] 21 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: [Inaudible.] 22 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, when you look at our 23 total system, which includes both child care and 24 Head Start, and all of our settings, it's, 25 approximately, 50,000 seats today. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: 50,000. 2 SARA VECHIOTTI: That includes family child 3 care and center-based care. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, and that doesn't take 5 into consideration the informal home-based 6 neighbor -- 7 SARA VECHIOTTI: No, this is -- 8 SENATOR SAVINO: -- family -- 9 SARA VECHIOTTI: No, this is just the 10 contract-system capacity we have. It does not 11 include the voucher system. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: Do you have any idea how 13 many people are receiving vouchers for informal 14 care? 15 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, approximately, we have 16 94,000 children enrolled today in subsidized child 17 care. And the number of vouchered children is -- 18 Just give me one second. 19 The number of children enrolled with 20 vouchers is approximately 17 -- 16,500, on the 21 low-income side. And, then, on the cash-assistance 22 side, it's approximately 53,000. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: 53,000 on the -- on the -- 24 SARA VECHIOTTI: On the cash-assistance side. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: -- cash-assistance side. 1 SARA VECHIOTTI: Yes, correct. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Lights just went out on that 3 one. 4 So, that -- and that's not including the 5 50,000 that are in center-based care right now. 6 So total, then, capacity -- the way I would 7 look at the capacity, is the number of children who 8 need day care; subsidized day care, or 9 Early Childhood, or Head Start -- would be, 105 -- 10 100 and -- 11 SARA VECHIOTTI: The number I gave you -- 12 SENATOR SAVINO: -- 160 -- 13 SARA VECHIOTTI: The number I gave you 14 before, of 94,000, includes, the cash-assistance, 15 and the low-income, families. 16 So, those 53,000 cash-assistance children are 17 included already in the "94,000" number. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: But you have 50,000 that are 19 in center-based care? 20 SARA VECHIOTTI: No. We have 50,000 that are 21 in, center-based, and family-and-child-care, 22 networks, in Head Start, and in child care. 23 So, the number of "94" does not include 24 Head Start children. 25 If you include Head Start children, then that 1 total is closer to 112,000 today, enrolled. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, so I'm going to go 3 back to the question: What is the capacity that is 4 needed? 5 Don't -- no -- not center-based capacity. 6 In total; what is the capacity -- what is the 7 total capacity for the system? 8 And -- because, you guys, obviously, are 9 counting the system separately. 10 Informal day care? 11 Center-based? 12 SARA VECHIOTTI: Right. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: Early Childhood? 14 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, the way it works, is 15 that our contracted capacity is approximately 16 50,000. 17 The voucher capacity is, basically, 18 equivalent to the number of vouchers we have 19 today. 20 So, in total, the capacity that we have 21 today, is close to 112,000 children. 22 In terms of the children that are eligible 23 for child care, that number would be greater than 24 the 112,000. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 1 Okay, what's the -- what's the actual cost 2 of -- 3 (Off-the-record discussion at speaker 4 table.) 5 SENATOR SAVINO: I see Joe has a response. 6 SARA VECHIOTTI: Right. 7 Early Learn, however, is just about 8 contracted capacity. It is not about the voucher 9 system. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: If you -- if one of you want 11 to sit up there with her, if you have -- that's 12 fine. You can -- you know, so you can -- you can, 13 you know, if you want. Feel free to jump in. 14 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, Early Learn is just 15 about our contracted center-based and family 16 child-care capacity. It's not about the voucher 17 capacity. 18 (Joe joins the speaker table.) 19 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, what's the actual cost 20 of care under this RFP? 21 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, the actual cost of care 22 is approximately 580 million for Early Learn; which, 23 again, is just our contracted capacity. 24 SENATOR SAVINO: And is that reduced from, 25 prior to the introduction of Early Learn? 1 Did it cost less before? 2 Did it cost more? 3 Or... 4 SARA VECHIOTTI: Early Learn NYC actually 5 enables us to live within our budget for 6 child care and Head Start. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: What -- that didn't quite 8 answer the question, Sara. [Laughing.] 9 Is there a reduction in the actual cost of 10 care under Early Learn? 11 Did it cost more prior to the introduction? 12 That's what I'm trying to get at. 13 (Off-the-record discussion at the 14 speaker table.) 15 SARA VECHIOTTI: Right. 16 We are actually paying more in 17 Early Learn NYC than we are today. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: And what drives the 19 increase in the cost? 20 SARA VECHIOTTI: Primarily the trends that we 21 mentioned in the testimony, about families 22 increasing use of regulated care, which would be the 23 center-based care. And, younger children being 24 served are found in the voucher system, not the 25 contracted-care system. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: So, it's just the increase 2 in the utilization? 3 SARA VECHIOTTI: For certain types of 4 families in the voucher system, correct. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: And -- okay, so we'll move 6 on to: How much does ACS charge as an 7 administrative cost for overseeing UPK? 8 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, for UPK, we actually do 9 not charge an administrative cost. All the funding 10 from UPK follows, from the DOE, to ACS 11 contracts. 12 So, all costs associated with providing the 13 2.5 hours of UPK are devoted to the classroom 14 program. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: One of the big issues that 16 has arisen from some of the provider agencies, is 17 their concern that there is a lack of feasibility in 18 the rates that you guys are proposing, with 19 respect to Early Learn. 20 Can you talk a bit about this, and answer 21 some of these questions that they have? 22 SARA VECHIOTTI: Right. 23 So, the rates in RFP adequately fund 24 contractors, to operate a high-quality child-care 25 program without running a deficit. 1 They were designed to comply with the 2 requirements of the Department of Health and 3 Mental Health for the licensing standards, and, do 4 incorporate the rates from the existing salary 5 schedules. 6 The new rates, however, do not -- do 7 require that programs have to make decisions, to 8 change their current methods of operations. 9 So, they -- so programs in Early Learn have 10 to change their operations in -- for example: 11 They have to maximize the number of classrooms that 12 they have per site. And, also, they have to 13 maximize the number of children served per 14 classroom. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: But, then, that means that 16 the rates that were determined don't -- aren't -- 17 won't allow them to continue what they're doing. 18 So, they're being -- what their concern is, 19 that, this new program is going to require them to, 20 either, reduce the number of children that they're 21 able to serve, or increase the number of kids per 22 classroom, or make some sort of change, in order to 23 meet this new rate; which means, there's a 24 reduction in the rate to them. 25 So it's is not the same. 1 SARA VECHIOTTI: So -- 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Your answer was, that, the 3 rates will allow them to maintain their programs 4 pursuant to where they do that now. 5 Well, that's not exactly the case; because, 6 your own answer says, they're going to have to 7 change their methods in order to comply with these 8 new rates; which means, they're going have to 9 reduce them. 10 SARA VECHIOTTI: They have to change the 11 method of their operations, to a certain extent, in 12 order to maximize the rates in Early Learn. 13 For example: When we talk about actually 14 maximizing the number of children per classroom, 15 many of our centers already, today, do actually 16 provide mixed-age classrooms; which, that 17 enables them to maximize the number of children 18 that are served in those classrooms. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: When the rates were 20 determined, did -- was -- did you do a -- any 21 question -- did you question any of the provider 22 agencies as to whether they would be able to operate 23 under the proposed rates? 24 Did any -- was there any give-and-take with 25 the agencies? 1 Did anybody speak to them about what they 2 could or couldn't comply with? Or what they felt 3 they could comply with? 4 (Off-the-record discussion at the 5 speaker table.) 6 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, the first step to the 7 RFP was, that we did release a concept paper. And, 8 actually, messaged what Early Learn, and the vision, 9 is all consisting of. 10 Then we did receive comments from 11 providers, in response to the concept paper, which 12 we did review, and consider, when we were developing 13 Early Learn NYC. 14 We also did use the current framework for 15 what we have, in terms of, the licensing standards, 16 and the salary schedules, and the existing 17 knowledge that we have about child care and 18 Head Start programs and budgets. 19 And all of that was taken into consideration 20 in order to develop the rates for Early Learn NYC. 21 SENATOR SAVINO: Is it possible you could 22 share with the Committee, at some point in the 23 future, the responses from the agencies when you did 24 this survey? 25 SARA VECHIOTTI: For the comments to the 1 concept paper? 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Comments, right. 3 (Off-the-record discussion at the 4 speaker table.) 5 SARA VECHIOTTI: Right. 6 In addition to that, we also had several 7 addenda that were actually submitted after the RFP, 8 and where we responded. 9 So, we can go back and pull together that 10 information for you. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 12 Moving on. 13 So, we're going to go back to the -- we're 14 actually reducing funding to this. That's part of 15 the process; we're going to be reducing the amount 16 of money that's spent through the Early Learn 17 program. 18 Correct? 19 We all agree that's part of the process, is, 20 because we have less money to spend, so we have to 21 find efficiencies. 22 So, if we're under- -- if we're reducing the 23 funding, as a result of this reduced funding, or 24 underfunding, or however we want to call it, if 25 there aren't sufficient providers to meet demand, 1 what -- what can -- does ACS propose any changes? 2 Are you looking at putting more money in? 3 Any more options that are available to you? 4 How would you try to make the system whole? 5 Would you raise the rate? 6 What would you do? 7 SARA VECHIOTTI: So as we've said, the total 8 capacity that was proposed included a number of 9 unique proposers, sites, and seats that exceeds 10 our current system. 11 So, we are confident that we will be able to 12 take that sufficient proposal pool, to be able to 13 make awards for Early Learn NYC. 14 SENATOR SAVINO: You don't foresee this as -- 15 this underfunding as producing any capacity issues? 16 You think you'll be able to accomplish it 17 all? 18 SARA VECHIOTTI: I think we'll be able to 19 make awards, based on the proposals that were 20 submitted, in order to -- to award the number of 21 slots that we have in the RFP. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. 23 But under your own estimation, you're looking 24 at a loss of 10,000 seats, due to last year's 25 budget cuts. 1 And the cost of the enhancements in 2 Early Learn, given that reality: 3 What would the cost to Early Learn do to 4 Early Learn? 5 And how would you maintain current capacity 6 with 10,000 less seats that are funded? 7 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, when you actually 8 compare the fiscal-year '12 base we have for 9 contracted slots, it's no longer a difference of 10 10,000. It's actually a difference of 8,200 11 slots, comparing fiscal-year '12 base to 12 Early Learn. 13 And in order to restore those slots, it would 14 be a cost of approximately $82 million, on an annual 15 basis, to include those slots in the Early Learn 16 RFP. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: Last year, the 81 million 18 was restored by the City Council. 19 SARA VECHIOTTI: Correct. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Wasn't it? 21 SARA VECHIOTTI: And that funding, however, 22 is discretionary, and cannot be procured through the 23 RFP process, 'cause it is -- because it's one-time 24 funding. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: And has there been any 1 discussion between your agency and with the State 2 Division of Budget about increasing the amount of 3 money that the State's going to allocate for 4 child care and Early Learn? 5 The better, bigger question is: Has anybody 6 from OCFS spoken to your agency about your needs; 7 what you need to actually meet capacity? 8 SARA VECHIOTTI: Yes, we are in consistent 9 communication with OCFS about funding, and the 10 availability of funding. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: And do they anticipate there 12 will be any extra funding, that you know of? 13 SARA VECHIOTTI: I believe they are -- as we 14 are, possibly, anticipating federal cuts to the 15 system, due to the appropriations' process at the 16 federal level, we have actually heard on the 17 Head Start side, that there might be a 1.5 percent 18 cut. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: And, so -- yeah, we haven't 20 even touched on the issue of the Super Committee, 21 and their failure to actually accomplish anything. 22 Are you making contingency plans for the 23 worst-case scenario; that, we lose money from the 24 feds, there's no money coming from the State, and 25 the City Council can't make up the difference this 1 time? 2 SARA VECHIOTTI: Yes, we are looking, and 3 anticipating, what possible cuts will be, and what 4 the impact would be on the system; in addition to 5 looking at the impact of the rising costs. 6 And, so, those are discussions that we would 7 be having with the State and with City Council 8 regarding the fiscal-year '13 budget. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: Worst-case scenario, do you 10 have any idea how many slots you wouldn't be able to 11 fund, or how many children would not be serviced? 12 SARA VECHIOTTI: We haven't actually gotten 13 to the actual details of the number of slots that 14 would impacted, quite yet. We're still trying to 15 clarify information, to gather more certainty about 16 the federal and State funding available to us. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. 18 Oh, I see Assemblyman Keith Wright is in the 19 back. 20 Do you want to join me, Keith. [Laughing.] 21 You have your own hearing, down the hall. 22 SENATOR WRIGHT: I have my own hearing. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: One of the concerns that's 24 has arisen from the provider community, is the 25 suggestion that your agency is telling them that 1 they -- in an effort to bring down their costs, they 2 should just negotiate better health-insurance rates. 3 How would -- how are they possibly going to 4 be to negotiate a better rate than the City of 5 New York can for its workforce? 6 You know, it's widely known that 7 New York City employees are the only ones left 8 that are not required to contribute to their health 9 insurance; and that's partly because of the size of 10 the bargaining unit, of about 400,000 people. And 11 that's allowed them to maintain that no-contribution 12 rate, although the mayor would like to change that. 13 But, that's a conversation for a different 14 room. 15 But, how are they supposed to negotiate a 16 better rate than you can? 17 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, ACS has been 18 transparent, in consistently messaging that steadily 19 increasing health-insurance costs do comprise a 20 significant portion of the child-care deficit. 21 And, that, continuing the current 22 health-insurance structure is, unfortunately, not an 23 option that we can continue at this time, in order 24 to make sure that as many children are served as 25 possible in Early Learn. 1 We do know that it is an increasingly common 2 practice for non-profits who do provide health 3 insurance, to actually require those employees to 4 contribute and/or institute a co-pay. 5 And the rates in Early Learn NYC assume 6 these type of efficiencies in health insurance. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: But, again, it's -- if 8 there's a limited amount of money, right -- 9 You know, I'm not -- you know, I'm smart, but 10 I'm not that smart. 11 -- you have a limited amount of money that 12 has to cover a whole host of things. And, at the 13 end of the day, it's all about: How do children 14 get, you know, the best quality, subsidized child 15 care? 16 If you drive up their costs, deliberately, by 17 forcing them to negotiate a health-insurance 18 contract for a smaller group of people, you're going 19 to eat into that dollar amount. You know, you have 20 a limited amount of money that has to cover all of 21 these issues. 22 You're actually putting them in a position 23 where they're not going to be able to provide as -- 24 the cost is going to go up per child, instead of 25 going down. 1 I really think you should rethink this idea 2 of asking them to negotiate their own 3 health-insurance rates. 4 It's -- it's going to be completely 5 counterproductive. Less people will be served, and 6 the cost is going to go up. 7 I see Joe is chomping at the bit there. 8 JOE: Even when she's interpreting what I say 9 to her. 10 But, on our -- in our non-profit community, 11 on the foster-care side and on the preventive side, 12 this model is already in place. They negotiate 13 within their -- well, some do it as a group. You 14 know, like the Catholic agencies come together and 15 negotiate health insurance as a group, and other 16 providers negotiate it with their staff, or a 17 local union that they're working with; and, they 18 deal with their health-insurance issues. 19 That's the model that we're going to here. 20 The fact that the City of New York is 21 involved in procuring and in administering the 22 health-insurance packages for our provider 23 community is a model that we're simply getting away 24 from, as a city. We're not going be going -- we're 25 not going in that direction anymore. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: When did you guys decide 2 that you're going in that direction, though? 3 JOE: Well, that's the direction that went, 4 on the child-care side, 25, 30 years ago. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: I -- it probably always was 6 that way, because those agencies -- 7 JOE: I don't think it -- 8 SENATOR SAVINO: -- started out separately. 9 JOE: I don't think it was always that way. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah, it probably was. 11 JOE: It was -- they were looking for cost 12 containment 30 years ago when they went to this 13 model. It's no longer a viable model. 14 And the City does -- as our finance person 15 was pointing out to me, the City does require its 16 employees to pay for various items in their 17 health-insurance package. 18 I know I'm a City employee. I know I pay a 19 whole bunch of things, on riders, and 20 pharmaceuticals, and all the rest of it. And, 21 there's every expectation that I'll do so. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Well, that's simply because 23 you want to improve the access to coverage that you 24 have. 25 Basic health insurance, you don't have to 1 contribute to if you only want the basic care. You 2 know, HIP and GHI were created for just that 3 purpose. 4 Yes, there are riders, and there are 5 co-pays. You know, we could quibble as to whether 6 it's completely free, or not. 7 But, again, I don't -- I think you're putting 8 these agencies in a position now, where you're 9 actually going to drive up their actual cost of 10 operation, without any assistance, in a shrinking 11 pool of money. 12 And I think, I really -- I urge you to 13 rethink this, unless, you want to assist them in a 14 way where they can create their own, you know, pool 15 of people, that they can negotiate with the 16 health-insurance carrier, on. 17 It's not -- I foresee a real problem, going 18 forward, in the future. 19 But, let's move on. 20 JOE: Can I just answer that? 21 And we're always willing to consider any 22 suggestions, but, do know this: There's no 23 avail- -- no additional available money that's been 24 identified as coming into this system. 25 So, any monies that would be added into the 1 current process, into the Early Learn process, would 2 have to come from, either, new money, which I said 3 is, no one's identified any from the, state, 4 federal, level; and, it would require, basically, a 5 reduction in slots. 6 And, that's something that we haven't -- we 7 don't want to consider more reductions of slots 8 in order to fund-up health insurance, and other 9 things, but, it's something that we can talk about. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Question; let me go back to 11 the concept of the actual cost of care: When the 12 actual cost of care is determined -- not the whole 13 system capacity, but, per agency, or per child -- 14 doesn't it take into consideration the cost of 15 salaries and benefits? 16 JOE: Yes. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: So you've already calculated 18 for that in the actual cost of care? 19 JOE: The cost -- the rate incorporates the 20 salary structure, as bargained in the various 21 collective bargaining (inaudible). 22 SENATOR SAVINO: So this $580.5 million, 23 currently, that you determine is the actual cost of 24 care, takes into consideration the cost of 25 salaries and benefits, as they are right now; 1 right? 2 So, you've already -- you've already taken 3 into consideration that cost. 4 (Off-the-record discussion at the 5 speaker table.) 6 JOE: Yeah, the salaries, as they have been 7 collectively bargained, have been included in the 8 rates, so, that's part of the 580. 9 The benefits, on top of the salaries, that 10 we're talking about now, like health insurance, 11 that's something that we had to relook at. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: So you don't con- -- you 13 don't take into consideration the full package, an 14 employee package, as part of the rate of 15 compensation, the way the City currently 16 determines it for their workforce? 17 JOE: The City -- the City is able to fund 18 what the City can fund in a time of reducing, you 19 know, resources. 20 It's as simple as that, and it becomes as 21 complicated as that: there's a shrinking pool of 22 money. 23 How are we best going stretch that shrinking 24 pool of money? 25 And for the provider community, we understand 1 it well, and we -- you know, we clearly sympathize 2 with the concerns that people have about how to 3 stretch the dollar. 4 But the fact of the matter is, we are all, as 5 a country, and as a state, and a city, trying to 6 deal with shrinking dollars. And we're trying to 7 utilize those shrinking dollars in the best way we 8 can, to drive quality, and, serve as many people as 9 we can. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: I don't -- I think we agree 11 that there's a shrinking pool of money, and we have 12 to find the best ways to spread those dollars, 13 but, they're going to have less money. 14 If you force them to go out and purchase 15 their health insurance, they cannot compete. 16 There's no way they're going to be able to provide 17 the same level of benefits at the same cost that 18 they can currently do now, because the City 19 negotiates for them. 20 But, let me finish the point. 21 At the same time, one of the goals of 22 Early Learn, as I understand it, is to improve the 23 quality of care. 24 And one of the ways we improve the quality 25 of care is, we're supposed to be recruiting and 1 retaining people who will better be able to meet 2 these new standards that we all agree are important 3 to early childhood education, and subsidized 4 day care. 5 You're going to put these agencies at a 6 competitive disadvantage. 7 How can they recruit and retain qualified 8 people if they can't provide a decent level of 9 compensation, which includes benefits? 10 They're not going be able to do that, and I 11 think this becomes counterproductive after a 12 while. 13 So, again, we could argue this all day long. 14 I really, I urge you guys, to reconsider this 15 issue on the health insurance, because I think it's 16 going to be a real problem, going forward, for these 17 agencies. 18 And maybe there's a different model. Maybe 19 it's not the one that you currently have. If 20 that's -- you know, it's possible. 21 There's got to be some other way to 22 accomplish this. Otherwise, we're going to undo all 23 of the good work that we're trying to do, and it's 24 going to become more expensive, and less children 25 are going to be served. 1 But, let us go on to the next question, which 2 is: 3 One of the other concerns that has come up 4 is about the leases; the City-held leases. 5 RFP -- the RFP, as it is -- currently 6 states, that: Programs with City-held leases 7 will have to negotiate their own leases after the 8 first year of the RFP. 9 What is ACS's assessment on the impact this 10 will have with the system? 11 Does the assessment consider the impact of 12 loss of high-quality providers unwilling to take 13 on this unpredictable expense just after one year 14 into a contract? 15 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, we would like to 16 clarify, that the RFP does not say that people have 17 to negotiate their own leases in the City-leased 18 sites. 19 However, as ACS has done over the recent 20 years, we would be willing to work with any 21 contractor who would like to assume the lease at a 22 City-leased site. 23 What the RFP does say, is that, for those who 24 are applying to a City-leased site, that they have 25 to maximize the space in a City-leased site, by, 1 perhaps, actually including other services that are 2 non-ACS-contracted uses; like, after-school 3 programs, family social services, arts and 4 education, early intervention. And, possibly, 5 accepting private-pay children; so, having a 6 tuition-paying program. 7 And what will happen is, in those 8 proposals, there would be a cost-allocation 9 strategy. 10 And, so, the RFP is essentially saying, in 11 the first year, as an incentive, there will not be a 12 cost allocation imposed for those type of services. 13 But, then, after the first year, ACS, and the 14 individual contractor in that site, would work 15 together to forge an appropriate cost-allocation 16 strategy, going forward. 17 And with this approach in the RFP, we believe 18 that it was successful, because, for at least every 19 single leased site, there was at least one proposal, 20 who was proposing to serve children at the 21 City-leased site. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 23 All right. I'm sure that will come up again, 24 at some point. 25 One of the big concerns that has come up 1 from just about every one of the providers, is 2 this issue that they've been instructed that they're 3 going have to raise -- not only is there a decrease, 4 you know, in funding, in general, but they're going 5 to -- now have to come up with the -- an additional 6 6.7 percent match. And, that they're told that 7 they're going to have to raise that money on their 8 own. 9 What if -- what if they can't do it? 10 You know, you have some high-quality, 11 high-enrollment programs in target neighborhoods 12 that are not going be able to do this. They're just 13 not going be able to raise this. 14 And there's also the question, as to whether 15 this might be a violation of State law, that says 16 that child care is supposed to be subsidized at the 17 actual cost of care. 18 So, how do we -- how do they expect -- how 19 are they expected to raise this money? 20 They're supposed to hold a bake sale? 21 I'm kind of confused. 22 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, we do have a requirement 23 of a contractor contribution in Early Learn NYC. 24 And we view that as a way to support the economic 25 health of the early care and education system, by 1 ensuring that there is actual ongoing community 2 investment in our sites. 3 The requirement can actually be met in 4 multiple ways. It is not just simply fundraising. 5 Non-cash contributions, such as, donated 6 supplies, equipment, or services, and, non-ACS 7 contracted revenues, and including private-pay 8 funding from private-pay tuition-paying families, or 9 foundation grants, and other community supports, 10 as long as they offset the cost of Early Learn, may 11 be counted, as long as they defray those costs of 12 Early Learn. 13 This is not actually an unprecedented action, 14 as Head Start contractors currently are required 15 to comply with the 25 percent federal match, which 16 can be in kind or monetary. 17 20. 18 Excuse me, 20. 19 20 percent. 20 And, currently, ACS preventive-services 21 contracts also require a private share. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: But, again, if we're cutting 23 the funding; then we're cutting it again, and 24 saying, Go out and make it up, and go negotiate your 25 own health-insurance contracts, I just see this -- 1 this is like a recipe for disaster in some of these 2 communities. 3 Not others. 4 Some of these agencies will be able to raise 5 the money on their own. You know, they have, you 6 know, maybe people who were, you know, 7 philanthropists in their community, they're willing 8 to support this. 9 But, the smaller agencies, my concern is, the 10 smaller agencies are going to disappear. They're 11 not going of be able to compete in this world, and 12 the larger agencies are going to eat them up. 13 And, I think that's something that we need to 14 be concerned about. 15 Again, I see Joe chomping at the bit there. 16 (Off-the-record discussion at the 17 speaker table.) 18 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, as you know, as we've 19 expressed before, that we did receive a number of 20 proposals that actually exceed our current number of 21 unique sponsors. And, in those proposals, they 22 have discussed how they will meet the 6.7 percent. 23 And, so, that is a process that is being 24 reviewed now; and, so, we are confident that we will 25 be able to award contracts to sponsors that are 1 successfully able to meet the 6.7 percent. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Without divulging who they 3 are, these unique proposers, you can give me some 4 idea of some of the things that they claim they 5 could do to raise the 6.7? 6 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, that is something that 7 we cannot talk about, due to the ongoing 8 procurement. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: Can you give me any idea? 10 Like, seriously? 11 Like, somebody must have said they're going 12 to have a bake sale. 13 [Laughter.] 14 No? 15 Nobody has a rich uncle out there? 16 I just think -- again, you know, I'm trying 17 to be somewhat humorous here. 18 But, I do think that we're going to -- 19 there's going be a problem here. You're driving up 20 the cost to the agencies, with reduced funding, and 21 demanding higher performance. 22 I don't see how they're able to accomplish 23 that, and meet the capacity demand. 24 And, hopefully, I'm wrong. You know, I 25 want -- I'd love to be back here next year, and, you 1 know, I'm wrong and you're right. But, I'm not 2 betting money on that. 3 All right, so, we only have -- oh, we only 4 have one more question for you, so you... 5 The RFP lists capacity in targeted ZIP codes, 6 at 33,407; and, non-targeted, as 1,557. 7 What was the criteria that you used to 8 determine what's targeted, and non-targeted? 9 And how do you plan to address the need in 10 the non-targeted ZIP codes? 11 SARA VECHIOTTI: So, Early Learn NYC invests 12 its limited resources to maintain capacity in the 13 neighborhoods that have the largest number of 14 eligible children for subsidized child care. 15 In the areas of highest need, which are the 16 targeted ZIP codes, 86 percent of the children 17 eligible are residing in those ZIP codes. 18 In order to define and assess need, ACS 19 actually used several social indicators to 20 comprehensively assess need, which includes factors, 21 such as: 22 Concentrations, and numbers of eligible 23 children at or below 200 percent of the federal 24 poverty level; as well as the 100 percent of the 25 federal poverty level. 1 We also looked at the number of children who 2 are receiving child-welfare services; 3 And, we also looked at the concentration of 4 housing vouchers for Section 8 and 5 public-assistance housing. 6 So, those were some of the factors that ACS 7 used to determine community need. And that is how 8 "targeted" and "non-targeted" was determined. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: Well, uhm, I'm sure you're 10 not going sit around, to listen to all of the people 11 who are going to testify. 12 I am fully prepared to forward to you guys, 13 copies of the testimony of everyone who is here, 14 present. 15 But, as you can see, this is a packed room. 16 There are a lot of concerns about this program. 17 Some of them we've discussed here today. 18 We're going to continue to have that 19 conversation, because, again, the concept of 20 Early Learn may -- you know, is, obviously, a good 21 one. We want better care for children. We want to 22 increase the standards. We want to increase, you 23 know, the experience. We want to increase the 24 number of people who qualify. 25 I'm just not sure we're going to accomplish 1 that this way. I think we're actually going to go 2 backwards. And that's a real concern for me. 3 But, with respect to the other two pieces of 4 the legislation, I agree with you; we need to find 5 ways to make sure that we're not putting children 6 at risk in the informal day-care setting. 7 By the way, the way to do that is, provide 8 more subsidized day care. 9 I think children in center-based care is 10 always the best place, because it's just not 11 baby-sitting, as we all know. 12 I still have serious concerns about the 13 decision made a couple of years ago, to eliminate 14 kindergarten-based -- center-based kindergarten. 15 I think that was a tremendous mistake in the 16 city of New York. 17 Something that we'll probably look at, going 18 forward, over the next year. 19 And, I would be -- I would sincerely hope 20 that your agency would work with me, in support of 21 my legislation that would exempt women on public 22 assistance from participation in workfare, to 23 preserve those day-care slots for working women. 24 And, we'll talk more about that, going 25 forward, in the future. 1 And so, now, unless you have any other 2 comments to make, I want to thank you for coming. 3 I want to thank you for participating, and 4 answering the questions as thoroughly as you have. 5 And, we're going to move on to our next 6 presenter, which is, Ragland -- 7 SENATE AIDE: (Inaudible comment.) 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh, good. 9 Thank you. 10 SARA VECHIOTTI: Thank you. 11 Thank you for the opportunity. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: Ragland George, the -- 13 SENATE AIDE: They're going to do it, all of 14 them, together. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. 16 Ragland George, who is the executive director 17 of District Council 1707; 18 Betty Powell, who is the treasurer of the 19 Head Start Employees, Local 9; 20 Mabel Everett, president of the Day Care 21 Employees, Local 205; 22 And, Luz Santiago, the field services 23 director of DC 1707. 24 Good morning. 25 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Good morning, Senator. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: So, who's going to testify 2 first? 3 Rags? 4 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Yeah, I guess I'll start 5 off -- 6 SENATOR SAVINO: Ragland George. 7 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: -- seeing I'm 8 outnumbered, you know. 9 Good morning. 10 I am grateful to the Standing Committee on 11 Children and Families, and to its members, and to 12 Senator Savino, for holding this timely hearing. 13 This hearing is timely, because, we sit here 14 today, the Bloomberg Administration is attempting 15 one of the most fraudulent acts against children 16 of working and poor families in the city of 17 New York, and state. 18 He is rapidly attempting to dismantle the 19 most comprehensive child-care-program system in the 20 nation. No city in this nation comes close to 21 reaching the thousands of children our city 22 educates and cares for in subsidized day-care 23 centers and Head Start centers in the 24 five boroughs. 25 Advocates for children's rights have 1 fought huge battles to place our children on the 2 path to success: socialization, and preparation for 3 school-aged educational opportunities. 4 For some 40 years, we have advanced to 5 provide safe, affordable, and quality education for 6 our children. 7 And, now, the City of New York, in a single 8 stroke, wants to eliminate 10,000 children from 9 child care, through its so-called "Early Learn" 10 programming; a regressive attempt to place our 11 children from communities in need, and at risk, 12 another step away from quality education. 13 Early Learn is being conducted without an 14 environmental impact study on testing this 15 outlandish scheme through a pilot program. 16 For more than a generation, through the 17 efforts of the administration of Mayor John Lindsay, 18 New York City's children have been able to absorb 19 great preschool experiences through the dedication 20 and efforts of the members of Day Care 21 Employees, Local 205; and Head Start Employees, 22 Local 95. 23 Early Learn is represented by the Bloomberg 24 Administration, the Administration for Children 25 Service, in an anti-child, anti-family, and 1 union-busting program, that will also stymie 2 community-based organizations who will be forced to 3 pay a levy of nearly 7 percent of their contract 4 allocations to sponsor child-care programs. 5 These community-based organizations which 6 have been the hallmark of the child-care network in 7 the city will be forced out because they do not have 8 the surplus funding those richer non-for-profit and 9 for-profit corporations have. 10 The shape and tone of child care will be 11 altered, from one of dedication to children and 12 of -- and their families, to one of seeking profit 13 from families that cannot afford to pay high fees. 14 We fear that many parents will be forced: 15 One: Quit real jobs to care for their 16 children; 17 Two: Work part-time, and not be able to buy 18 the essentials for their families; 19 Three: Forced to use public services and 20 unemployment insurance as crutches for family 21 support; 22 Four: Or even become forced to find 23 inadequate, and possibly dangerous, child-care, 24 placing their children at risk, and without even 25 adequate educational experiences. 1 How many times have we heard of desperate 2 parents across the nation who leave their children 3 in homes or in cars without -- without -- while 4 they attempt to work? 5 How many more cases will we hear about the 6 New York City's (inaudible) from distressed 7 parents? 8 The federal government provides some 9 60 percent of the child-care funding through the 10 Child-Care Development Block Grant and the 11 Community Development Block Grant, which flows 12 through ACS. 13 The great child-care system would work -- 14 would not work without the dedication of its 15 workers from both locals. Our members have 16 secured all necessary professional educational 17 training, and certificates, mandated by the -- by 18 New York State. 19 In fact, they meet the same standards that 20 they do in the public schools. 21 Beside me are two long-time dedicated members 22 who, between them, have more than 70 years of 23 child-care experience. 24 (Inaudible) retention of these child-care 25 professionals if Early Learn drastic cuts are 1 enacted. 2 In a complaint sent to Maria Rosado, the 3 district director of U.S. Department of Labor, 4 District Director of the Wage in our division, the 5 council for District Council 1707 (inaudible) 6 called, cited the Federal Services Contract Act, and 7 said that the City has chosen to follow the lead of 8 the Republican governor of the states, like 9 Wisconsin, Ohio, and Florida, and, conveniently, 10 collected bargaining rights of thousands of 11 employees. 12 The purpose of this act is to prevent the 13 wage-busting, the practice where competing firms 14 proposed to hire, and actually hire, a 15 predecessor-contractor employees, to reduce wages 16 and benefits in order to be the low bidder in the 17 government services of contract. 18 The Early Learn requests for proposals, 19 as issued by ACS in April, and became effective in 20 2012: 21 It will decrease the number of children and 22 reach subsidized day care, and it will decrease the 23 numbers of subsidized day care; 24 Compel non-profit community-based day-care 25 centers to contribute thousands of dollars they 1 cannot fund to maintain centers; 2 Open subsidized care to corporations, but 3 will raise rates to poor and working families; 4 Not respect the nation's contract, and lower 5 wages, and possibly lower or eliminate health and 6 pension benefits for almost 7,000 employees; 7 And, the Early Learn RFP may have a very 8 serious negative effect on the Cultural 9 Institutions Retirement System. 10 They never took that into consideration, when 11 they understood, when they reduced the rates for 12 some of these centers, they wouldn't be able to 13 pay the pension costs. And those costs will now be 14 borne by them if they reach an unfunded vested 15 liability in these programs. 16 They would not be able to pay it. 17 Who's going to pay it? 18 The City is the one that's funds it, so the 19 City is going to now have to take a look at, maybe, 20 $120 million worth of unfunded vested liability. 21 And if the other cultural institutions 22 can't, don't, want to go along with this, and absorb 23 these unvested liabilities, then they'll be faced 24 with another $350 million. 25 So, it's something to take a look at. 1 Let me explain, and which I just did: Our 2 members have a pension plan under our union 3 contract. 4 The City placed our members' pensions in the 5 Cultural Institution Retirement System, by 6 constructing the RFP so that it will not fully fund 7 our contract. 8 The City has put the entire CRS in danger of 9 being severely underfunded. 10 When they sat here and said that they don't 11 fund these programs, they do. 12 As part of the -- their RFP that's put in, 13 and they get allotted budget from the City, all of 14 these things are included: the pension, the welfare 15 benefits. All of the things. Days off, 16 vacation days. 17 All that stuff is included when they sign 18 these contracts; and, so, they can't say that they 19 didn't know about it. They sign them, year to year. 20 Them have to come in and endorse these contracts 21 every year. 22 And since I've been here, in 20-some-odd 23 years, and it goes back further, 30 years, they've 24 been endorsing these contracts. So, there's 25 nothing new to them. 1 And if they say that they don't know anything 2 about it, they're not telling you the truth. 3 I am quite concerned, that if the City of 4 New York does not meet the obligations to members 5 of the pension plan -- 6 I didn't mean that, Bloomberg. I didn't mean 7 that. 8 [Laughter.] 9 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Okay. 10 Okay. He's sending me a signal. 11 He's sending me a signal. 12 -- the entire system may collapse, and hold 13 our great art museums and other institutions 14 liable for tens of millions in pension 15 liabilities. 16 The federal government provides some 17 60 percent of the City's child-care funding through 18 the Child-Care Development Block Grant and the 19 Community Development Block Grant, which flows 20 through ACS. 21 The union recently filed a federal lawsuit 22 against the City of New York, the federal district 23 court, to stop the RFP. 24 We contend that the Early Learn request for a 25 proposal is an unformal attempt by the City to 1 regulate labor relations, in violations of federal 2 civil-rights statute, because it deprives the union 3 members of the rights to secure rights secured by 4 federal law. 5 Another insidious part of the Early Learn 6 proposal is the way that certain ZIP codes are 7 removed from entirely -- removed entirely from the 8 funding scheme. Entire ZIP codes will be removed 9 from funding eligibility; removal day-care and 10 Head Start funding from dozens of neighborhoods. 11 Some of these neighborhoods are economically 12 mixed. Some have subsidized housing projects next 13 to high-price condos. 14 The City must -- 15 Two: The City must keep the fully reimbursed 16 child care as they always have done, and not attempt 17 to fund sponsors on a monthly basis, and will be 18 shortchanged sponsors, and force them to pay our 19 members less than their contractual obligations, 20 which include health care, vacation and sick time, 21 and pensions. 22 The City must return to the bargaining table 23 with Local 95, and 205, and negotiate fair and 24 equitable contracts with our members. 25 In order to -- and we haven't had one in 1 day care in six years -- almost six years. 2 In order to save money, the City must allow 3 the health-and-welfare funds of the Local 95, and 4 205, control of the funding -- their health-care -- 5 health funds, which will save the City from 6 redundancy and provide better coverage at lower 7 costs. 8 The City must not attempt to put the 9 pensions of day-care workers, the members of 10 DC-37, and other members of great cultural 11 institutions of the city, at risk by ending its 12 funding through the Cultural Institutions 13 Retirement System. 14 We'll owe tens of millions of dollars to 15 guarantee their fiduciary obligations to the 16 remaining members of the pension fund. 17 Early Learn is a disaster. It will take 18 principle opposition from elected officials, and 19 communities to need religious organizations, and 20 others, to ensure that child care in New York City 21 remains a valid -- a viable alternative. 22 And I'm here to answer any questions that you 23 might have of me. 24 And thank you so much for inviting us here. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Ragland. 1 Do we want to hear from the two ladies first, 2 or do we want to -- yeah, let's -- okay. 3 CAROLYN COX: My name is Carolyn Cox, 4 vice president of Local 95, a child-care local. 5 First, I want to thank you for -- 6 SENATOR SAVINO: Come closer to the 7 microphone. 8 CAROLYN COX: Okay. 9 -- I want to give thanks for being invited to 10 express and share my experience, as a parent, as 11 well as a staff person. 12 As a parent, I had two children to go through 13 Head Start, and a grandchild. 14 And, during my time in Head Start, as a 15 parent, it gave me an opportunity to -- the 16 opportunity to be a part of the decision-making, 17 being involved in volunteering, which instilled in 18 me to go and continue my education and my studies in 19 education. 20 And I was able to do that because of the 21 Education Department, at the union level, provided 22 me with tuition reimbursement. 23 I've been part of Head Start since 1974. And 24 the effectiveness of Head Start is very powerful, 25 because parents, using myself as an experience, will 1 become empowered to better themselves. 2 They learn parenting skills. There's so 3 much that Head Start offers to them. 4 And I have a concern that the 5 Bloomberg Administration, Early Learn RFP, will only 6 shortchange children and parents, by narrowing the 7 preschool education -- educational opportunities in 8 both subsidized day care and Head Start. 9 The Bloomberg Administration is performing a 10 disservice to the city's future, which is our 11 children. 12 The Bloomberg Administration wants to 13 eliminate 10,000 children from their ability to 14 register for child-care programs. 15 The Early Learn proposal wants to eliminate 16 offers of child care to children in so-called 17 "non-targeted ZIP codes," which would not allow 18 poor and working families in financially mixed 19 neighborhoods to obtain child-care services. 20 Mayor Bloomberg wants to eliminate the 21 Head Start local and the day-care local because he 22 is not interested in working rights, and the right 23 of children, to deal with the dedicated 24 professionals who earn decent wages, health 25 care, and pensions. 1 While he has doubled his wealth during his 2 recession, he has joined other Republicans who 3 want to harm working families, predominantly 4 females. 5 And having said that, most of the staff is 6 females. Women of color, generally; and 7 preschoolers who seem like good targets. 8 And I say that, because, I cannot see 9 Mayor Bloomberg focusing on young children, and to 10 use them as a target for his own benefit. 11 New York City has the highest rate of 12 unemployment, underemployment, substantial dropout 13 rates, and the high rate of crime, which is caused 14 by the lack of opportunities, and other factors. 15 Head Start and subsidized day care help our 16 children to become better students, better 17 citizens. 18 There have -- Mayor Bloomberg has learned -- 19 will -- sorry. 20 Early Learn will help our children -- will 21 not help or benefit our children, but this is an 22 impossible -- this is impossible, for the dedicated 23 and professional child-care workers are 24 eliminated, and replaced with the revolving door of 25 workers who will not have the best interests of 1 our children. 2 As that major -- I have that as a major 3 concern. 4 I really feel that if something is not broke, 5 don't fix it. 6 And, saying that, is that, the families 7 across the city of New York depends on child care. 8 Child care is not a luxury; it's a necessity. 9 They need that. 10 It's very difficult for parents to have to 11 worry about: How can they get child care? Where 12 can they leave their children in a safe and healthy 13 environment? 14 I thank you. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Ms. Cox. 16 MABEL EVERETT: Good morning. 17 My name is Mabel Everett, and I too have been 18 in day care since 1974. 19 I understand what Ms. Cox is saying about 20 Head Start, because I had children in Head Start. 21 And, when day care came into effect, I was doing 22 child care in my home. 23 When day care came in, it allowed me to have 24 a job. 25 And I, too, went into day care, and have been 1 there since then. 2 I have worked in public day care for more 3 than 30 years. 4 I am horrified that the Mayor's attempting to 5 dismantle this vital service for working parents 6 without any evidence that the City has realistically 7 planned for these children who will need safe, 8 quality, and affordable child care in the future. 9 Today, I want to ask why ACS is pursuing the 10 Early Learn procedures service that our day-care 11 service already provides. 12 I have seen growth in public day-care-based 13 centers in the city for more than 30 years, and I 14 know families who rely on our service. 15 I know I've seen three generations come 16 through the center since I've been there. 17 I also know that my members, many of who are 18 women, and women of color, many head of 19 households, rely on the income and their 20 benefits to provide for their families. 21 We do not want to collect unemployment. We 22 do not want to go on welfare. 23 We want to work, and service our children, 24 our communities. 25 We do not want to be unemployed, as well as 1 making minimum salaries without the benefits, 2 because the Mayor wants to downsize government 3 commitments to working families. 4 All our teachers in day care, our room 5 teacher, are masters's teachers, with the same 6 requirement that's required of the teachers in the 7 Board of Ed. And, with us, they have to have their 8 degree in early education. 9 The initial Early Learn concept paper made 10 frequent reference to high-quality programs, 11 enriching environment, and qualified teachers. 12 Our teachers already there. 13 Our members and I have always answered the 14 call from the State and City for more qualification 15 and training. No other program matched the level of 16 professionalism and experience that our day-care 17 workers possess. 18 ACS say these new programs will be funded 19 with the mix of federal child care and Head Start, 20 State universal pre-K, City tax levy, and private 21 dollars. 22 This union -- 23 Excuse me. 24 -- has consistently pushed for full 25 utilization of all children-funding services, but 1 our proposals have been ignored. We have 2 suggested that all City agencies that fund early 3 care education, day care, UPK, Head Start, 4 preschool, special education, et cetera, need to 5 collaborate with one another to ensure that all 6 centers' facilities are fully utilized. 7 The Mayor has rejected our proposal. 8 I do not believe that (inaudible) request for 9 proposal is intended to create better service for 10 our children -- for our children. 11 If that was the goal, then there would be no 12 need for an RFP, because the City has already, has a 13 worldwide-class, quality childhood education system 14 with qualified teachers, and a net worth of ACS 15 subsidized day-care centers, with the 16 well-developed, high-qualification educational 17 system already in place, a request for proposals 18 is unnecessary. 19 We urge our elected officials and advocates 20 to demand that the Mayor withdraw RFP, and, instead, 21 preserve the high-quality service that we already 22 provide. 23 Uhm, what I'm saying is, that, many of our 24 teachers, day by day, are now finding that they're 25 concerned about their jobs. 1 If the Board of Ed is downsizing, and they're 2 cutting teachers, we're the people that has gone to 3 school, been trained, paid their tuition, and can't 4 find a way to pay that. 5 Many of our parents are concerned about: 6 What are we going to do about quality day care? 7 We have always, Head Start, is one compliant; 8 day care's another. 9 And what they're saying, that we're one. And 10 they're already have started implementing it in our 11 centers. 12 Every day, ACS is coming there, telling us 13 that we have to do this, we have to do that. They 14 want to see that the services is met. 15 We've been doing that all along. 16 When the Health Department came in, and put 17 the changes in, we met it. 18 Our assistant teachers, our aides, we are 19 there, we are ready. 20 But, for them to take our benefits away 21 from us, and they're going pay somebody with a 22 masters's degree less than (inaudible), where are 23 we going? 24 And I had -- I said it; I did a thing called 25 "college zone." And we had did something with young 1 people, and future of education. 2 Many of the high school, and junior high 3 schools, said: I don't want to be a teacher. 4 There's no jobs. 5 What are we telling our young people? 6 Thank you. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 8 A couple of questions, because this didn't 9 come up when the Commissioner's Office was here; 10 something I hadn't been aware of. 11 Prior to the -- prior to this new process, 12 where the RFP was developed and sent out, the 13 awarding of contracts for day care was done 14 through the negotiated acquisition process? 15 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: No. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: No? 17 So how did they determine who would get a 18 contract to provide day care? 19 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: I don't know how they 20 did it, but, they didn't talk to the union, they 21 didn't talk to anybody that was involved. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Maybe I can ask; when some 23 of the agencies come up, they can explain it to me. 24 Because, there are different ways for the 25 City to let a contract out. 1 One, of course, is through the 2 competitive-bidding process. And that's -- 3 And then, the other thing, is negotiated 4 acquisition. 5 Negotiated acquisition is generally used when 6 there's a -- like, for instance, it's an emergency. 7 There's a water-main break, and there's only 8 one company in the state that -- in the city that 9 can do this work immediately. 10 So, you don't have to do an RFP. You would 11 just hire them, and do it. 12 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: What would be the 13 responses here? 14 THOMAS MURRAY: Hi, Senator Savino. 15 My name's Thomas Murray. I'm general counsel 16 for District Council 1707. 17 I think you're correct; generally, the City 18 would just find -- they would often find other 19 sponsors, and have a -- as you said, a negotiated 20 acquisition. 21 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 22 THOMAS MURRAY: And, in fact, there's even an 23 example of the City implementing Early Learn without 24 an RFP. 25 Last year, the -- there was a day-care center 1 that was -- sort of, the board was non-functional -- 2 called "United Community of Williamsburg." 3 Close by was a large Head Start agency, with 4 multiple locations, called "Bush Work United 5 Head Start." 6 The lease on one of their programs is going 7 to be increasing by 110 percent; something like 8 that. 9 The executive director of that agency 10 happened to be on the board of the United Community 11 of Williamsburg Day Care. 12 What the -- so, ACS went to Bush Work United, 13 and said: Look, why don't you take over this 14 program. It's only a couple blocks -- or, a block 15 or two from your site where you're going to lose the 16 lease, because it's too expensive. 17 And that's what they did; United Community 18 went out of -- you know, ceased to exist. 19 It was a couple-month progress. There was 20 lots of meetings between Bush Work United and -- 21 and officials of ACS. 22 They integrated the two programs, and they 23 even told them, this is going to be our model for 24 Early Learn. 25 So the idea that there has to be, or had to 1 be, an RFP is a -- it's really a misnomer. 2 I mean -- in fact, the idea that this is a 3 legitimate request for proposal, is a misnomer, 4 because the City is setting the rates. It's not 5 saying, you know, typical request for proposal 6 says: This is the service we want. How much can 7 you do it for? 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 9 THOMAS MURRAY: What they're saying is: This 10 is the service we want, and this is what we're going 11 to pay you for it. 12 So it's not really a request for proposal, as 13 would be understood under the laws of New York. 14 SENATOR SAVINO: Why do you think they're 15 doing it this way, then? 16 THOMAS MURRAY: I think you heard the answer 17 from the prior speaker. 18 They didn't like the way health care was 19 being delivered. They wanted the benefits of our 20 unions, our locals, to mirror, more likely, the 21 City unions. 22 I think it's -- that's, really, you know -- 23 you know, we've had multiple meetings over the years 24 with the City; the City officials. 25 We've always met, particularly with day care, 1 to negotiate the contracts. 2 Particularly, officials from the Office of 3 Management and Budget were particularly hostile to 4 the union. 5 You know, in 2008, the City wanted to take 6 our members out of Central Insurance Program, and 7 put them in the state-federal -- State Family Health 8 Plus. 9 And that's what they told us. 10 And the -- and our employee -- our members 11 who fell below a certain level, the City wanted to 12 put them into Medicaid. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: Six of one, half dozen of 14 the other. 15 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Right. 16 THOMAS MURRAY: Right. They wanted to shift 17 the costs to the state. 18 For a variety of reasons, that didn't happen. 19 It wasn't -- it wasn't feasible for the -- for our 20 members, or any employers. The State just didn't 21 get the program ready for employers to go into 22 Family Health Plus. 23 We had proposed then, that the City, that 24 allowed the union Taft Hartley plans, to take over 25 the health benefit. In fact, that's something we've 1 proposed for many years. 2 In the course of the meetings, it came 3 out -- and this is something we knew was likely, we 4 had made Information Requests -- and the City came 5 up with a number of people they were paying 6 health insurance for, through Central Insurance and 7 day care, that was 1,700 more people that was -- 8 than were, in fact, in the system, because the union 9 Benefit-Management Trust Funds also provided 10 supplemental benefits. 11 So, we build the centers directly, we have 12 very accurate -- we -- you know, we have very 13 accurate numbers for the amount of people 14 getting -- that should be getting health insurance. 15 The figures the City gave us, that 16 particular, at one of the meetings, was 1,700 more 17 people. 18 We did a quick calculation. That's, like, 19 probably, 7 million-or-more dollars a year that the 20 City's just -- 21 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Wasting. 22 THOMAS MURRAY: -- you know, wasting. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: These are people they're 24 covering, that are no longer actually eligible? 25 THOMAS MURRAY: Right. 1 I mean, we had had instances, over the years, 2 where -- I can think of one in particular. 3 One of the members of the Local 95 board 4 got contacted by someone who had left the employ of 5 the agency seven years earlier, and went on to 6 new -- another job. Then he went to retire, 7 couldn't get Medicare, because he was still on 8 Central Insurance, seven years after he left the 9 system. 10 It's just very inefficient. 11 So, the -- you know, we proposed taking it 12 over. We proposed accepting the same premium that 13 the City paid for -- for the municipal employees, 14 the Municipal Labor Council. 15 We had gotten commitments from the 16 (inaudible) from HIP, to provide the same benefit. 17 So, the idea that we were somehow gaming the 18 system to get these Cadillac benefits is really a 19 misnomer. 20 But the City, I think, just -- you know, they 21 don't want to have to deal with the union. 22 I think that's major. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Perhaps that's an issue that 24 can be revisited with the City. 25 You -- Rags, you said that you -- your 1 contract is six years overdue? 2 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Just about. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: When -- refresh my memory. 4 You don't negotiate directly with the 5 agencies? You negotiate with the City, and the City 6 represents the agencies at the bargaining table? 7 Is that how it works? 8 I don't remember anymore. 9 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: The agency sets up a 10 sponsoring-board council -- 11 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, move the -- you have 12 to speak into the mic. 13 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: -- sponsoring-board 14 council that we negotiate with. 15 Once we complete our end -- and, now, in 16 recent years, we didn't have to go to them because 17 they were sitting at the table. The City was 18 sitting at the table. The Department of Labor 19 Relations, and folks from the City, OMB, 20 everybody's at the table. 21 But we normally negotiate with the 22 sponsoring-board councils. And when we come to an 23 agreement, they take it back to the City to have it 24 approved. 25 But now we don't have to do that, because 1 everybody's sitting at the table, and it's just 2 about done, if we ever get to do it. 3 They have opted not come to the table and 4 complete our negotiations; and, so, we've been 5 operating under the old contract, that we keep 6 carrying forward, and that's what we've been doing. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: And in your experience -- 8 You've been around a long time now; right? 9 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Yeah, too long. I'm 10 getting too old. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: -- when you finally get 12 around to negotiating a contract, it generally 13 mirrors whatever the pattern that was in place by 14 the municipal workforce? 15 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Yes, we do. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: And, so, what I'm curious, 17 and you may not know the answer to this, and it'll 18 be a question I'm going submit to the agency: When 19 they determine the cost of care, which is supposed 20 to reflect, I think, the cost of salaries and 21 benefits, to the extent that you can determine them, 22 is there any -- is there any indication that that 23 increased cost of care would reflect, what the most 24 likely scenario will be, is that, you are going to 25 receive the same pattern that DC 37, and the rest of 1 the municipal workforce, got, which I think was 2 4-and-4 in their last contract. 3 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Exactly. 4 Exactly. They always do. 5 Not unless there's an abundance of money that 6 was dumped on us, which we never have had done. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: That's a -- 8 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: But we would normally go 9 along with that pattern. And -- 10 SENATOR SAVINO: That's a question I'm going 11 submit to them. 12 And the -- the other issue that of -- is a 13 real concern now, that's been raised, is the issue 14 of your pensions, and underfunding them. 15 Uhm, I'm going to have to get some clarity on 16 that; how the -- how ACS, or the City of New York, 17 is prepared to deal with that issue. 18 Because, at the end of the day, we'll pay one 19 way or the other, but, the State of New York is 20 going to wind up absorbing the cost -- 21 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Well, you know -- 22 SENATOR SAVINO: -- which would be a real 23 problem. 24 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: -- I guess I'm more 25 privy to a lot of this stuff, because we have 1 trustees, both, through the welfare fund, and to 2 the CIRS, of which I am a part of. I'm a trustee. 3 And, so, I know the problem has been raised, 4 and it's a major concern. And -- and it's got to 5 be. I don't see how the City is going to turn its 6 back and walk away from that. They can't. 7 They can't. 8 And, so, that's where we are. 9 I don't think the City, when it does whatever 10 it does, and who sits down and thinks of these 11 things to do, never takes into consideration all 12 the aspects of what happens when you do that; 13 like: Make cuts to child care. Make cuts to 14 programs. Eliminate day-care, child-care centers, 15 in communities of need. 16 What happens when these workers can't go to 17 work, and when they come back to the City and ask 18 for the -- to be dependent on the City, to help them 19 out. 20 I mean, they don't understand that the cost 21 to the City goes up, it doesn't go down. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 23 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: It goes up. 24 But these -- these folks who are, I guess, 25 the brain trust of the City -- which is not too 1 smart, because they don't seem to come up with the 2 right answers for the right situations -- seem that 3 they're trying to appease a mayor that doesn't care 4 about unions, doesn't care about people. 5 And that's what it is. 6 That's just my opinion. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: You're entitled to yours, 8 yes. 9 THOMAS MURRAY: Okay, now, I just wanted to 10 go back to the last question you asked, and the 11 assumptions that the City is making, as far as, you 12 know, what to pay -- what employees will be paid. 13 They testified here, and they've said in the 14 past, that they took the City -- you know, the 15 collective-bargaining agreements into account, not 16 necessarily the -- the cost of health insurance. 17 So, I just wanted to make two points. 18 One: The City sent out a number of addendums 19 to the request for proposal. 20 In one of those addendums, they told 21 prospective contractors that they had to be 22 prepared, at a minimum, to comply with the living 23 wage -- the City Council-passed Living Wage Act; 24 which means, you have to pay at least $10 an hour. 25 And if you don't provide health insurance, you have 1 to pay, additional, $1.50 an hour. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: What? 3 THOMAS MURRAY: That's what they told them in 4 the addendum to the RFP. 5 We think that was meant, because the City, it 6 seems, who has made a big push to attract 7 for-profit providers here. So, I guess that's 8 where the profit will come. 9 They don't pay the employees the 10 collectively bargained wages. 11 They don't have a union. They just pay the 12 minimum -- you know, they don't pay health 13 benefits. They pay the minimum amount under the 14 Living Wage Law. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: That would be for agencies 16 that don't have a collective-bargaining agreement. 17 THOMAS MURRAY: That's right. 18 Right. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: And, that's assuming the 20 Living Wage Bill is passed by the City Council, 21 signed by the Mayor, vetoed, and overridden by the 22 City Council. 23 That's a pretty big assumption. 24 THOMAS MURRAY: Well, I guess they would 25 just, really, have to pay the federal minimum wage. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah, minimum wage. 2 THOMAS MURRAY: The second point I wanted to 3 make -- 4 SENATOR SAVINO: But, again, it's 5 counterproductive to the idea that you're going to 6 improve the quality of care and the standards of the 7 employees and the educational standards, and, be 8 able to recruit and retain people. 9 So, I -- 10 THOMAS MURRAY: And the second part I wanted 11 to -- 12 SENATOR SAVINO: -- I question their ability 13 to pull that one off. 14 THOMAS MURRAY: -- one of the consultants 15 for our benefit fund, who had looked at the RFP, he 16 determined that the actual amount that they put in 17 for health insurance, is just enough to cover the 18 penalty employers will have to pay under 19 President Obama's Health Reform Act, if they don't 20 provide health insurance. 21 So, that's the amount of funding that 22 appears to be in the RFP for health insurance. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: One question, and then we'll 24 move on, because we have a lot of people here. 25 You had mentioned that, at one point in 1 negotiations with the -- ACS in the past, there 2 was some discussion about moving your members to 3 Family Health Plus and/or strict Medicaid. 4 The -- the concern I would have with that is, 5 Family Health Plus is Medicaid; it's just dressed up 6 in a fancy package. But, that's what it is. That's 7 what funds it. 8 But there are income limitations on it. And 9 I think we -- in the State Legislature, we increased 10 the threshold to families earning up to $80,000 a 11 year, a family of four. 12 What's the average salary in -- of your 13 members? 14 The highest educated, the highest paid? 15 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: We have -- 16 MABEL EVERETT: 40. 17 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: No, no -- 18 THOMAS MURRAY: 40. 19 In Head Start, it's, like, 45,000, for a 20 masters's-degree teacher. 21 SENATOR SAVINO: Really? 22 THOMAS MURRAY: That's the highest. 23 So, about -- 24 MABEL EVERETT: About 35. 25 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: 35. 1 MABEL EVERETT: 35, for the master's teacher. 2 THOMAS MURRAY: -- they're -- yeah, day-care 3 is more like, 35. 4 You know, you have part-time custodian, 5 part-time teachers' aides, who probably make 6 20,000 -- 7 SENATOR SAVINO: So no one's going to over 8 the -- the concern -- I was kind of concerned that, 9 perhaps, people might go over -- 10 THOMAS MURRAY: No, no, no. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: -- the income cap; and, 12 then, what would what happen to them? 13 But that's a legitimate question: If you 14 were to move to that model, and you had employees 15 who went over the eligibility, what would happen to 16 them? 17 Would they lose their health insurance? 18 I'm -- that would be a major concern. 19 And you might wind up having to have a 20 coverage, a -- an insurance policy, for those 21 employees. And a different policy for the 22 administrators. 23 It would probably be a mess. 24 I think it's best to keep everybody in one. 25 But, in any event, thank you. 1 Thank you for your testimony. 2 Thank you for -- 3 RAGLAN GEORGE, JR.: Thank you for having us. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: -- for your comments. 5 And, you brought up a couple of more 6 questions, which I'm going to forward to the agency, 7 and maybe they'll be able to answer them for me. 8 Coming up next is -- 9 Who? 10 SENATE AIDE: Linda Manley. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: -- Linda Manley, for the 12 Lawyers Alliance for New York. 13 And, then, followed by Linda, is -- 14 Is it, Ken? 15 Oh, I thought that Ken Popler was going to go 16 next. 17 SENATE AIDE 2: (Inaudible.) 18 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. 19 So, Linda Manley; 20 And following Linda will be, Don Friedman, 21 from the Empire Justice Center; 22 And, then, Ken Popler, from the 23 Staten Island. 24 All right, just for brevity, you don't need 25 to read the whole testimony. 1 LINDA MANLEY: I will not. I promise. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: [Laughter.] 3 Thank you. 4 LINDA MANLEY: I will catch you up, or at 5 least for my 10 minutes. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 7 LINDA MANLEY: Good morning, Senator Savino. 8 My name is Linda Manley, and I'm legal 9 director for The Lawyers Alliance for New York. 10 The Lawyers Alliance is an non-profit 11 organization whose mission it is to provide 12 high-quality business-law services to 13 community-based non-profit organizations working in 14 New York City's low-income communities. 15 For over 20 years, Lawyers Alliance has 16 had an active practice representing child-care 17 centers, Head Start programs, and family 18 child-care networks. 19 And I've had the pleasure of doing that work 20 for the 14 years that I've been at 21 Lawyers Alliance. 22 We commend the Committee for devoting such a 23 substantial amount of time to the issues of early 24 childhood education, which I think all of us in the 25 room recognize is a vital social service provided by 1 the City and the State. 2 You'll heard today from many passionate 3 experts and advocates about the elements of 4 quality early childhood education, and it will help 5 the Committee to quantify the need for that care. 6 Lawyers Alliance's focus is on 7 organizational stability. Without quality 8 child-care providers there cannot be quality care. 9 And we firmly believe that certain elements 10 of Early Learn jeopardize the ability of non-profit 11 organizations to continue to deliver early childhood 12 education. 13 As your conversation, Senator, with the 14 Administration for Children Services, and the union 15 officials, recognized earlier, there are certain 16 components of Early Learn that jeopardize 17 organizational stability. 18 First, is the use of universal 19 pre-kindergarten funds, which I think would be a 20 significant importance to this Committee. 21 As I understand it, in 2007, 22 Administration for Children Services and the 23 New York City Department for Education began to 24 collaborate on universal pre-kindergarten, and DOE 25 delegated to ACS, the ability to contract universal 1 pre-kindergarten slots. 2 From 2007, to the Early Learn RFP, we've seen 3 a shrinkage of dollars coming into providers to 4 provide this combined early childhood care, both 5 child care and universal pre-kindergarten. 6 And in Early Learn, that even goes a step 7 further, since ACS is now mandating that all 8 child-care providers enroll 4-year-olds in UPK. 9 The net result, at the provider level, is a 10 loss of funding, and an increase in regulatory 11 compliance. 12 Now, they must comply with both universal 13 pre-kindergarten and child-care requirements, then 14 they have to dual report; all for a net loss of 15 funding. 16 And I think, while the Administration for 17 Children Services may not take an administrative fee 18 to fund UPK, or to process UPK, as the Committee 19 asked, as I understand what's happening, is, the 20 City's contribution of tax-levy dollars is being 21 shrunk, and universal pre-kindergarten dollars are 22 being used to help fill that gap. 23 So, there is a total loss of funding. 24 The second issue relates to employee-related 25 expenses. 1 You've spent a great deal of time today on 2 health insurance, so let me just add this 3 perspective: 4 As counsel to the non-profit organizations, 5 during the economic downturn, Lawyers Alliance has 6 spent a significant amount of time helping employers 7 to look at alternatives, lowering overall benefit 8 expenses, allowing for employee contribution to 9 health insurance. 10 I think what distinguishes the child-care 11 community from that of other non-profit 12 organizations, is the fact that the majority of 13 providers are collectively bargained, so that the 14 child-care providers really don't have a great 15 deal of flexibility in how they handle the 16 health-care expense. 17 And I certainly share the concern that you 18 raised earlier, Senator, that these providers just 19 don't have the buying power that the City does. 20 So, even if you were to allow the providers 21 to buy in, to purchase from the City at their actual 22 cost, the health-care insurance that's currently 23 being provided, you're, probably, will have a net 24 savings of money than if these providers go out 25 into the marketplace independently. 1 The third concern is that of 2 successor-in-interest liability. 3 And you've touched on the City directly owned 4 and leased sites. 5 The RFP provides that new -- it is possible 6 that, under the RFP, new providers will be 7 assuming the operations of City-leased spaces. 8 And, the Administration for Children Services 9 has taken the position that there is no 10 successor-in-interest liability; meaning, new 11 providers coming in will not have to pay the 12 expenses that prior providers were not able to 13 pay: Creditors. The landlord. Perhaps unpaid 14 benefits; health benefits, and pension 15 contributions. 16 In order to make that true, those 17 relationships have to be very, very carefully 18 structured. 19 And it's not clear to us, that under 20 Early Learn, that's been done appropriately. 21 Those are the concerns that I wanted to raise 22 with the Committee this morning. 23 Unless there are questions, you have our 24 written testimony, and -- with our contact 25 information. And we're happy to provide any 1 additional information. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 3 I just want to go back to the issue of UPK. 4 UPK, right now, I mean, it's pretty clear to 5 me why they want to merge the funding streams; 6 because, it allows them to reduce their portion of 7 the commitment to day care, and backfill it with 8 federal money -- 9 LINDA MANLEY: Absolutely. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: -- and state money from UPK. 11 But, UPK only covers 2 1/2 hours a day; 12 right? 13 LINDA MANLEY: Right. 14 SENATOR SAVINO: That's it. 15 So, essentially, the City's reducing what 16 they're paying, backfilling it. 17 But, the requirements for UPK are much 18 higher, aren't they? 19 LINDA MANLEY: They are higher. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Base limitations -- 21 LINDA MANLEY: Base limit -- 22 SENATOR SAVINO: -- based on educational 23 requirements on the staff that works there? 24 LINDA MANLEY: Yes. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: And what happens if the 1 agency can't meet it? 2 LINDA MANLEY: Then they'll be in breach of 3 their contract, and subject to revocation by the 4 City. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: Hmm. 6 Hmm. 7 So, we're reducing funding. We're requiring 8 you to come up with another, almost, 7 percent, 9 uhm -- 10 LINDA MANLEY: Contribution. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: -- on your own. 12 We still don't know how. 13 We're forcing you to negotiate your 14 health-insurance contracts, on your own. 15 We're increasing the demand, the 16 requirements, the educational requirements of 17 the staff, with less money. 18 In the end, I -- I don't see how this is 19 going -- I really don't see how they're going to 20 accomplish this. 21 I think -- here's my real concern -- 22 And, you know, I wish the agency was still 23 here. 24 I don't know if the Mayor's Office is here. 25 -- I see a direction that we're heading in, 1 which is taking us back 20 years. Back to the 2 informal, unregulated day-care settings; where 3 desperate working women will take that happy little 4 voucher, and go out and pay their next-door 5 neighbor, or the woman who lives down the hall, 6 et cetera. 7 We -- after all of this time, we know, that 8 early childhood education, early intervention, 9 makes the difference for children, UPK, just -- it 10 just seems like we're just going backwards here, 11 all in an effort to chase that, you know, shrinking 12 dollar, instead of working together to increase 13 day-care funding -- 14 LINDA MANLEY: And, Senator -- 15 SENATOR SAVINO: -- which is, again, it's 16 what makes work pay. You know, you gotta keep 17 people in the workforce. 18 And one of the things working women need, 19 really depend upon, is access to quality, subsidized 20 day care. 21 LINDA MANLEY: We absolutely agree. 22 The only additional concern I would add, is 23 that, where you have multi-service organizations 24 that are providing a wide range of social services 25 in the communities that we recognize are absolutely 1 vital, these non-profit organizations are going to 2 struggle to try and continue to provide quality 3 child care, because that's part of their mission. 4 Perhaps at the expense of other programs, 5 they're going to take other unrestricted dollars to 6 help plug the hole. 7 Or, we're going to start to lose some of the 8 real cornerstone organizations of our communities, 9 because they just can't struggle under all of the 10 additional burdens that are being added. 11 So, in addition to a loss of quality child 12 care, we're going to start to see, you know, very 13 significant non-profit organizations, that we rely 14 on to provide a wide range of social services, 15 crumble under the weight of the obligations. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: And that's my concern, too: 17 The smaller agencies are going to suffer. 18 The larger agencies will always be able to 19 operate. 20 And that's -- that's the real shame in this. 21 And, you know, there's one -- there's another 22 issue that, you know, is very clear to me, and I 23 don't know if anyone else has really come to the 24 same conclusion, but, all of these cuts, whether 25 they're in day care, whether they're in, you know, 1 early childhood, whether they're in mental-health 2 services -- wherever they happen to be -- they are 3 falling disproportionately on women. 4 Women are getting murdered in these budgets. 5 And most of the unemployment, as a result of these 6 budget cuts, are falling in programs where women 7 are, overwhelmingly, the -- you know, the staff. 8 So, that's another issue that we're going to 9 try and focus on, going forward; is, kind of 10 connecting all of the dots on this stuff. 11 But I want to thank you for your testimony. 12 LINDA MANLEY: Thank you, Senator. 13 Thank you. 14 SENATOR SAVINO: And our next presenter is, 15 Don Friedman, from the Empire Justice Center. 16 That's a lot of stuff you've got there, Don. 17 Oh, look, we have pictures too. 18 [Laughter.] 19 Again, you don't have to read the whole 20 testimony. If you want to -- 21 DON FRIEDMAN: I won't. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: -- hit us with some 23 highlights, and then -- or if there are some things 24 that you think I need to focus on with my next 25 interaction with the agency. 1 DON FRIEDMAN: Okay, I'll try to do that. 2 Thanks for this opportunity to discuss this 3 issue. 4 I'm Don Friedman. I'm at the Long Island 5 office of the Empire Justice Center. 6 I'm presenting testimony that I have 7 prepared, with Susan Antose (ph.) in our Albany 8 office, who's unable to make it here today. 9 Empire Justice works to protect and enhance 10 legal rights of low-income New Yorkers in a variety 11 of areas, including social services and child care. 12 I hope you'll bear with, uhm, something of a 13 non-New York City perspective here. 14 Although, I do live in Brooklyn. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. 16 [Laughter.] 17 DON FRIEDMAN: It goes without saying that 18 high-quality child care is critical to the 19 well-being of children and families, so I won't 20 elaborate. 21 The first key point that I would like to 22 make, is that New York needs a comprehensive and 23 consistent child-care policy. 24 Whether a family receives child care, and the 25 amount of the benefit may well depend, in New York, 1 on where they live; where the family lives. 2 Each of the 58 social-services districts in 3 the state determine their local subsidy levels and 4 eligibility rules. 5 The child-care rules -- for instance, 6 parental co-pays, how children's income is budgeted, 7 et cetera -- depend, very dramatically, from county 8 to county. 9 The rules affecting providers, such as rules 10 on payment to providers for child absences, are 11 locally decided, and subject to change with minimal 12 notice, making it difficult for providers to make 13 plans, and to hire and retain staff. 14 Two of my colleagues have -- 15 And this is part of the reason for the size 16 of the package that you have there. 17 Two of my colleagues, Susan Antose and 18 Simon Achtar (ph.), have written a report, which is 19 attached, providing much of the detail, that I won't 20 go into today. 21 That report is: "Mending the Patchwork: A 22 report examining county-by-county disparities in 23 child-care subsidy administration in 24 New York State." 25 Let me just touch on a couple of key points. 1 First, the current system regarding parent 2 fees is inequitable, and we believe it violates the 3 Social Services Law. 4 New York allows each district to set its own 5 co-pay, and the result is a highly inequitable 6 system. 7 The complicated fee formula is explained in 8 our full written testimony, but, as an example: 9 A family in one county may be charged as much as 10 17 1/2 percent of the gross income for child care, 11 while a comparable family in a nearby county must 12 pay only 5 percent of their gross income. 13 And counties can change these rules by simply 14 amending their plans, with minimal notice. Co-pays, 15 and even the basic rules for child-care eligibility, 16 may be changed at any time. 17 The Social Services Law requires that 18 parental co-pays be based on ability to pay, and 19 that the co-pay rules ensure access to child care 20 that is equal to that of children who are not 21 financially eligible for subsidies. 22 Clearly, the current co-pay system fails to 23 comply with this law. 24 We recommend several legislative changes to 25 address this. 1 First, and most important: The Legislature 2 should direct OCFS to immediately work on a 3 statewide fee schedule that is truly based on a 4 family's ability to pay. 5 Until such a statewide fee is adopted, we 6 would recommend that the cap -- that they cap the 7 maximum payment, co-pay, at 12 percent of gross 8 income. And until there's a statewide standard, 9 reduce the percentage, annually, by 1 point. 10 In addition, all districts should be required 11 to describe their compliance with the Public Comment 12 Rules before OCFS approves the change in the 13 district's co-pay. 14 Next: The Social Services Law should be 15 amended to be require that affected parents be given 16 at least 60-days notice of changes that may affect 17 their eligibility for a child-care subsidy. 18 The current 10-day-notice requirement doesn't 19 allow parents enough time to make alternative 20 arrangements in the event that there's a significant 21 change. 22 There's a 2010 bill, sponsored by 23 Senator Montgomery and 24 Assemblymember Peoples-Stokes, that propose a 25 cost-effective advanced-notice provision, and we 1 hope that that will be reintroduced this session. 2 Next, a word about equal access for families 3 with teens: In determining a family's eligibility 4 for a child-care subsidy, districts have different 5 rulable about how to budget the income of teenagers. 6 Families with older teens may or may not be 7 eligible for child care, depending on the local 8 rules for counting the teens and income they may 9 have. 10 We want the budgeting rules to be uniform 11 throughout the state. 12 For starters, the Legislature should pass 13 your and Assemblymember Jaffee's bill, which 14 provides for uniform budgeting rules. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: I agree. 16 DON FRIEDMAN: Since it's your bill, I won't 17 elaborate. 18 The last topic I'll talk about, just for a 19 couple of minutes, is about funding. 20 As you know, New York State's 21 Child-Care Development Block Grant is primarily 22 composed of funds from the federal Child-Care 23 Development Fund, and the TANF Block Grant. 24 In recent years, New York supplemented its 25 child-care funds with the -- with American Recovery 1 and Reinvestment Act funds. The "ARRA" funds. 2 The loss of the ARRA funds reduced total 3 funding for 2011-'12 by nearly $43 million across 4 the state. 5 Child-care funding for 2012-'13 will be 6 further reduced as a result of Congress's 7 elimination of the federal TANF Emergency 8 Contingency fund. 9 In New York, the loss of these funds will cut 10 at least 37 million more from child-care funding. 11 Prior funding losses have already resulted in 12 significant hardship for many low-income working 13 families. 14 Looking Upstate, Albany County imposed a 15 moratorium on applications, beginning in April of 16 2010, and lasting over a year. 17 Columbia and Oneida Counties stopped taking 18 applications in November. 19 Erie County lowered its eligibility level, 20 from 200 percent of poverty, to 125 percent, as of 21 March 2010, leaving 1,100 children without care. 22 Monroe County lowered eligibility to 23 165 percent of poverty. Eligibility there had once 24 been as high as 275 percent of poverty. 25 And the list goes on. 1 So what's needed? 2 The State must work -- work must be done to 3 find a permanent funding stream for child care. 4 Empire Justice supports the Winning Beginning 5 position, uhm asking for $37 million to replace the 6 lost TANF contingency funds, and additional 7 10 percent, over the total block grant. 8 And, here's something else I won't go into in 9 detail: We have a proposal to protect child-care 10 funding for families with jobs. 11 You've already discussed it, and you're a 12 co-sponsor. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: I am the sponsor. 14 DON FRIEDMAN: I'm sorry. 15 You're the sponsor. 16 And we know there are two bills out there: 17 One that would exempt parents with children 18 under the age of 2, another one would exempt parents 19 with children under the age of 1, from the welfare 20 work requirements. 21 And, that would allow counties and districts 22 to redirect the money to families who are already 23 employed, and really are at risk of losing their 24 employment if they can't retain the child care. 25 We conserve -- we conservatively estimate 1 that the two-year exemption would make $44.2 million 2 available for child care for working parents; and, 3 the one-year bill would redirect about 16.4 million. 4 Twenty-five states provide the exemption for 5 households with children under 1 or 2 years old. 6 In conclusion: It would increase the 7 economic stability of low-income working families, 8 as well as that of child providers themselves, if 9 our state established statewide standards to the 10 rules of its child-care subsidiary program. 11 And, to keep low-income New Yorkers working, 12 the Legislature must continue to support child care 13 for working families. 14 This can be done by restoring $37 million in 15 lost TANF funding, and by redirecting some 16 welfare-work-program funds to child care for 17 employed low-income New Yorkers. 18 We urge the Legislature to strengthen 19 New York's Child-Care Block Grant, so that it serves 20 all children of working New Yorkers on a fair and 21 equitable basis. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Don. 23 There is one thing that you can help me with. 24 As we know, most of the budget, essentially, 25 was completed the other day, when the Legislature 1 met recently. 2 And we took -- 3 Oh, we're being joined by Senator Montgomery. 4 (Senator Velmanette Montgomery joins the 5 hearing.) 6 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 7 -- when we met last week, and we took up the 8 tax-restructuring package. So, a lot of the numbers 9 have been plugged in already. 10 But there are a lot of unknown variables: 11 One of them being -- in the social-service budget; 12 one of them being around day care, and expanding it. 13 Good morning, Dominick. 14 So, what would be helpful, is, if the 15 Empire Justice Center, and anyone else in this room, 16 would please contact the Division of Budget, and 17 tell them to include in the budget, my bill that 18 would exempt women on public assistance, so that we 19 can preserve the day-care slots, which are shrinking 20 every day for working women. 21 And it can be couched in exactly the way that 22 the Governor wants to hear it right now: It's about 23 economic development. 24 You cannot have job creation without access 25 to quality, subsidized day care. 1 Oh, I see Councilwoman Tish James is in the 2 back, there. 3 So, you can help me with that. 4 DON FRIEDMAN: We've done it, and we will do 5 it again. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: Excellent. 7 Thank you. 8 DON FRIEDMAN: Thanks a lot. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: All right, so, next up -- 10 next up is, Ken Popler, who is the president, and 11 chief executive officer, of the Staten Island 12 Mental Health Society. 13 Good morning, Ken. 14 KENNETH POPLER: Good morning, Senator. 15 Good morning, Senator Savino, 16 Senator Montgomery, Committee staff. 17 We're very grateful, Senator, that you had 18 this hearing today, to hear from ACS, and to pose 19 questions to them. 20 My name is Ken Popler. I'm the president and 21 CEO of Staten Island Mental Health Society. 22 We are a Staten Island-based children's 23 services agency, that, among our various services, 24 provides three Head Start preschool centers, and one 25 day-care center for preschoolers, who are from 1 economically disadvantaged Staten Island families. 2 We operate these four separate program sites 3 that serve 342 children at any one time. 4 For the fiscal year that ended on June 30, 5 2011, we provided services to 700 unduplicated 6 children and their families. 7 We've been a provider of children's preschool 8 services since 1895. That's two years before 9 Staten Island became part of the consolidated 10 New York City. 11 Our Port Richmond day nursery was started and 12 funded by volunteer women in that community. 13 For the past 16 years, the center has been 14 located in the New York City Mariner's Harbor 15 housing complex on Staten Island. 16 Our Head Start centers date back to 17 July 1965, when, quote, Project Head Start was 18 created by President Johnson. 19 We were part of that original first summer, 20 quote, experiment. 21 Our original site is still operating in the 22 New York City Berry Houses Complex in Dongan Hills, 23 which is not in an ACS priority ZIP code. 24 All of these services, and hundreds of others 25 provided by our sister agencies throughout 1 New York City, will end on October 1st, as we heard 2 this morning, when the City launches its Early Learn 3 project. 4 On that day, New York City ACS will close 5 down all Head Start and child-care centers within 6 the city that it funds. 7 This will be a sad day indeed. 8 On that day, New York City ACS will reduce 9 the slots that it funds by 31 -- 37.1 percent, and, 10 will supplant the New York City tax-levy funding by 11 replacing such funding with the federal Head Start 12 grants. 13 Regarding the reduction, for example, on 14 Staten Island, there are, currently, about 15 500 center-based Head Start and day-care slots 16 around the Island, including 342 operated by our 17 organization. 18 According to the RFP for Early Learn, issued 19 by ACS, the final award for Staten Island providers 20 and families needing services will be for 240 slots 21 to serve preschoolers. 22 That's a 50 percent reduction from children 23 currently receiving services on the Island. 24 For the other four boroughs, the statistics 25 are similar with the 37.1 reduction of currently 1 operating slots. 2 Just permit me to briefly go back in time, 3 and review why preschool services make sense. 4 46 years ago, the federal government launched 5 an experimental program: Project Head Start. 6 It was a component of 7 President Lyndon Johnson's "War on Poverty." 8 Head Start was designed to help to break the 9 cycle of poverty by providing preschool children of 10 low-income families a free comprehensive program 11 that would meet, not only their educational needs, 12 but their emotional, social, health, nutritional, 13 and psychological needs as well. 14 That summer in 1965, our organization, 15 Staten Island Mental Health Society, opened the 16 first, quote, temporary Head Start center, among the 17 first in the country, in the Berry Houses, where it 18 still is. 19 This program proved so exceptional, that it 20 was specifically cited for commendation by the 21 President during his speech in the White House 22 Rose Garden on August 31, 2000 -- 1965. 23 During that same speech, the President 24 announced that Project Head Start would be 25 permanently funded by the federal government. 1 Numerous national studies have shown that 2 children who have attended a preschool with 3 high-caliber evidence -- with a high-caliber 4 evidence-based curriculum do better in elementary 5 grades than their peers who did not have a preschool 6 experience. 7 According to Dr. Edward Zigler, of 8 Yale University, who was one of the founders of the 9 Head Start Program in the United States, quote: 10 "Head Start does more than child care, even 11 high-quality child care, aspires to do. 12 "Head Start makes sure that poor children get 13 medical and dental care, helps their families gain 14 access to social services, offers volunteer and paid 15 employment to parents, involves parents in 16 governance, serves nutritious meals, provides 17 intellectual stimulation, and above all, helps 18 children develop the social competence necessary to 19 succeed in school." 20 Dr. Zigler continues: 21 "A study by Dr. Steven Barnett, published 22 in 1995 by the Packard Foundation, found 23 overwhelming evidence that large-scale public 24 programs, including Head Start, result in 25 educational gains. 1 "Years later, disadvantaged children who 2 participated in a preschool program were less likely 3 than their peers to repeat a grade or use special 4 education. 5 "The longest-term evidence of effectiveness 6 of Head Start, and similar high-quality child-care 7 programs, was carried out by Dr. David Weikart and 8 his colleagues in Ypsilanti, Michigan, 9 Preschool Curriculum Developmental Project" -- 10 "Demonstration Project, 1978." 11 These were all very famous studies. 12 "According to the authors in an article 13 published in 'The American Psychologist,' the 14 longest-term evidence of effectiveness is based on 15 data collected in 1980. 16 "By that time, children were old enough to 17 have completed high school. In each case, the 18 program group had higher high school completion 19 rates. There was a 15 percent difference in 20 high school completion rates. 21 "These effects were matched by evidence of 22 higher occupational aspirations and expectations 23 among children and their parents. 24 "In view of the numerous other influences on 25 children's progress during the intervening, or dozen 1 or more years, the discovery of significant effects 2 on these measures seem, on the very face of it, 3 fairly convincing that early intervention makes a 4 lasting impact, at least until the end of 5 schooling." 6 Unquote, Dr. Weikart. 7 Psychologists, again, studied children, now 8 young adults, when they reached their 19 -- "they 9 reached 19 years of age. 10 Dr. Weikart and his colleagues found 11 significant effect of preschool unemployment rates. 12 59 percent of the preschool group was employed, 13 compared with 32 percent of matched controls. 14 Other research by Dr. Weikart has 15 demonstrated significant decreases on the levels of 16 juvenile crime and arrests, as well as the rates of 17 teenage pregnancy. 18 These are real-life measures that fulfill 19 President Johnson's dream, that, quote, "No American 20 child shall be condemned to failure by the accident 21 of his birth." 22 In the 46 years since it was launched, 23 Project Head -- the Head Start, quote, experiment 24 evolved into the premiere -- a premiere preschool 25 model that has replicated through the nation, and 1 other countries. 2 It's forward-looking, optimistic, 3 evidence-based curricula have earned it accolades 4 from educators, child-care and mental-health 5 professionals, and perhaps, most importantly, from 6 the parents. 7 More than 900,000 children are enrolled today 8 in Head Start programs across the country. 9 On Staten Island, the Staten Island Mental 10 Health Head Start, and our day-care center, the 11 Port Richmond day nursery, provide 18 full-day 12 classrooms, in 4 centers, that accommodate 13 approximately 700 children, annually, between the 14 ages of 3 and 5. 15 At each Staten Island center, children 16 experience the first-rate academic, social, and 17 emotional preschool environments. 18 Along with the academic and social 19 development, the Staten Island Mental Health Society 20 Head Start, like our sister programs around the 21 city, provide each child with health-care plan -- 22 with a health-care plan that includes medical and 23 dental services, as well as, on-site speech therapy; 24 psychological counseling, if needed. Healthful 25 breakfasts, lunches, and snacks satisfy the 1 children's nutritional appetites, and perk up their 2 appetites for learning. 3 Fulfilling one of the missions of Head Start, 4 the programs are a cornerstone for parental 5 involvement. 6 The Head Start philosophy recognizes that 7 parents are the most important influence on their 8 child's development. 9 And within the parameters of a child's 10 preschool education, caregivers are invited to 11 become full partners in program planning and 12 activities. 13 The parents review and approve the budget and 14 hiring, have an equal voice in the overall 15 Head Start decision-making. 16 Assisting parents outside of the classrooms 17 is another goal. 18 Parent workshops and classes run the gamut, 19 from child development, to career development, 20 covering topics as diverse as, how to prepare 21 nutritious meals, how to prepare a resume, 22 fatherhood, healthy marriage and family initiatives, 23 adult education, health education, English as a 24 second language, and job readiness, are included. 25 Parents, as volunteers, participate in all 1 aspects of our preschool centers. As trained 2 volunteers, parents gain valuable pre-work 3 experience. They are first in line when an 4 entry-level job becomes available. 5 Through the years of our sponsorship -- 6 through the years of our sponsorship, scores of 7 volunteers have been trained, and become valuable 8 long-term employees; turning poverty into 9 employability, with health-care benefits for their 10 families, with pensions, and with dignity. 11 In conclusion: Quality Head Start and 12 quality day care produce a quality experience that 13 imparts enduring, positive life-time benefits on the 14 children participating in these services, and on 15 their families. 16 That's a scientific fact. 17 It's a scientific fact that's it been 18 replicated many times. 19 So, on October 1, 2012 -- 20 I'm not sure ACS had anything to say about 21 what's going to happen during that first September, 22 by the way. 23 -- according to the latest ACA [sic] website, 24 there were 37,460 children enrolled in group child 25 care, and 17,843 children enrolled in Head Start; 1 totaling, 55,303. 2 Which was on September 30, 2011, which was 3 the latest data on the ACS website. 4 According to the ACS Early Learn RFP, 5 Appendix F, ACS is projecting a total Early Learn 6 enrollment of 34,764. That, for the city. 7 That's a reduction of 37.1 percent of the 8 slots that are currently filled today. 9 2,500 children will lose their services. 10 October 1st will be a dark day in 11 New York City. 12 Thank you for allowing me to testify. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 14 KENNETH POPLER: If I can just say, three 15 quick things. 16 Health insurance: We were an ACS provider of 17 prevention services. 18 And, in our contracts, we had to go out and 19 to get health insurance, pension plan, for our 20 employees. 21 ACS had that as an allowable expense in our 22 contract. However, compared with the City's CIP, we 23 paid much more. 24 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh? 25 KENNETH POPLER: So, it's not about saving 1 money. It's about shifting costs onto the provider. 2 That 6.7 percent, which you pointed out 3 before, of the private-agency match, that's going to 4 put the small community-based organizations that are 5 in minority neighborhoods, it's going to put them 6 out of business. 7 And, you asked ACS, about: How much money 8 did they take off the top for UPK? 9 And they said "none"? 10 I would look into that. 11 The amount of money that goes into this 12 system for each individual UPK slot, is -- and the 13 amount that comes into the provider for providing 14 that 2 1/2 hours, there's a huge difference between 15 them. 16 So, perhaps, with your follow-up with ACS, 17 those would be three questions that might be worth 18 checking on. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 20 Do you have any questions? 21 Okay. 22 One -- there's just one question that I have 23 for you. 24 The -- I notice in your testimony, you talk 25 about the reduction of the slots that it funds -- 1 ACS is reducing the slots that it funds by 2 37.1 percent. 3 And, now, is going to supplant the 4 New York State tax levy -- or, New York City 5 tax-levy money with Head Start money, which is 6 similar to what they're doing with UPK. 7 So, they're shifting. They're actually 8 decreasing their share of the cost, by supplementing 9 it with federally subsidized, or State-subsidized, 10 programs. 11 And, in the end, what happens if those 12 programs are cut by the federal government? 13 This is a very dangerous shell game they're 14 playing -- 15 KENNETH POPLER: Well, ACS -- 16 SENATOR SAVINO: -- shifting money around. 17 KENNETH POPLER: Correct. 18 ACS said that the federal government is 19 contemplating a 1.5 percent reduction in Head Start. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 21 KENNETH POPLER: But, with them reducing 22 slots, even if the federal government did implement 23 the 1 1/2 percent decrease, the Head Start grant to 24 New York City is still intact. Maybe it will lose 25 1.5 percent. 1 So, they're reducing the number of slots 2 tremendously, but the Head Start grant is intact. 3 Obviously, they're federalizing their 4 commitment to day care. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 6 KENNETH POPLER: Those are things you might 7 pursue. 8 We're very concerned about this, because, 9 New York City had always been a leader in quality 10 child-care services. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 12 KENNETH POPLER: Also, regarding the fringe 13 benefits for our employees, to push them into 14 nothingness: We have 30-year employees. 15 And, now, we're going to tell them that we're 16 not going to provide health-care benefits anymore? 17 These are people who dedicated their entire 18 professional career to childhood service -- early 19 childhood services, and do a good job. 20 Now we're taking away their benefits. 21 SENATOR SAVINO: There's been a lot of 22 discussion about the active employees. 23 What about the retirees? 24 Has there been any discussion with how you 25 provide for retiree coverage? 1 Not pensions, just their health insurance. 2 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: [inaudible.] 3 SENATOR SAVINO: There is no health 4 insurance? You lose it when you retire? 5 KENNETH POPLER: For Head Start. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: For Head Start. 7 Is that -- is that true of -- I guess I'll 8 have to ask you guys -- 9 Yes? 10 I see, Tyler, is shaking his head. 11 You lose your health insurance? 12 TYLER: [Inaudible.] 13 SENATOR SAVINO: So, you have to work until 14 you're Medicare-eligible -- 15 KENNETH POPLER: He's -- although, in the 16 negotiation -- 17 SENATOR SAVINO: -- which means you have an 18 older workforce. You have a workforce that sticks 19 around longer. 20 They work longer. And, so, their -- the cost 21 of compensation is higher, because they're at the 22 higher stage of their workforce. The highest 23 earning capacity. 24 And when they negotiate -- when they 25 determine the cost of care -- 1 And I'm going to ask you the same question 2 I've asked everyone else. 3 When they determine the cost of care, do they 4 take into consideration the cost of the total 5 benefit package, which is not just salaries? 6 ACS, you heard them say that they only 7 calculate for the cost of salaries, whatever's in 8 the collective-bargaining agreement. 9 But, do they calculate the cost of health 10 coverage and the cost of the pension contributions? 11 KENNETH POPLER: Well, as Ragland George 12 said, he said yes, and I believe he's correct. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: Right, because ACS said no. 14 We're not taking questions from the audience. 15 [Laughter.] 16 SENATOR SAVINO: Do they? 17 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible) question. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: Yes. 19 Do they? 20 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: When they retire, 21 (inaudible) for the retirees, but, they get full 22 optical, dental, and nutrition plan when they 23 retire. And day care. 24 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 25 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) 1 KENNETH POPLER: Thank you very much, 2 Senator. 3 And it's -- really, we're very grateful that 4 you put all these issues from ACS, and others, on 5 the table. 6 Thank you very much. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 8 All right, next up -- actually, before we 9 take the next testimony, I need to take a two-minute 10 break. 11 I shall be right back. 12 (A recess was taken.) 13 (The hearing proceeded, as follows:) 14 SENATOR SAVINO: Resuming our testimony on 15 "Challenges in Child Care," we are now going to hear 16 testimony from Betty Holcomb, the policy director 17 for Center for Children's Initiatives. 18 Thank you. 19 You may -- you don't have to read the whole 20 testimony. 21 BETTY HOLCOMB: Really, you don't want me to. 22 [Laughter.] 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Focus on the highlights. 24 BETTY HOLCOMB: Yeah, I will. 25 I just, first of all, I want to thank you for 1 all your efforts, and for sponsoring the legislation 2 that would help waive work requirements for mothers 3 with infants. 4 And, to also recognize Senator Montgomery's 5 great contributions to this. 6 I'm very glad to be testifying before the two 7 of you. 8 In listening to the earlier testimony, I 9 share, our organization shares, all of these 10 concerns in our roles as a co-convener of 11 Winning Beginning, and working in The Emergency 12 Coalition to Save Child Care in the city. 13 Obviously, the primary threat to everything 14 is the lack of adequate funding. 15 And, I know that's come up again and again 16 this morning. 17 And, I would say that, CCI, having worked 18 for, many years, as a child-care resource and 19 referral agency, really does support the City's 20 vision for quality improvements, as articulated in 21 the Early Learn RFP. 22 And we know that it's been recognized as a 23 national contribution, to thinking about how we put 24 all the funding together more effectively and 25 efficiently. 1 And, I also want to recognize that the City 2 has made a lot of progress in moving more of the -- 3 especially families on public assistance, into 4 regulated care. 5 And, I think that they deserve credit for 6 those efforts, and for looking at a vision that 7 would make the system, you know, they're hoping, 8 more sustainable. Certainly, higher quality in the 9 long run. 10 So, I just want to strike that note of 11 recognition, that, Early Learn does move in a 12 direction that I think, at every level of 13 government, we're seeing, uhm, to be the 14 forward-thinking wave of embedding quality, as we 15 move forward, because we know that that's when we 16 get the better outcomes that we all talk about. 17 And, without that, we're going to be selling 18 families and children short. 19 So, I want to say that. 20 Nonetheless -- "nonetheless" -- and that 21 said, and all of that, I just want to underscore 22 what was said earlier this morning, about the 23 inadequate funding levels in the Early Learn RFP. 24 And we have signed on to all of the letters, 25 and testified, and fully support the 1 Lawyers Alliance in their pursuit, under Freedom of 2 Information Request, to get more information about 3 the way ACS calculated the funding, because none of 4 us can quite imagine how programs are supposed to 5 pay the benefits, salaries, and, attract a 6 highly-qualified workforce. 7 And we know that, already, the field is among 8 the worst-paid in the nation, and it's a scandal. 9 And, so, we applaud the efforts to have more 10 qualified workforce, but you can't do that without 11 money. 12 And I know we've talked about that, but I 13 just want to underscore, that, while we say we love 14 the vision, we are deeply concerned about resources. 15 And you'll see in my testimony, also, that we 16 have looked at what's going on, in terms of the 17 losses to the system already. 18 Since 2006, we've lost about 18,000 subsidies 19 that -- where we sit today. 20 And from when I heard this morning, from ACS, 21 if they're saying we're, now, got 94,000 children in 22 subsidized care, between TANF and low-income working 23 families, that's 4,000 fewer than when we did our 24 study this spring. 25 So, I feel like I can't even keep track of 1 the really terrible losses that children and 2 families are suffering. 3 And I know lots of people will address all 4 those things. 5 The only other thing that I want to say, 6 that's -- that is, I don't think highlighted enough 7 in what's already been said, is that, I think it's 8 urgent to elevate the voices of parents in this. 9 And you'll see that I've added, with my 10 testimony, I just handed it to your staff, this case 11 study that we did, looking at what really happens to 12 parents who are eligible for subsidies, but can't 13 get them. 14 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 15 BETTY HOLCOMB: And, as a child-care resource 16 and referral agency, I sit in my office every day 17 and talk to women, and parents. And our parent 18 counselors try to help people figure out what to do, 19 given that we're so underfunded, so short on 20 services. 21 And one of the women I spoke to recently, was 22 just cut off, and given eight days to find another 23 slot, at the same time she had just heard that her 24 child is going blind in one eye. 25 Another parent was talking to us about how 1 she uses candles, and does not turn on the 2 electricity, because she has to save money 3 somewhere. 4 And, then, there's a larger point to be made, 5 about how parents see these services now, and what 6 they believe, and how far ahead they are of elected 7 officials. 8 When we did our big fight here, and we got 9 our $80 million restored last year, to at least 10 temporarily protect services, there were many 11 hearings held by public officials, and other 12 advocacy organizations. 13 And one of the things that you heard there, 14 and you'll hear in our report, is parents said: Who 15 can I sue? This should be a right. Every child 16 should have the right to get into school, with the 17 ability to succeed, and not be left behind. 18 And, in some places, like New Jersey, of 19 course, that is included in their State education 20 lawsuit, and is recognized as a right. 21 And, parents spoke to us a lot about how 22 important quality is. It's not just: I want to go 23 anywhere. I want to have quality services. 24 So, again, just to underscore those points, 25 because it seems to me that the dilemma we face, is 1 the general recognition of how valuable these 2 services are. 3 More demands for quality, obviously, at a 4 time of falling resources. 5 So the question is: How do we align our 6 resources better, and support these, and grow the 7 system, so it's higher quality? 8 So, in my testimony, you'll see a couple of 9 proposals around that. 10 We're urging you to fund the Quality Stars, 11 the Quality Rating and Improvement System. That's 12 part of the Winning Beginning agenda. 13 But I also just want to use my time to alert 14 you to something new on the horizon, and to get you 15 to think about really looking across systems. 16 I know this Committee is really focused on 17 social services and human services. And, often, we 18 get siloed, because of what the funding streams are, 19 and how we've traditionally thought about things. 20 Certainly, the Early Learn proposals put the 21 education money together. And, at the federal 22 level, Health and Human Services and the 23 federal Education Department are moving together. 24 And when you combine resources that are in 25 the education world, with the early childhood, you 1 have the potential for getting more funding, better 2 standards, and better access; because, of course, 3 public education, our UPK program, is the only early 4 childhood program open to every single child. 5 They don't have to jump through a lot of 6 demeaning means tests, and go in and out of 7 eligibility. 8 So, you'll see that I sneaked into my 9 testimony, a proposal that comes from 10 Winning Beginning, AQE, and Citizen Action, to our 11 State Education officials, about including early 12 childhood in our request for a waiver from the 13 No Child Left Behind Act. 14 That could free-up important resources 15 through Title 1 of the federal Education funding, 16 and there's other opportunities, where that money 17 could be used to supplement what we're spending on 18 pre-K, and on home visiting, and other strategies, 19 that we know are really effective. 20 It's also, I think, going to an increasing 21 requirement that we think across systems; make stuff 22 work together. 23 I noticed this morning, you made a point of 24 talking about how you disagreed with the ACS pulling 25 the 5-year-olds out of the ACS centers. 1 We agree, that, in terms of pulling them out 2 of the ACS centers, it was really counterproductive. 3 However, we also think that there's a 4 broader, bigger strategy. 5 And, we hope this Committee will drive the 6 thinking about, how, maybe we use the Education 7 dollars to support the services, the kids could have 8 stayed put, but we could have been more creative 9 about the way we used resources. 10 So, in my testimony, you'll see that we are 11 urging you to, as you think about the challenges for 12 keeping child care, and increasing its quality, that 13 you think across systems. That maybe you do more 14 hearings, and work. 15 I know that there was some work the last few 16 years, between the Education committees and 17 Children's Services. And, that we think a lot more 18 creatively about how we build things. 19 The State has applied for an Early Learning 20 Challenge grant. 21 I don't know if we'll get one. 22 I think it's going be announced the end of 23 this week. 24 That, could give us resources to work across 25 systems. 1 We would have some money in our "Race to the 2 Top" funds, which is going to be used to help spur 3 quality improvements in programs that are near the 4 persistently low-performing schools. 5 So, I think it's good to think about this, 6 increasingly, as school readiness. And, to think 7 about all of the resources that we have, and all of 8 the platforms, in terms of engaging the public, and 9 engaging policymakers, in moving things in a way 10 that's more effective, efficient, and really looks 11 at the whole realm of services. 12 And when we don't do that, you know, I know, 13 in city, when we moved those 5-year-olds out, we 14 ended up with empty classrooms on the ACS sides. 15 5-year-olds being told to go to kindergarten 16 programs, where there was no space. 17 So, they were bussed out of the neighborhood, 18 and then there were no after-school services. 19 So, I think, again, if we work across the 20 different agencies, and funding streams, and think 21 of them as all in support of young children, that 22 would really help as we move ahead. 23 The only last two things, just as important 24 notes, is that: 25 We're fully supportive of the 1 Empire Justice System's [sic] agenda, around making 2 this system more equitable across the state. Making 3 sure we don't have this crazy quilt of fees and 4 eligibility requirements in one county to the next; 5 And, we also support the Youth Alliance 6 priorities; and, especially, to make sure we have 7 enough after-school funding to support younger 8 elementary children. 9 We're still talking about very young 10 children. 11 And, our child-care subsidy programs, 12 certainly in the city, and around the rest of the 13 state, does not adequately support those things. 14 And, this brings it back to, also, State 15 responsibilities. 16 The City does make a significant investment. 17 We all know it's at risk now. 18 The federal government does make a big 19 investment. We know that's also at risk. 20 Historically, the State has been the lesser 21 partner, in terms of its contributions, pretty much, 22 with our Child-Care Block Grant, contributing what 23 it takes to draw that money down. 24 And I'm not entirely certain -- certainly, 25 ACS, and other people, could tell you -- but I think 1 part of the money that the State depends on, to draw 2 down the federal Child-Care Block Grant, is the 3 City's investment in early childhood services. 4 So, I would just urge you to really work on 5 the point that the Empire Justice System [sic] made, 6 and that you urge your colleagues at the state 7 level, to make sure we at least make up that 8 $37 million shortfall. That we get a more 9 consistent and better investment from the State, 10 that would help us all, because it takes all levels 11 of government to really make this work. 12 And the State has been somewhat missing in 13 action on child care. 14 Certainly, a huge contributor with the pre-K 15 program. That's 400 million. And, 200 million of 16 that is in community programs. 17 So, on that front, you know -- but, we would 18 love to see you implement the suggestions that 19 Empire Justice and Winning Beginning is urging, in 20 terms of better funding, and the State stepping up 21 to the plate more. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Betty. 23 Do you have any questions, 24 Senator Montgomery? 25 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Just one -- one question 1 I have. 2 I note, that, uhm, Betty -- 3 First of all, I want to thank you, 4 Senator Savino, for this hearing. 5 It's been, certainly, one that we've needed 6 to have, this kind of discussion. 7 And, uhm, I note that ACS has, in the last 8 couple of years, I think, done several things to 9 totally change what the child-care system looked 10 like, 10 years ago, maybe even 5 years ago, removing 11 5-year-olds, removing after-school. Really, really, 12 uhm -- and, now, moving to change the way that 13 programs are funded. 14 So -- in removing pillars that allowed 15 programs to be able to exist, to some extent. Maybe 16 not to the quality that we like, but, at least we 17 had centers in communities, that, now, we won't 18 have. 19 And I'm just wondering, recognizing all of 20 the expertise in this room, including CCI, and 21 Day Care Council, and 1707, and all of the 22 organizations that have traditionally worked 23 together, hopefully -- sometimes, yes; sometimes, 24 no -- but, certainly we all have the same goals: 25 Was there a collaborative effort to try and answer 1 some of the questions that you've raised in the 2 testimony here, in terms of, how do you do effective 3 funding, blending funding, in a way that allows us 4 to continue to have a system that serves children 5 across the board, and families, but, perhaps, with 6 more quality, more efficiency, and, somehow 7 connected to the educational system as we know it? 8 Was there any collaboration before those 9 moves were made? 10 Or, are we now trying to correct the errors 11 that were made, based on -- or the, I guess, the 12 outcomes of those decisions, after the fact? 13 BETTY HOLCOMB: I think there's certainly 14 been a collaborative effort among advocates, and 15 labor, to approach, participate, offer their 16 expertise, and give testimony, and engage with City 17 officials in the process. 18 I would not say, through the process, that it 19 has been transparent or collaborative. 20 And I think that the fact that the 21 Lawyers Alliance, and, now, other organizations, are 22 submitting Freedom of Information Requests, trying 23 to obtain more transparency around that, speaks to 24 the matter of whether or not there's been adequate 25 collaboration. 1 And, I think when Senator Savino made the 2 comment, that this looks like going backwards, she 3 touched that nerve, about the fact that people have 4 not felt particularly included in the process. 5 I would say, that, the thing that frustrates 6 me the most about all this, is that, in 7 New York City, we're all proud of having the 8 ACS-contracted centers. 9 We've done this bold thing, starting very 10 much with you, and other people in my organization, 11 other people around the city. And it really looked 12 like, at the outside, what they're trying to 13 recreate now. 14 I mean, it really was the precursor to 15 Head Start. The ACS programs really have aspired to 16 be, and do, all of the things we're now looking at 17 in Early Learn, and to do this robust, comprehensive 18 early childhood service. 19 And it stood out across the country. It's 20 one of the world's -- I was a journalist before I 21 came to my job. 22 One of the reasons I came to work on this, is 23 because New York had been doing great things. 24 Clearly, in this budget crisis, and without a 25 lot of cross-collaboration about, how advocates' 1 expertise might be brought into play, and, agencies 2 really looking at things, like, capacity across 3 systems, money across systems. 4 I don't think everyone agrees with the 5 choices now. 6 And, at the end of the day, what we're doing 7 is, making cuts on the back of families and children 8 who can least afford it. 9 And, the workers in these program, for years, 10 and that, you know, this morning, we're talking 11 about, health insurance, retirement, all the things 12 that we all depend on, from our jobs, and, those are 13 at risk. 14 And, that's the way we're talking about 15 paying for cuts. 16 And, so, that was kind of long-winded, but, 17 you know -- I mean, I think, historically, as I've 18 listened to you, and listened to other people in my 19 agency that worked on it, what's really sad right 20 now, is: Everybody wanting to do the right thing. 21 Everybody having a vision. 22 And, we need to really generate the public 23 will to fund it. 24 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Thank you. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Betty. 1 Since your organization is -- oftentimes, 2 people turn to it for research, for information -- 3 the policymakers, the professionals in the field -- 4 did ACS speak to anyone in your organization, about 5 developing the cost of care? 6 I asked them that question, about. 7 They said, they solicited information from 8 various providers, and they were able to determine 9 that, the cost of care, they'll be able to meet with 10 this reduction in funding. 11 Was, your, one of the agencies that they 12 asked? Just out of curiosity. 13 BETTY HOLCOMB: I don't know if asking, but 14 we gave. 15 [Laughter.] 16 We, uhm -- I mean, we've been very 17 instrumental in the implementation of universal 18 pre-kindergarten. 19 And, in 2007, when we saw UPK money moving 20 across agencies, we got concerned about whether or 21 not that was going to supplant other funding, and 22 leave programs with less resources. 23 So, we developed a policy brief. We decided 24 the central question is: What's the cost of care? 25 So, we have developed generic models. 1 And I thought I brought it. That's what I 2 was -- just looking for it. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: It's probably in here. 4 BETTY HOLCOMB: I don't know. 5 But, I certainly can e-mail it to your staff, 6 that, both, in State conversations about this, and 7 in the City debates, our contribution has been, to 8 come up with a generic program model, and look at 9 what that costs. 10 Some of the assumptions we made in that, 11 were, that you gave the comprehensive services, 12 which is much more like a Head Start model. 13 Also, that teachers were paid at the same 14 level as public school teachers, at least starting, 15 which is about 48,000, in City. That's the low end. 16 So -- you know, that's the high end of where 17 a child-care worker might be. 18 So, we came out with the cost of care, there, 19 somewhere in the neighborhood of, sixteen, 20 eighteen thousand for the really younger children. 21 Fourteen, fifteen, when you put all those components 22 together in various ways. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 24 Thank you. 25 And your -- you also mentioned the issue of 1 converting the -- or federalizing the day-care model 2 by utilizing more Head Start money. 3 And -- which has been, I think Ken Popler 4 talked about them utilizing UPK to do the same 5 thing. 6 In the past, when we've -- 7 And I'm sure Senator Montgomery can agree. 8 -- when we've attempted to federalize 9 programs, it was in an effort to capture more money, 10 to expand it. And then you match it with State 11 money, with City money. 12 So you had, you could -- this is actually 13 doing in the opposite. 14 They're federalizing some of these pro- -- 15 some of these subsidies, in an effort to drive down 16 their obligation to it; and, thereby, decrease the 17 costs, and then, saddle the feds with more of the 18 requirement. 19 It's a completely different model of 20 federalizing the social services -- 21 BETTY HOLCOMB: Well, when universal 22 pre-kindergarten started, and our agency really 23 worked on it, UPK money -- which is, in the city, 24 about $3,300 a kid -- could be added to an existing 25 program, to extend the day, to enhance teacher 1 compensation, to buy supplies. And, that is State 2 policy. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: But that doesn't appear to 4 be what they're doing here. 5 BETTY HOLCOMB: But what has happened, as ACS 6 developed a hole, is, obviously, that it's been used 7 to supplant to other funding. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 9 It's a very sig- -- it's a very big problem. 10 BETTY HOLCOMB: It is a very big problem. 11 But, again I, bring it back to you all, also at the 12 State. Like, we really need you to fill the hole in 13 State funding as well. 14 SENATOR SAVINO: And, we're going to do 15 everything we can, on that. 16 And, so, towards that end, I'll suggest the 17 same thing to you that I suggested to the 18 Empire Center, and anyone else: You're going to all 19 be submitting testimony, ideas, to the Governor and 20 Division of Budget. We need to frame this issue 21 differently than we've ever done it before. 22 This is about economic development. 23 You cannot have job creation programs, put 24 people to work, and then pull the rug out from 25 underneath them. 1 BETTY HOLCOMB: That's right. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: You have to make work pay. 3 BETTY HOLCOMB: That's right. 4 Just one other detail on the pre-K funding? 5 It did -- when they made that switch, it did 6 result in layoffs of aides, in loss of enrichment 7 programs. And, really, concrete losses. 8 I think there's some people here who can talk 9 about what happened to their programs; when they put 10 the pre-K money into ACS, and what happened at the 11 program level. 12 And, also, at the program level, we still 13 haven't resolved, "who's on first," in terms of 14 assessments, and the way the system works. 15 So, when you talk about federalizing things, 16 even in Early Learn, I believe individual programs 17 will still be answering to about eight different 18 agencies, in terms of their reporting and 19 assessment. 20 And, so, that's another big issue about why 21 we need to work across systems, and use the money 22 more effectively. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: That just gives more 24 credence to the concern that was raised earlier; 25 that, this Early Learn is going to -- 1 One: It's going to drive down costs; 2 It's going to drive down eligibility; 3 It's going to reduce the number of slots; 4 And, it's going to close the smaller 5 agencies. 6 That's a fact, because the smaller agencies 7 are not going be able to comply with all of these 8 multiple regulations, and meet the requirements. 9 They're just not going to be able to do it. 10 And we know that. 11 BETTY HOLCOMB: I think that's already a 12 reality across the city. You know, programs are 13 merging, and sharing services. 14 It's going on right now. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Betty. 16 Next up is...? 17 SENATE AIDE: Randi Levine. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: ...Randi Levine, for the 19 Advocates for Children; 20 Followed by, Moira Flavin, from the 21 Citizens Committee for Children of New York; 22 And, Steve Antonelli, from the Bank Street 23 College of Education. 24 So, if you're all here, if you could come up 25 in the front, and... 1 And, again, we don't need to read the whole 2 testimony. If could just get the highlights. 3 Yeah, if other two want to come up and sit at 4 the table, it might make it go faster. 5 Are they here? 6 I'm assuming you're Moira? 7 RANDI LEVINE: Yep [looking at Moira Flavin]. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: [Laughter.] 9 Okay. Go ahead. 10 RANDI LEVINE: Thank you for the opportunity 11 to discuss challenges regarding the state of 12 child care in New York. 13 And, thanks to both of you for your 14 leadership on this issue. 15 My name is Randi Levine, and I'm an attorney 16 at Advocates for Children of New York, where I focus 17 on early childhood education. 18 I also grew up on Staten Island, in the 19 23rd District. 20 For more than 40 years, Advocates for 21 Children has worked to promote access to the best 22 education New York can provide for all students, 23 especially students from low-income backgrounds, and 24 students of color. 25 To narrow the achievement gap, and provide 1 the best education possible, we cannot wait until 2 children enter kindergarten. 3 Years of research made clear that we must 4 start by providing low-income children with a 5 high-quality early childhood education. 6 For many children in low-income families, 7 subsidized child-care programs are the only 8 opportunity to have such an early childhood 9 education. 10 Regardless of whether these programs are 11 called child care, preschool, or pre-kindergarten, 12 they are critical for school readiness and school 13 success. 14 In our written testimony, you'll find some 15 powerful statistics about the profound impact that 16 these programs have on education. 17 And Dr. Popler already reviewed some of the 18 research about the importance. 19 We're deeply concerned about the rapidly 20 shrinking opportunities for children from low-income 21 backgrounds to participate in child-care programs in 22 New York City, due to lack of funding. 23 Between 2006 and 2010, the City eliminated 24 14,000 child-care subsidies. 25 These reductions have included closing dozens 1 of child-care centers, and eliminating subsidies for 2 parents who are unemployed and looking for work, and 3 parents who are ill or incapacitated. 4 Last year, we were surprised, and alarmed, 5 that Mayor Bloomberg proposed cutting an additional 6 17,000 children from child-care programs. 7 While we were pleased that this proposal was 8 rejected, we were disappointed that dozens of 9 classrooms were still cut. 10 Furthermore, 7,000 of the child-care slots 11 that were restored were funded through one-year 12 City-Council funding that expires at the end of 13 June. 14 These reductions have not only led to reduced 15 opportunities for children to have early childhood 16 education programs, but made it significantly more 17 difficult for elementary-school children in 18 low-income families to access after-school programs. 19 Now, as you know, the City plans to implement 20 its Early Learn NYC initiative, which will blend 21 child-care funding with Head Start and universal 22 pre-K funding. 23 We support the overall vision of 24 Early Learn NYC, an early childhood education system 25 with comprehensive, high-quality, full-day programs, 1 integrating children with special needs, and 2 increasing capacity for infants and toddlers. 3 However, we are extremely concerned that the 4 funding is inadequate to realize this vision. 5 With the current level of funding, the City 6 has acknowledged that Early Learn NYC will lead to a 7 decrease in capacity of 3,000 children, in addition 8 to the 7,000 additional slots at risk of 9 elimination. 10 We're concerned that some of the children who 11 will lose a seat are those who need it the most. 12 Early Learn NYC gives priority to programs 13 located in ZIP codes that have the highest 14 concentration of poverty and need. 15 However, this methodology overlooks the fact 16 that there are pockets of deep poverty, such as with 17 public housing developments located in ZIP codes, 18 and other parts of the city. 19 Unless the City receives additional funding, 20 child-care programs serving these communities are at 21 risk of closing. 22 As many other folks have already mentioned, 23 we're also concerned that the per-child rate of 24 Early Learn proposal is inadequate to support the 25 high-quality standards, in addition to all of the 1 additional requirements for Early Learn. 2 Continued cuts in child-care capacity will 3 only increase the achievement gap that exists 4 between children from low-income backgrounds and 5 their more affluent peers. 6 Today you have heard, and will continue to 7 hear, many statistics about the decreasing number of 8 child-care slots. 9 Behind each of these numbers is a child and a 10 family. 11 Advocates for Children receives calls from 12 low-income parents who are looking for preschool 13 programs to get their children ready for school, and 14 are surprised to learn that there are no publicly 15 funded options available. 16 We recently received a call from the mother 17 of 4-year-old Andrew. 18 Last year, due to Andrew's special needs, the 19 New York City Department of Education placed him in 20 a full-day integrated class where preschoolers with 21 disabilities learn alongside their typically 22 developing peers. 23 Andrew made significant progress in this 24 setting, and the Department of Education recently 25 determined that he no longer required a 1 special-education seat in an integrated class. 2 One would expect this news to be the source 3 of celebration for Andrew's family. 4 Instead, this news precipitated a family 5 crisis, leaving his low-income, single, working 6 mother scrambling to find a free preschool or 7 subsidized child-care seat for her child in the 8 middle of the year. 9 Thus far, his mother has not been successful. 10 She works on a temporary basis, and is now 11 being forced to turn down jobs, in order to care for 12 her son. 13 And Andrew went, from preparing for 14 kindergarten by participating in a high-quality, 15 full-day integrated preschool class, to sitting at 16 home all day. 17 Advocates for Children is also working with 18 the family of twin girls with disabilities. 19 The twins should have started kindergarten in 20 September, but their single mother is unable to meet 21 their bus after the school bell rings due to her 22 work schedule. 23 She has been unable to find an after-school 24 program that can accommodate the family's needs, and 25 in the meantime, her children have been out of 1 school all year. 2 We understand that the State is facing a 3 federal shortfall of nearly $40 million in 4 child-care funding, due to the elimination of the 5 TANF contingency dollars. 6 The State must fill this gap. 7 At this critical time, New York City cannot 8 absorb an additional cut in State or federal 9 funding. 10 We recognize that these are challenging 11 economic times, but that is exactly why the State 12 must increase child-care funding, that enables 13 parents to keep their jobs, and enables children to 14 prepare to succeed in school. 15 Studies have found that high-quality program 16 for preschool-aged children saves $7 to $16 for 17 every dollar invested. 18 Cutting children from these child-care 19 programs will only increase unemployment, and will 20 cost more in the long run, in increased remediation, 21 special education, public assistance, and criminal 22 justice costs. 23 We look forward to working with you to 24 increase funding for child care. 25 Thank you for holding this hearing today to 1 discuss this critical issue, and for the opportunity 2 to speak with you today. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: Moira. 4 MOIRA FLAVIN: Sure. 5 Good afternoon. 6 My name is Moira Flavin, and I am the policy 7 associate for Early Childhood Education, Education 8 and Youth Services, at Citizens Committee for 9 Children of New York. 10 CCC is a 68-year-old independent 11 child-advocacy organization, dedicated to ensuring 12 that every New York child is healthy, housed, 13 educated, and safe. 14 CCC would like to thank Senator Savino, and 15 the members of the Children and Families Committee, 16 for holding this hearing regarding challenges facing 17 the child-care community in New York State in the 18 coming year. 19 This hearing is particularly timely, given 20 the upcoming state budget process, New York City's 21 Early Learn RFP, and the shortage of funds to 22 maintain capacity, let alone enhance quality, at a 23 time when low-income working New Yorkers need access 24 to subsidized child care more than ever. 25 The need to serve as many income-eligible 1 children in high-quality early learning environments 2 often results in a tension between increasing and 3 maintaining the system's capacity, and enhancing and 4 maintaining the quality of care provided. 5 Though this tension may exist, we cannot 6 sacrifice one for the other. 7 New York must have a child-care system that 8 provides high-quality care to as many 9 income-eligible children as possible. 10 While limited budgets have led advocates, 11 legislators, policymakers, and budget crunchers to 12 focus on maintaining as much of the system's 13 capacity as possible, New York's child-care system 14 has never had enough capacity to provide child care 15 for families in need. 16 Thus, our goal must remain to increase the 17 system's capacity so that all income-eligible 18 children can be served in high-quality programs. 19 Early childhood education has also been 20 proven to benefit children's cognitive, emotional, 21 and social well-being. 22 The return on investment of early -- of 23 quality early childhood education has been estimated 24 to be $1.80 to $17 per child. 25 CCC appreciates the efforts of the 1 State Administration and the State Legislatures to 2 make -- that have made to protect the quality and 3 capacity of the child-care system. 4 We appreciate the Legislature's ongoing 5 commitment to keeping funding for the State's 6 Child-Care Block Grant outside the Flexible Fund for 7 Family Services, and helping to ensure that TANF 8 surplus funds were used to maintain the CCBG funding 9 levels. 10 CCC also appreciates the careful and 11 deliberate attention the State has paid to 12 eliminating child-care subsidy fraud. 13 CCC is especially grateful for the work that 14 went into developing and submitting New York State's 15 application for the federal "Race to the Top - Early 16 Learning Challenge" grant. 17 We applaud the State's stated goals: To 18 increase the number of high-quality early learning 19 and development programs, to close the achievement 20 gap, and to improve the quality of early childhood 21 workforce. 22 CCC also appreciates the State's commitment 23 to Quality Stars NY, which, if fully implemented, 24 would allow for consistent measuring of service 25 quality so that parents are able to make informed 1 decisions about child care. 2 While rating and monitoring child-care 3 programs using a tiered system is important 4 progress, CCC urges the State to also commit 5 resources to technical assistance and quality 6 improvements, so that parents and communities with 7 fewer child-care options have access to quality 8 services. 9 While CCC applauds the efforts in the -- has 10 State -- the State has made to try to maintain 11 funding levels and to enhance quality, CCC is deeply 12 troubled by the instability of the child-care system 13 in New York. 14 While child care is a lifeline for many 15 struggling families, the State-subsidized child care 16 is currently in crisis. 17 In short: There is insufficient federal, 18 State, and county funding available -- invested, and 19 available, for quality child care for all 20 income-eligible and TANF-eligible children. 21 CCC is well aware of the budgetary challenges 22 New York State has faced since the economic 23 downturn. 24 New York State allocated approximately 25 $800 million for the child-care subsidy program this 1 fiscal year, most of which was distributed amongst 2 the local social-service district. 3 Notably, a substantial portion of this 4 funding is dollars from the federal 5 Child-Care Development Block Grant, federal 6 Social-Services Block Grant, and TANF. There is 7 very little State general-operating support in the 8 State's child-care system. 9 While CCC is grateful that State's Child-Care 10 Block Grant funding has remained constant over the 11 past three years, the costs of care have increased 12 tremendously. 13 Child-care costs have increased due to a 14 number of factors, including: 15 The increase in the number of families 16 entitled to child care, due to greater numbers of 17 public-assistance recipients during this period of 18 economic hardship; 19 The increased costs of health insurance for 20 child-care and Head Start staff; 21 The increased costs for quality care; 22 The increased number of families exercising 23 their parental choice to secure more regulated care 24 rather than informal care; 25 And, the increased costs of care associated 1 with the biannual market-rate adjustments. 2 CCC appreciates the challenges the State is 3 facing, given the decrease in federal funding. 4 First: The loss of $42 million in federal 5 ARRA funding has had a profound budgetary impact on 6 the struggling system. 7 Further, the State's decrease in federal 8 CCDBG [sic] funds, as a result of the young-child 9 factor, has led New York's federal allocation to 10 decrease, from 313 million in State 11 fiscal-year '06-'07, to 300 million in State 12 fiscal-year '11-'12. 13 CCC understands that New York State has been 14 able to maintain its Child-Care Block Grant level, 15 despite the decreased federal funding -- the federal 16 allocation, by transferring TANF dollars; 17 approximately, $37 million over each of the past 18 3 years. 19 CCC is deeply concerned about the impact of 20 the elimination of the federal TANF Contingency Fund 21 on the State's child-care allocation in State 22 fiscal-year '12-'13. 23 CCC urges New York State to increase its 24 support and commitment to the families and children 25 served by the child-care subsidy program in order to 1 offset the decline in federal funding. 2 It is imperative that, regardless of these 3 funding challenges, New York's Child-Care Block 4 Grant Funding level must, at a minimum, remain 5 constant when the State fiscal-year '12-'13 budget 6 is adopted, and should be -- in fact, be increased, 7 to ensure equitable State support for this 8 struggling system. 9 In addition to our concerns about State 10 funding for subsidies, CCC is concerned about the 11 quality and safety of child-care programs and 12 providers. 13 Quality Stars NY, and initiatives within 14 the -- "New York's Race to Top - Early Learning 15 Challenge" grant application are good steps towards 16 addressing quality. 17 CCC also believes that addressing quality and 18 safety requires establishing more requirements for 19 the informal child-care providers who currently 20 receive government funds to provide care, but do not 21 get cleared through the State's Central Registry for 22 child-abuse, neglect, nor fingerprinted in a 23 criminal-record check. 24 CCC urges the Legislature to amend the 25 Social Service Law, to require these minimal checks 1 before parents leave their children in 2 State-subsidized informal child-care arrangements. 3 New York City's child-care system has been in 4 crisis for some time, moving from addressing one 5 budget hole to the next. 6 While State and federal funding have remained 7 relatively flat, costs of care have increased 8 significantly. 9 According to the Administration for Children 10 Services, only 27 percent of income-eligible 11 children receive child care. 12 This is despite the fact that child care is a 13 boost to the economist economy, enabling parents to 14 work, and employing child-care providers, and most 15 importantly, a critical component to preparing young 16 child for academic and social success. 17 ACS has been addressing their child-care 18 budget deficit in numerous ways that have impacted 19 the system, including: 20 Increasing parent fees, two times; 21 Costs allocating UPK funds in a way that 22 reduce funding to providers; 23 Closing several direct-lease care sites; 24 Ensuring 5-year-olds attended kindergarten 25 rather than contracted care centers; 1 And, paying programs for enrollment rather 2 than capacity. 3 Last spring, the City planned to address the 4 deficit by taking the child care away from nearly 5 17,000 children of low-income working families, for 6 a savings of approximately 119 million. 7 In response to this devastating proposal, 8 CCC, and other child-care advocates, formed the 9 Emergency Coalition to Save Child Care. 10 These efforts secured $82 million for the 11 current City fiscal year, 53 million of which is 12 only for the current year. 13 In addition, it is unclear at this time how 14 ACS will be using the $29 million of funding that 15 was baselined for child care as part of last year's 16 City budget negotiations. 17 Furthermore, the City issued an RFP for its 18 contracted system, referred to as "Early Learn." 19 Early Learn is a model of child care aimed at 20 improving the quality of care for our youngest 21 New Yorkers. 22 Unfortunately, the Early Learn rates and 23 model, plus the loss of one-year funds from 24 child care, would lead to a loss of close to 25 10,000 slots in New York City's child-care system. 1 This loss of capacity is untenable in a city 2 so desperately in need of child-care services. 3 CCC supports the vision of Early Learn. 4 However, we have serious concerns about the funding 5 for Early Learn, as it is insufficient to support 6 the model as outlined in the RFP. 7 Specifically, we are concerned that the rates 8 do not appear to be sufficient to cover the costs of 9 care, because of (a) the elimination of the 10 Central Insurance Plan, such that health insurance 11 must now be paid for by programs, rather than by the 12 City centrally; (b) the facilities costs, which used 13 to be negotiated and budgeted individually for each 14 program, based on leased costs; and, (c) the 15 6.7 percent provider match required in the RFP. 16 Furthermore, the significant reduction of 17 capacity, almost 10,000 slots, is slated to leave 18 some communities, especially those not targeted as 19 high-need, with significant reductions in their 20 ability to provide child care to eligible children. 21 CCC would be remiss were we not to mention 22 the crisis pertaining to after-school programs. 23 ACS currently provides after-school 24 child-care vouchers to thousands of children, 707 -- 25 700 -- 70 -- 7,700 of which are funded by one-year 1 City-Council fund, uhm -- funds included in the City 2 current FY12 budget, but not included in the FY13 3 budget. 4 In addition, New York City has also released 5 the RFP for its out-of-school-time -- "OST" -- 6 programs, which, unfortunately, reduces both the 7 funding and capacity of OST programs. 8 This RFP and funding cut will reduce the 9 City's OST program to approximately 29,000 slots, 10 down from a height of approximately 55,000 slots 11 just a few years ago, at a time when other 12 after-school programs have also received federal, 13 State, and City cuts. 14 This is also unacceptable. 15 Subsidized child-care is an invaluable 16 resource for low-income children and families, and 17 an investment in New York's future. 18 CCC appreciates the opportunity to testify in 19 this hearing, and to highlight some of the steps 20 necessary to ensure that more of New York's children 21 have access to quality care. 22 Thank you. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Steve Antonelli, actually 24 runs one of the programs. 25 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Hello. 1 I'm Steven Antonelli, from Bank Street 2 College. 3 Thank you for inviting me to testify on an 4 issue which is of vital importance to the low-income 5 children and families we serve. 6 Bank Street Head Start serves 90 children at 7 2 sites located in Manhattan. Our funding is 8 derived primarily from our Head Start-ACS contract. 9 This is supplemented by New York State universal 10 pre-K funding, which, for the last several year, has 11 been distributed through ACS, who retain a part of 12 those funds based upon a cost-to-allocation formula 13 they've created. 14 Aside from the ARRA funding which we received 15 in 2010, allowing us to renovate our outdoor play 16 area, it's worth noting, that despite continual 17 costs increases, our basic grant has been, 18 essentially, flat since 2006. 19 As you know, all early childhood programs in 20 New York City who wish to continue providing 21 Head Start or child-care services, as delegates to 22 the grantee, ACS, were required to respond to the 23 Early Learn RFP that was released, after significant 24 delays, early in the spring of 2011. 25 This was the first time in many years that 1 community-based organizations, such as ours, were 2 required to re-compete for this funding. 3 The application process was challenging, 4 required a significant commitment of resources, and 5 was overwhelming to smaller organizations, many 6 which have been providing essential educational and 7 social services in communities throughout the city 8 for many years, and have become significant sources 9 of support to families and their neighborhoods. 10 Many of the stated goals of Early Learn NYC 11 are admirable, and in alignment with the goals of 12 all quality early childhood providers. 13 The Early Learn NYC concept paper released in 14 April of 2010, speaks of improving service quality 15 by reducing teacher-child ratios, increasing service 16 hours, improving professional development, improving 17 assessment, and enriching curriculum. 18 The implementation of Head Start performance 19 standards across all preschool programs is presented 20 as the comprehensive model that will raise the 21 standard of quality provided to all children and 22 families. 23 However, also stated in the concept paper 24 were the goals of maximizing resources, and assuring 25 sustainability of child care in New York City. 1 It seems that, in final model detailed in the 2 RPF, that these last two goals have undermined the 3 possibility of improving quality, and more 4 dangerously, have put the continued operation of 5 many programs at risk. 6 The central concern I raise about the 7 Early Learn NYC model is the rate of compensation 8 offered to delegates, or, the reimbursement rate, 9 per child, offered under the RFP. 10 The calculation of this rate, which impacts 11 the bottom line of any contract to be offered, was 12 done without any real input from delegates, and with 13 little transparency. 14 Questions that were raised by delegates were 15 dismissed, with the only explanation offered by the 16 ACS staff, that they could in the address the 17 details at the risk of contaminating the RFP 18 process. 19 We are assured the calculation of the rate 20 includes sufficient funds to pay for implementation 21 of the high-quality program described in the RFP, 22 but our own calculations throw this assertion into 23 doubt. 24 In fact, delegates will be required to raise 25 a substantial amount of money if they wish to 1 continue operation at their current levels. 2 The funding gap is created primarily by the 3 fact that the grantee will no longer pay for 4 employee health insurance and pension costs, and has 5 reduced the reimbursement facility costs. 6 For many years, ACS has stated their concern 7 about the rising health-insurance costs, and 8 attempted to negotiate with the Head Start Employees 9 Union, DC 1707, about charging some premium to staff 10 members for coverage, or dedicating the increasingly 11 rare COLA salary increases, to defray this expense. 12 These negotiations have not been fruitful. 13 It seems, now, that ACS is simply throwing 14 this issue to the delegates and washing their hands 15 of the problem. 16 Calculating future health-insurance costs is 17 not easily predictable. However, based upon an 18 estimate provided to us by ACS, of the average costs 19 of our staff's health insurance currently provided 20 under citywide Central Insurance, we project that 21 our agency will be required to raise between 22 three hundred fifty to four hundred thousand dollars 23 to continue to provide this coverage. 24 Adding to this, the new pension-costs 25 obligation and additional facility expenses, we 1 project that our contribution will amount to over 2 $450,000. 3 This is a serious threat to the continuity of 4 our program, a high-quality preschool program that 5 many families rely upon each day. 6 Finally, I would like to comment on the 7 current stated implementation date of this new 8 model: September 2012. 9 In our response to the RFP, we created a 10 fiscal plan that relies upon enrolling private-pay 11 students and seeking foundation support. 12 In order to obtain the large amount of money 13 required, we must increase our enrollment capacity, 14 and recruit private-pay students at a tuition rate 15 of approximately twenty-two to twenty-six thousand 16 dollars a year, as well as, charge for summer 17 after-school service -- and after-school service. 18 Therefore, the recent announcement of a delay 19 in the RFP decisions until the spring is of great 20 concern to us. 21 This time frame does not allow us any time to 22 recruit students, and is completely out of sync with 23 the regular school-application cycle. 24 Similarly, creating an effective fundraising 25 plan, and implementing it, requires a significant 1 amount of time. 2 The original time frame will be a serious 3 challenge to any other programs who will be 4 attempting a similar fiscal strategy. 5 But, in fact, all delegates will struggle to 6 meet the transition to the new system by the 7 original implementation date. 8 Parents will also be at a loss to negotiate 9 the new environment, with some old centers closing, 10 new ones opening, and others with new 11 administrations and staffs. 12 I assert, that, based upon the new decision 13 date, that implementation should be delayed until 14 the start of fiscal-year 2013. This will avoid both 15 programmatic and fiscal confusion. 16 I believe that the stated goals of 17 Early Learn NYC are worthy of support, and that the 18 effective blending of funding streams for early care 19 in the city and state are necessary, and advisable, 20 but the implementation of this new framework must be 21 practical, designed with the input of all vested 22 parties, and not punish or unfairly burden the 23 dedicated staff of early childhood centers or the 24 community-based organizations that run these 25 essential programs. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: And questions? 2 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: I just have one comment. 3 It seems that, what I'm hearing, is that, 4 definitely, we need to be able to do more, from the 5 state level, and the State budget. 6 And, obviously, Senator Savino will be 7 working hard, and we all will, along those lines. 8 But, we are faced, as we, traditionally, 9 historically, have been, with the question of: 10 Quantity versus quality. 11 And, so, at the City's level, we're faced 12 with a process that seems to be reducing capacity, 13 perhaps, you know, in the interest of raising 14 quality. 15 I'm not sure about that. I don't necessarily 16 trust that, but, this is what, ostensibly, is being 17 done. 18 So, whatever funding we do at the State -- 19 the state level, I'm just -- I'm concerned that we 20 don't seem to be able to convince the City leaders, 21 and Administration, of the need to continue to 22 maximize the capacity, while, at the same time, 23 looking to quality. 24 So, we're having to sacrifice one for the 25 other. 1 And, for me, where so many day-care slots 2 have already been lost, I'm just -- I'm having a 3 very difficult time identifying with the City's 4 process, because it hurts the people that I 5 represent more than any other place. 6 So, while we talk about the quality, and I'm, 7 absolutely, have always been, and continue to be, in 8 favor of investing in upgrading the quality, I'm not 9 upgrading any quality, because I don't have the 10 slots anymore. I don't have the day-care centers to 11 support the families in my district. 12 So, it's very -- it's a very difficult 13 position for me, politically, at this time. 14 And I think, for us who are advocating, we 15 need to clarify, what is, exactly, what we're 16 talking about, because the City has forced us to 17 eliminate too much of the service. 18 And, while the advocates talk about quality, 19 which I'm all in favor of, we have lost too much of 20 this service to people who actually need it. 21 And, they're not necessarily looking at the 22 highest quality, like a Bank Street School, that's 23 going to charge 26,000. And you can probably get 24 it. 25 But, the average day-care center that I've 1 lost in my district, you could not get that kind of 2 tuition, and, parents still need a child-care 3 center. 4 So, I just want to offer that; I want to put 5 that on the table: It's becoming more and more 6 difficult for me, in terms of supporting this, 7 having to eliminate capacity, in the name of 8 quality. 9 STEVEN ANTONELLI: I want to say that, in 10 creating that model, which we created, and, not only 11 did we have to create a feasible fiscal model, but 12 we needed to create a model that the board of 13 directors of Bank Street College would say: Yes, 14 this could work, if you do this. 15 We had to create a tuition rate that was 16 less -- less than the average private-school 17 tuition, but something that we felt was reasonable. 18 But I feel that, you know, for example, ACS 19 is saying that more programs have applied -- there's 20 a larger capacity that has applied than, you know, 21 they actually need. 22 I know for a fact, that many programs apply, 23 creating fiscal models in their applications, that 24 they're just hoping that, possibly, they could 25 achieve this. 1 And, they're all waiting to see if they get 2 offered a contract, and then see if there's any 3 negotiation room, and seeing: Is this really going 4 to be fiscally possible for us? 5 And I'm sure there's going to be many 6 agencies that are going to be offered contracts, and 7 they're gonna say: Well, we're sorry, but we can't, 8 actually, really do it. 9 You know? 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you for bringing that 11 up, Steve. 12 First of all, I thank all three of you for 13 your testimony. 14 And, you know, it's interesting, there's 15 nobody who's been involved in this process yet, that 16 can object to the concept. 17 Right? 18 Everybody says: This is a good concept. 19 It seems to be, the implementation presents 20 the real problem. 21 You -- Mr. Antonelli, you're one of the few 22 people that I've heard from today, that actually had 23 to reply to the RFP. 24 And when I asked the administration earlier, 25 about the number of people who have replied, you 1 heard them say the same thing I did, that, they got 2 more RFP requests -- more RFP proposals than they 3 needed. They were going to exceed capacity. 4 And, I've been around a long time. 5 I'm trying to figure out how you reply to an 6 RFP for something that's not competitive. 7 How do you -- you know, normally, the RFP 8 process is, okay, the City needs a service. You 9 know, they need to contract out a particular 10 service. 11 And, then, they send out the RFP. And, then, 12 whoever the people that respond, they try and outbid 13 each other, without knowing what the bid is. 14 But, they arrive at the dollar amount, for 15 how much money they're going to charge the City of 16 New York, or the State of New York, or whoever, in 17 that contact, based upon a set of factors that they 18 determine, by, how much it costs them to do 19 business. 20 So, this is turned completely upside down. 21 They determine the rate of reimbursement, 22 correct, the actual cost of care? 23 STEVEN ANTONELLI: They provided what they 24 call "the maximum rate." 25 SENATOR SAVINO: "A maximum rate." 1 And, so, you are then forced to try and 2 develop a reply to this RFP, in keeping with their 3 maximum rate, which may have nothing whatsoever to 4 do with the reality rate -- 5 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Right. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: -- because you have to work 7 in the real world. 8 You know how many people work for you. 9 You know how many students are paying; you 10 know how many are not. 11 You know what the cost of the health 12 insurance -- and, actually, you don't, because, 13 right now, you're basing your -- your response, and 14 what you think is the actual cost of care, on a set 15 of factors that could change; correct? 16 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Right. 17 Certainly, the insurance costs will change. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 19 So how -- how -- so -- I'm going to ask you: 20 How did you -- you replied. 21 How did you determine what your feasibility 22 rate would be? 23 STEVEN ANTONELLI: We took our current 24 budget. We made some reductions that we felt we 25 could make without diminishing the quality greatly. 1 We expanded our capacity so we could 2 maximize, as they said, our classroom capacity, up 3 to the point that we could. 4 And, then, we had to then -- they claim that, 5 within the rate that they've provided for -- for 6 example, providing health insurance for staff -- we 7 took the figures that they provided us, which was 8 the average cost of health insurance for our staff 9 members -- and it differs, whether it's a family 10 plan, or a single plan -- but, the average rate they 11 provided us, I believe, was $13,800, which seems a 12 little low to me, but that's the rate that they gave 13 us. 14 We -- we -- the figure that I'm coming up, 15 that we have to raise $450,000, is the amount of 16 money that's just not there in that rate. 17 And, so, they're claiming that we're only 18 going to make a 6.7 contract, or contribution? 19 It's more like 30 percent. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: So that $13,000 that they -- 21 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Right. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: -- they project would be the 23 cost of providing health insurance, is that -- is 24 that real-world calculation, or is that what the 25 City of New York pays for its employees? 1 STEVEN ANTONELLI: I believe that's what they 2 pay, $13,800, for our medical part of it. Not the 3 hospitalization part, but the medical part. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: And how do they think that 5 you -- you have -- wait. 6 You have 90 students in your school. 7 How many people work for you? 8 STEVEN ANTONELLI: 26. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: 26. 26 people. 10 26 people work for you. 11 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Yeah. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: How do they think that you, 13 as an operator of a not-for-profit that employs 14 26 people, are going to be able to negotiate the 15 same rate that the City of New York does, when they 16 have 450,000 people as subscribers in their plan? 17 You're going to be able to negotiate the same 18 rate? 19 STEVEN ANTONELLI: I don't know. 20 I don't think that they have made that 21 commitment. 22 They did provide a workshop to delegates, 23 where they invited some companies to come and give 24 presentations to us. But none of -- 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Pray tell, who were they? 1 [Laughter.] 2 STEVEN ANTONELLI: I think, 3 Blue Cross/Blue Shield. 4 I can't remember, exactly, the companies, but 5 they were major -- major companies. 6 But, I don't think that they -- I think, 7 basically, they're washing their hands of the 8 problem -- 9 SENATOR SAVINO: It seems that way. 10 STEVEN ANTONELLI: -- because it's been a 11 longstanding problem. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: And one other question: You 13 said this is the first time, in your experience, 14 where you've had to -- 15 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Re-compete, yeah. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: -- to compete in this 17 process. 18 So, in the past, how did they do it? 19 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Basically, Head Start 20 contracts were just renewed. 21 As long as you were performing up to a 22 standard -- that, you didn't have, you know, serious 23 performance problems or fiscal problems -- I think 24 it was, every three years, your contract was just 25 routinely renewed, at a new rate, or at the old 1 rate. You know, that was something that had to do 2 with the federal money coming into the City, or 3 whatever. 4 But it -- I've never -- I've been involved in 5 Head Start since 1991, and I've never been involved 6 in a re-competition for a grant. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh, oh, one more question, 8 since you, obviously, serve a population where there 9 are some people who could pay $20,000 to send their 10 kids to day care. 11 One of the components of the Early Learn RFP, 12 is that, you're going to have to raise 6.7 percent 13 on your own. 14 Where would -- where would you go to raise 15 that kind of money? 16 I mean, I joked earlier that you'd hold a 17 bake sale, but, you know, I'm not -- that was, 18 obviously -- 19 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Well, if we -- 20 SENATOR SAVINO: -- a joke. 21 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Well, if we can't enroll 22 private students, which is, basically, what we were 23 thinking, that we were going to raise the money, is 24 that, you know, we have to go to foundations. 25 And, you know, you're going to literally 1 have, you know, how many programs -- Head Start 2 programs in the city going to same foundations, 3 saying: Please, you know, help us run our programs. 4 And foundations, traditionally, don't want to 5 fund operating costs. They want to fund new 6 enrichments to the programs, and stuff. 7 So, it's sort of a hopeless case. 8 But, you know, again, we had to create a 9 model that, looked okay, fiscally responsible, and 10 we think that this is feasible. 11 And I -- if we get the grant, and we go 12 forward, I'm going to do everything I can do to make 13 it work. 14 But, Bank Street College, which is a fairly, 15 you know, good size organization, which is not -- 16 our Head Start program is not one of the largest 17 Head Start programs by any means, but, they clearly 18 do not have $450,000 to invest into the Head Start 19 program. 20 And, they've made it very clear that they 21 can't do that. 22 So -- 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Were you -- I keep saying 24 this is the last question, but then it makes me 25 think of something else. 1 Were you ever the recipient of any member 2 items from the State? 3 Some of the small -- some of the day-care 4 programs have it. 5 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Uhm, no. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: Because that punched another 7 hole in the budgets of some of them. 8 Yeah, this creates -- this creates some 9 interesting dilemmas. 10 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Yep. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 12 STEVEN ANTONELLI: Thank you. 13 SENATOR SAVINO: All right, next up...? 14 SENATE AIDE: CSEA [inaudible]. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: CSEA, Local 1000, 16 Denise Dowel, and Matt D'Amico; 17 And, then, the United Federation of Teachers, 18 Tammie Miller, the head of the Child-Care Providers 19 Chapter, and, Carol Gerstl, if Carol's coming. 20 You can. 21 Who's going to go first? 22 DENISE DOWELL: I guess I will. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, Denise first, and then 24 Tammie. 25 DENISE DOWELL: Good morning, Senator Savino 1 and Senator Montgomery. 2 Thank you for putting this together, and 3 giving us the opportunity to speak to you today 4 about the challenges we face to ensure that families 5 in New York have access to safe, secure, quality 6 early learning and care. 7 My comments today are going to address 8 challenges we face as a state, but particularly 9 those that are unique to the 57 counties outside 10 New York City. 11 I'm the director of Early Learning and 12 Care Programs with CSEA. 13 We bring together 300,000 public- and 14 private-sector workers across New York. 15 Outside New York City, we represent almost 16 7,000 registered family and licensed group-family 17 child-care providers, under the umbrella of VOICE; 18 and 15,000 informal legally exempt child-care 19 providers, under the umbrella of Child-Care 20 Providers Together; "CCPT." 21 A first step, and key, to a new economic 22 development strategy to expand access to quality, 23 affordable child care to New York families is to 24 invest in child care. 25 So, my colleagues have already covered this a 1 little bit. 2 Empire Justice Center, and Betty, spoke to 3 the fact that New York State invests about zero in 4 child care. 5 Our investment is limited to matching and 6 maintenance of effort dollars related to federal 7 funds. 8 And, I'm not sure if you're aware of this, 9 but our child-care licensing system, which is a key 10 element of the infrastructure that provides basic 11 health and safety and oversight, is entirely funded 12 by federal dollars. 13 This has to change. 14 New York's apportionment of child-care 15 development funds continues to decrease each year. 16 With loss of ARRA and TANF contingency funding, we 17 estimate an $80 million shortfall in child-care 18 funding in the coming year. 19 And fewer counties, outside New York City, 20 are allocating dollars for child-care subsidies and 21 quality improvements in their budget. 22 So, we do need to step up now, to make up the 23 $37 million projected shortfall and TANF-contingency 24 fundings, just to be able to hold on to what we 25 have. 1 You know, rigorous longitudinal studies show 2 that high-quality early childhood education delivers 3 large benefits, not only to participating children 4 and their families, but to society overall. 5 Payoffs include: Lower costs for special 6 education and grade retention, higher tax revenues 7 because earning of participants as adults increase, 8 and reduced social and judicial costs. 9 To reap these returns, programs must be 10 high-quality. A key ingredient to quality early 11 learning and care is a qualified workforce. 12 So, effective State investment would target 13 two areas: 14 It would make quality early learning and care 15 affordable for low-income and middle-class working 16 families through direct subsidies and tax credits; 17 And, it would raise standards for 18 qualifications and compensation across the early 19 childhood industry. 20 Low comp- -- you know, currently, across the 21 field, there's low compensation, with few, if any, 22 benefits. And it makes attracting and retaining a 23 skilled workforce with education and credentials in 24 early childhood education nearly impossible. 25 And, the fact that the workforce doesn't have 1 resources to participate in ongoing professional 2 development that leads to credentials and a degree, 3 is also an enormous challenge. 4 And, we're swimming upstream in the face of 5 what we know about the workforce. 6 A paper on early childhood education that's 7 just been released as part of the Annie E. Casey 8 Foundation, "Big Ideas for Jobs," reports that, 9 between, 1983 and '84, and 2000, the education 10 levels of center-based early childhood educators 11 declined, from over 40 percent, to around 12 30 percent. 13 The age profile of educational attainment 14 among center-based teachers is unique as well; 15 while, in the economy, as a whole, the 25- to 16 30-year-old cohort is more college-educated than all 17 older groups. Among center-based teachers, the most 18 educated group is over 50. 19 Projections show that we'll lose many of our 20 most-educated professionals in the next decade. 21 And there are programs across the country, 22 like, Teach and Wages, and, quality rating and 23 improvement systems, that provide scholarships to 24 folk in the field, to secure credentials and 25 degrees, and reward them with stipends, and 1 education and retention bonuses. 2 And, these are good, but, they're not enough. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: (Inaudible) New York? 4 DENISE DOWELL: I'm sorry? 5 SENATOR SAVINO: Do you have them in 6 New York? 7 DENISE DOWELL: We do not have "Teach" in 8 New York, no. 9 And we no longer have an 10 education-and-retention bonus in New York. 11 We have something called "EIP," but, I'm 12 happy to talk with you about that another day. 13 So, what kind of investment in jobs are we 14 talking about? 15 We need to develop and implement a sectoral 16 strategy to transform "early childhood" jobs. 17 We should make them middle-class jobs. 18 Last week, Governor Cuomo, the Assembly, and 19 Senate agreed on a tax package to raise State 20 revenue. 21 That's good. 22 $1 billion is targeted to job creation. 23 That's good. 24 Creating -- investing in "early childhood" 25 jobs, the ones that are here, that aren't leaving 1 our communities or our state, is also a smart 2 investment. 3 In the short-term, research shows that every 4 dollar invested in early care and learning generates 5 $1.86 in additional spending in New York's 6 communities. 7 National research demonstrates that targeting 8 investments to raise compensation and qualifications 9 of the early childhood workforce would pay for 10 itself many times over, in the long run, because of 11 the high return on investment in quality ECAs. 12 So, clearly, it's smart economic development. 13 So, we need to look at some ideas about how 14 we can raise revenue to do this, from other states. 15 Arizona, New Mexico, California, are examples 16 of states that dedicated taxes and -- into early 17 childhood education, had dedicated taxes. And, in 18 this case, it was tobacco. 19 Louisiana recently launched innovative tax 20 credits that direct dollars to child-care consumers, 21 the early childhood workforce businesses, and other 22 contributors to early childhood funding mechanisms. 23 Texas reallocated $4.3 million in prison-cost 24 savings to quality early childhood investments. 25 And then there's something called 1 "social investment bonds," that are innovations 2 that, actually, making their way from the U.K. to 3 the United States. I think Utah is actually 4 experimenting. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: Hmm. 6 DENISE DOWELL: And this concept is simple. 7 It's just about securing investments at the 8 prevention stage of a problem, rather than throwing 9 money at the crisis stage. 10 So, I encourage us to engage in this kind of 11 thinking, in moving forward, so that we can really 12 impact the problem at the source. 13 And, along with investments, we need to 14 reform our subsidy system, particularly in 15 Upstate New York. 16 So, you've already heard from a few of my 17 colleagues, that, from county to county, parent 18 eligibility and co-pay are very inequitable. 19 I need to one -- add one more piece to that; 20 and that's, provider reimbursement rolls. 21 So, depending on what county you live in, if 22 you're a provider, whether you're a center-based 23 provider or a home-based provider, you may or may 24 not get paid when a child is absent. You may or may 25 not get paid for, five, or ten days, that could be 1 holidays, program-closure days, that you could use 2 for professional development. Snow days. Whatnot. 3 And these -- these things are really, really 4 critical to ensuring that we're able to sustain 5 quality within our system at the most basic level. 6 So, we really need to move towards setting 7 state standards for parent eligibility, co-pay, and 8 provider-reimbursement rolls. 9 In addition, outside New York City, 10 developing a more efficient and streamlined provider 11 payment system could save money, and reduce the 12 potential for fraud. 13 "CCTA" is a new automated time-and-attendance 14 system that's been rolling out in the 57 counties. 15 That was an ARRA investment. 16 It's a step in the right direction, but one 17 option we might want to consider, is moving to a 18 state-administered provider payment system, with 19 county DSS agencies continuing to handle parent 20 eligibility. 21 There's a lot of ways we could make this 22 payment system more efficient. 23 In terms of legislation that could help in 24 the here and now, absolutely, the legislation that 25 you have introduced, that waives training and work 1 requirements for mothers, we'd prefer to see, with 2 children under the age of 2, actually. 3 Also, legislation that requires counties to 4 give parents 60 to 90 days' notice when there are 5 changes in eligibility and co-pay, or benefits are 6 being cut completely. 7 And just so you know, we've had -- in 8 Upstate, we have faced in many counties, situations 9 where parents aren't being enrolled in the program. 10 But, most recently, within the last month, we 11 have had two counties that have discontinued 12 child-care subsidies for working families that are 13 not on TANF, to everyone, okay, with very little 14 notice. 15 And, it's a disaster when that happens. 16 And, since the -- this issue has come up, 17 about affordable health insurance, we absolutely 18 need help to address the issue of getting access to 19 affordable health insurance for this workforce. 20 And, beyond that, for the entire field, 21 liability insurance is also a huge issue. And, for 22 home-based providers, homeowners insurance. 23 And what we find is, increasingly, insurance 24 carriers redline folks in the child-care industry, 25 because they don't want to assume the risk. 1 So, that's something we really need some help 2 with. 3 Quality Stars, New York's quality 4 rating-and-improvement system, is a good thing. 5 And we would say, it will be successful only 6 if there's adequate funding to support professional 7 development and program improvements. 8 That is really, really critical. 9 And we also have to ensure, as Quality Stars 10 rolls out, that there's a firewall between 11 program-assessment rating, technical assistance, and 12 registration and licensing. 13 That's critical to maximize provider 14 participation across modalities. 15 Informal child care may be the best option 16 for families working second and third shifts who 17 need non-traditional hour care. 18 And, it's not included in Quality Stars NY, 19 because, baseline, is registration licensing. 20 Almost 50 percent of children receiving 21 subsidies are currently enrolled in informal care. 22 And, we need to invest in training that's designed 23 and delivered to informal legally exempt providers, 24 to promote outcomes for children and families. 25 So, we applaud the Senate and Assembly's 1 action last week to pass legislation to appropriate 2 funds to the child-care facilitated-enrollment 3 project. 4 This is an important step in ensuring that 5 working families can access quality, affordable 6 child care. 7 Investing in child care is an efficient and 8 effective way to improve educational, health, and 9 economic outcomes for children, families, and 10 communities in New York. 11 And, as always, I didn't mention it: We do a 12 lot of work to push for investment as well, at the 13 federal level. 14 We will be continuing to do that work that we 15 do. 16 And, we look forward to working with you this 17 year, and are available for. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Denise. 19 We'll hear from Tammie, and then we'll 20 take -- then we'll do some questions. 21 TAMMIE MILLER: Great. 22 Well, good afternoon. 23 Thank you so much, Senator Savino, 24 Senator Montgomery, for the opportunity to speak 25 before you and this Committee. 1 We really appreciate the fact that we're 2 speaking a very well-informed Committee. And 3 I appreciate the fact that you are very knowledgable 4 on what's really happening. 5 So, in the interests of time, and to not be 6 repetitious, I'm not going to speak my testimony. 7 I'm just going to highlight a few points that have 8 not necessarily been highlighted by my colleagues. 9 And, I'm really very happy to hear everyone 10 give all the statistics and data on the impact of 11 what's happening, as it relates to Early Learn NYC, 12 Quality Stars, and all these other very innovative 13 ideas. 14 I want to say, from our perspective, I am not 15 as kindhearted as my colleagues when I talk about 16 the vision of Early Learn NYC, because I do feel 17 like it is going to force everyone, the people that 18 are actually the benefactors of it, to incur more 19 hardship than benefits. 20 Obviously, anything that would promote 21 quality and more best practices, we applaud. 22 However, at the risk of understanding how 23 it's going to impact the workforce, I am very 24 concerned that Early Learn NYC is going mandate that 25 4-year-olds are going to be removed from the homes 1 of family child-care providers and pushed into 2 center-based, not because that's such a terrible 3 idea, but simply because, the one critical factor is 4 that of parent choice. 5 I think that parents must be at the forefront 6 of understanding, and having their voice heard on 7 what's best for their children. 8 It will be a logistical nightmare for parents 9 that have multiple-aged children, to have to go from 10 one program to the next program if the children are 11 not under one roof. 12 So, I think we need to understand, we talked 13 about parent fees? 14 Then we must also understand that those same 15 parents will incur higher parent fees, additional 16 transportation fees. And just as the predecessors 17 before me spoke about the impact on the home, we are 18 going to see more children at risk as these programs 19 are closed. 20 We have to look at things very realistically. 21 And I know you guys know very well, better 22 than most, how it impacts your district, your 23 communities, when centers are closed. 24 Parents need the right to have the option of 25 both center-based and home care. 1 We -- I heard someone earlier speak about the 2 informal care providers. 3 We represent approximately 20,000 of those 4 informal child-care providers. 5 Most of them are not licensed, not because 6 they decide, "I'm just going to have an unqualified 7 program." It is because, they simply don't meet 8 egress issues. 9 But, nonetheless, they are dedicated, 10 committed workers to sustaining their communities. 11 Just as Denise spoke, we have over the -- 12 just as she has, over the past two years, we've 13 trained more than 14,000 early care providers, most 14 of whom are informal care, and, of course, our, 15 7,000, 8,000 licensed and registered providers, in 16 everything, from CPR and first-aid, to early 17 childhood, to business classes. 18 So, as we move forward with these really 19 innovative ideas, my hope, is that we do not allow 20 anything to justify quantity for quality, because, 21 in the end, there is no quality if you don't have 22 child care. 23 So, to understand the devastation that 24 parents and families and children will suffer when 25 they are left in unsafe conditions, conditions that 1 are isolated and alone, I don't think we can risk 2 any further disinvestment in programs. 3 I'm very concerned about after-school 4 programs being cut. 5 I'm very concerned about the fact, that, it 6 just seems to me, like this agency, ACS, is playing 7 a shell game with finances and agencies. And, 8 they're pitting workers against each other, because, 9 one minute they're saying, Well, we'll give 10 additional funding to center-based, we'll give less 11 funding to the home day-cares. 12 It's unnecessary. 13 We cannot afford any type of continued 14 disinvestment in our children and in our parents. 15 These are working families. And not only are 16 we discussing the parents that are benefiting from 17 subsidies, we're also talking about the workers, the 18 industry, the child-care/early care practitioners, 19 who are hanging in the balance, barely making it to 20 provide for their own families. 21 So, I am very concerned, and I thank you 22 both, very much, for your continued support. 23 We have been able to keep ourselves above 24 water because of your support. 25 And I look forward to working with you, and 1 all the other advocates and labor in this room, on 2 this very topic. 3 Thank you. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: Velmanette, you want to go? 5 Any questions? 6 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: No. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, I have a few 8 questions, because your two organizations represent 9 a different part of this day-care-provider world. 10 As you may or may not know, I actually did 11 the legislation that granted collective-bargaining 12 rights. 13 TAMMIE MILLER: I do know. 14 Thank you. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: So your -- you represent 16 the -- outside the city of New York, you represent 17 the in- -- they're not informal, because they're 18 organized. 19 TAMMIE MILLER: Well, she -- 20 SENATOR SAVINO: And, so, walk me through 21 this. 22 TAMMIE MILLER: -- represents Upstate. 23 I represent -- 24 SENATOR SAVINO: Upstate, out -- right. 25 I say "outside the city of New York," and you 1 have -- 2 TAMMIE MILLER: -- all of the five boroughs. 3 And we both represent, both, licensed and 4 registered, and, informal providers. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: So how do you represent the 6 informal ones? 7 That's what I'm kind of con- -- so, do -- how 8 do you know where they are? 9 Is it through the voucher system that you're 10 able to identify them? 11 TAMMIE MILLER: Yeah, it is through the 12 voucher system. 13 We receive a list from ACS, who identifies 14 all of the care practitioners in their prospective 15 roles. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. And, so, then -- do 17 you then contact them, and let them know? 18 TAMMIE MILLER: We contact them on a regular 19 basis. 20 We -- again, we offer training -- free 21 training. We offer all types of support for them. 22 We are really very excited that we advocate 23 for them on issues of healthcare. And, so, we are 24 actually rolling that out, here in the city, health 25 insurance for all the providers that we know can't 1 afford it. 2 So, that's how we reach out to our members in 3 the five boroughs. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: So, two questions on the 5 informal care providers. 6 Once you're told who they are, you contact 7 them. I'm assuming you must go through some process 8 to sign them up -- 9 TAMMIE MILLER: We do. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: -- and make them members. 11 But, when you are -- when you're trying to 12 negotiate health insurance, how do you -- who are 13 you doing it through? 14 Are you negotiating directly? 15 TAMMIE MILLER: Yeah, I'll let Carol answer. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: Carol, how do you do it? 17 CAROL GERSTL: Well -- and this was true of 18 CSEA as well, because we negotiated, together, on 19 the first contract for family day-care -- family 20 child-care providers, with the State. 21 And in that contract, for the City, we set up 22 a system, where we are going to have a unit, where 23 anyone who is eligible for either Medicaid or 24 Family Health Plus -- 25 And, remember, our providers, a lot of them, 1 especially the informals, don't make very much money 2 at all. Hardly minimum wage. 3 -- if they're eligible, they will come into a 4 unit that is our unit of -- it's the 5 Family Health Plus buy -- employer buy-in, except, 6 there's no employer here. 7 We also negotiated from the State, this year 8 in the budget, there was, either, 9, or 18 million, 9 however -- but, 9 million in our contract, for us to 10 be able to provide the same Family Health Plus 11 package for over-income members. 12 So, we will be paying their full cost, 13 individual costs, and they'll be in the same group. 14 And our ability to do that is going to depend 15 on continued -- we have one more year in the 16 contract, and then we're going to have to negotiate. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: So your -- and your members 18 not affected by this Early Learn program, other 19 than, they'll have to pick up the capacity? The 20 excess capacity? 21 TAMMIE MILLER: It -- well, it's a decrease 22 in capacity, in actuality, because -- 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Really? 24 TAMMIE MILLER: Yeah. 25 -- if you are pulling 4-year-olds out of the 1 providers' homes, then you're decreasing their 2 capacity. 3 Most of our parents have multiple-aged 4 children. 5 So, very often, we'll have an infant and a 6 toddler, and then, an after-school kid, for that one 7 program. 8 So, the sustainability of the workforce is 9 actually being stripped away by only saying you can 10 have infants and toddlers in the programs. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah, that's -- that's -- 12 that would be a problem. 13 CAROL GERSTL: Yes. 14 SENATOR SAVINO: Because, you're -- as you 15 rightfully point out, if I'm a single, working 16 woman, and I have, uhm -- Senator Montgomery is my 17 early childhood provider at home; she's my family 18 day care. So, she has my infant, she has my 19 toddler, but, I have a 7-year-old who needs 20 after-school, I'm running around in different 21 places. 22 CAROL GERSTL: Right. 23 And when one of them hits 4 years old -- 24 TAMMIE MILLER: Uh-huh. 25 CAROL GERSTL: -- then they're going to be 1 moved, be forced, under this proposal, into a 2 center. 3 TAMMIE MILLER: Correct. 4 CAROL GERSTL: So, then, I might have three 5 places I'm going (inaudible) after-school-- 6 DENISE DOWELL: And one of the strengths of 7 home-based child care, is, that siblings can be 8 together. It's often why parents choose it. And, 9 you really have that continuity of care with a 10 single caregiver, over a period of time. 11 And, many parents like that. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: Now, Donna, do you have the 13 same relationship with the county organizations? 14 Do they provide to you the names of the 15 informal providers, so that you can reach out to 16 them, and offer training, and sign them up, 17 et cetera? 18 DENISE DOWELL: So, actually, we work 19 directly with OCFS. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: With OCFS. Okay. 21 But, they're providing the same support. 22 And, finally, since I have the UFT here, you 23 know, a couple of years ago, I think it was, 24 Senator Montgomery held a hearing not far from here, 25 over by -- 1 What school was it? 2 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: At the Borough of 3 Manhattan -- I mean -- 4 SENATOR SAVINO: -- yeah, MBCC, where we 5 registered our concern, and we had a big hearing, 6 about the idea of the Department of Education, or 7 ACS, eliminating center-based kindergarten. 8 And DOE took the position that they were able 9 to absorb every child that would be displaced by the 10 elimination of center-based kindergarten. 11 There would be a kindergarten seat in every 12 school for every child that demanded one. 13 Now, I didn't believe that then. I don't 14 believe it now. 15 But, can you speak to the experience since 16 that's happened? How many children? 17 Because this seems to be kind of 18 counterproductive. 19 So, we put so much money and effort into 20 universal pre-K, to early childhood, to Head Start, 21 and then we say: You don't got to go to 22 kindergarten, because we don't have a place for you. 23 What's happening there? 24 CAROL GERSTL: Well, I think, as you know, 25 over the last two or three years, basically, the 1 kindergarten -- the number of children enrolling in 2 kindergarten has expanded substantially. And, the 3 result has been, if there's a seat for every child, 4 it's in a classroom that now will have 28 children, 5 instead of the maximum 20 that we were all aiming 6 for when the Legislature first passed their 7 early childhood, early grade, class-size reduction 8 plan; the early childhood plan, and the federal 9 plan. 10 Our kindergartens are just exploding. 11 And, of course, years ago, we used to have -- 12 kindergarten had a teacher and a para. 13 That's been gone for a long time. 14 So you have kindergartens with -- 28 is the 15 maximum that should be there. 16 And, the problem also is, that parents are 17 not able to -- even with those class sizes, they 18 can't get their children in their zoned school. 19 So, you have 4- and 5-year-olds who are 20 forced to -- the parents are forced to travel some 21 distance to even get them into a kindergarten. 22 So that promise was, as many of those 23 promises are, really false, and empty. 24 SENATOR SAVINO: I think part of the problem 25 is, is because kindergarten is not mandated in 1 New York State. It's, you know, suggested. 2 And I think it's time for to us reexamine 3 that policy. 4 And, then, you know, allow -- continuing with 5 the idea of parent choice, center-based kindergarten 6 is also -- if you enroll a child in a center, and 7 they've been there since they were a toddler, 8 keeping them there through kindergarten makes the 9 most sense. 10 You know? 11 It doesn't -- I don't quite understand it. 12 But, we'll be looking at that going forward 13 this year. 14 Thank you -- 15 DENISE DOWELL: Thank you. 16 TAMMIE MILLER: Thank you. 17 CAROL GERSTL: Thank you. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: -- ladies, for your 19 testimony. And, we'll definitely be talking about 20 some of the things that have come up. 21 All right, who's next? 22 SENATE AIDE: (Inaudible.) 23 SENATOR SAVINO: Is Sister Margaret 24 McDermott here, from Tolentine? 25 No? 1 Is Geraldine Vignola, from the YWCA, 2 Richmond? 3 No? 4 James Matison, I know is here, from the -- 5 he's been sitting here patiently, waiting, from the 6 Brooklyn Kindergarten Society. 7 Is Gregory Brender here? 8 GREGORY BRENDER: Yes. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay. 10 And, Lisa Caswell? 11 In the back? 12 Okay, come on down. 13 All right, I'm going to try this one more 14 time: You don't to have read the whole testimony. 15 We -- really, we don't bite. By now, you 16 should have realized that. 17 So, if you just want to highlight. 18 [Laughter.] 19 SENATE AIDE: We have, Gregory Brender, and 20 Lisa Caswell? 21 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 22 Because we only have the room until 4:00. Or 23 until the sergeants at arms have to get on the train 24 and go back to Albany. 25 [Laughter.] 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Last week, we did have a 2 rough hearing. 3 So, who's first? 4 Go ahead, Mr. Matison. 5 JAMES MATISON: Yes. 6 I welcome Senator Montgomery. 7 Hello, Senator Savino. 8 I am the executive director of the 9 Brooklyn Kindergarten Society. We have centers that 10 have many families who are represented by you in 11 Bed-Stuy, Crown Heights, Brownsville. 12 I anticipated that today would be an event of 13 many people providing many statistics. And, in 14 fact, I have a whole stack of them, and I decided 15 I would avoid statistics unless they become 16 appropriate. 17 And I was trying to think of what I could 18 talk about that would be different from what other 19 people talked about. 20 And, as strange as it is, I thought about 21 fencing. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Fencing? 23 JAMES MATISON: "Fencing," as in sword 24 [inaudible] [indicating]. 25 [Laughter.] 1 JAMES MATISON: That, my first week as a 2 college student, I decided I wanted to do a sport I 3 had never done before. And, I had had an athletic 4 high school career, and went to the fencing tryouts 5 at my college, figuring I'd -- why not? I'll see 6 what it would be like. 7 And discovered, to my shock and dismay, that 8 every other person who was there was already a 9 fencer. 10 They had had multiple years of training, of 11 competition. And I debated whether or not this 12 would be worth my while, to try to compete with 13 people who were so far ahead of me, that, short of 14 some extraordinary experience, I would be lost. 15 And I wisely decided, no, I didn't think they 16 would invest a great deal in providing me with 17 special training. 18 And I think my experience, as an 18-year-old 19 looking at a world I knew nothing about and was 20 ill-prepared to encounter, is what happens to so 21 many children in New York. 22 More than two-thirds of them who are eligible 23 for early childhood education, who do not get it, 24 and arrive in kindergarten and first grade about as 25 well prepared for what they are going to face as 1 I was prepared to try out for a fencing team. 2 We continue to go forward as a society, and 3 fail to recognize that -- and I don't know how many 4 people saw it in today's "New York Times," there was 5 a brilliant op-ed piece that talked about, we should 6 start acknowledging the fact that poverty is a 7 factor in school achievement; that, we have all of 8 the greatest problems in areas where low-income is 9 the norm. 10 When I saw you a few weeks ago, I was talking 11 about the dropout rate, and 50,000 dropouts-to-be 12 enter the New York City school system every year. 13 I went on, and discovered some astounding 14 statistic; that, of students entering CUNY, and the 15 varying schools, fewer than 17 percent graduate on 16 time. 17 I don't know what the total number is if you 18 extend it out six or seven years, because we are 19 putting children who are ill-prepared for college 20 into college. We are putting children who are 21 ill-prepared for elementary school into elementary 22 school. 23 And we have a system -- and I put it mostly 24 on ACS, but it involves many, many institutions -- 25 that is designed in a way, that, I don't think, if 1 someone took any of the people who have testified 2 today, or these smart people on my immediate right, 3 and said, "Let's design an intelligent program for 4 providing low-income children quality early 5 childhood education," I don't think anyone would 6 design what ACS and DOE and CACFP and Head Start, 7 and you go down the list of all of the agencies that 8 provide different standards, different funding 9 requirements, and create an endless assortment of 10 bureaucratic needs. 11 They are expensive to run. They make it more 12 expensive for us to run. 13 I look beyond that, and I said: All right, 14 what do we do? We want to encourage parents to 15 bring their children to us. 16 So, if you're at ACS, we change eligibility 17 requirements. 18 We come up with the requirements that are, as 19 far as I can see, insane. 20 We will allow you to get subsidized care if 21 you are enrolled in a two-year college program. But 22 if you choose to go to a four-year college program, 23 we will not give you subsidized care. 24 You go down the list. 25 This past year, raising fees to exorbitant 1 rates for some families. 2 If you make -- which, we were talking -- 3 Steve Antonelli is here -- about charging $26,000 a 4 year. 5 The average family income in our centers is 6 under $20,000 a year, before taxes. 7 If we look at the people we are dealing with, 8 and then say, "By the way, we're really excited that 9 you're one of the fortunate ones, and you make 10 $40,000 a year, and, it's going to cost you $7,000 11 to send your child to an ACS-subsidized program," 12 that is almost impossible for people. 13 We also have a system where, now, we have UPK 14 classes. 15 The Department of Education has opened up UPK 16 classes in schools directly across the street from 17 us. 18 We, theoretically, are being funded by them. 19 And, I'd like to make an aside: We have 20 six UPK classes in our five centers. And ACS takes 21 $85,000 out of money that is from DOE, for whatever 22 purposes, we cannot figure. 23 SENATOR SAVINO: They did say they don't take 24 anything, though. 25 JAMES MATISON: Well, they most certainly do. 1 SENATOR SAVINO: It's their testimony. 2 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: [Inaudible.] 3 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh. 4 Oh! 5 [Laughter.] 6 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: They just take 7 everything else. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: They just take everything 9 else. 10 JAMES MATISON: Yes. 11 And, lastly -- although, it's not last -- 12 I'll be like with you your questions -- Early Learn 13 talks about raising the quality of programs, which 14 the Brooklyn Kindergarten Society endorses 15 wholeheartedly. We were enthusiastically in favor 16 of it, until the rates came out. 17 And, yet, the one thing that is most 18 striking, is that, aside from underfunding it, 19 I asked the relevant question; in the summer, 20 I said, "We work very hard to get the most qualified 21 teachers we can. These tend to be people, although 22 not always, who are State-certified. 23 "And as State-certified teachers, they are 24 going to make more money than someone with just an 25 associate's degree with no credentials. 1 "Will there be anything in Early Learn that 2 will allow us, as an organization, to be able to 3 continue to seek the highest-qualified teachers?" 4 And the answer was something I'm sure 5 everyone has heard, "It's in the rate." 6 And I said, "Well, then some people are 7 getting more money than they need, because, if 8 you're funding it for $40,000 for a teacher, and 9 people go out and hire $23,000-a-year teachers, then 10 they're saving the money." 11 I don't think that's what -- and the answer 12 was, "It's in the rate." And no one wanted to deal 13 with it. 14 I am at a point where I believe that 15 zero-based budgeting makes a lot of sense, and 16 scrapping systems would be ideal. 17 We can't do that. 18 But I think -- and perhaps the two Senators 19 at this table will be the ones to stand up and say: 20 Enough tinkering. Enough rearranging the chairs on 21 the Titanic. 22 That, in fact, it is time to say: Everyone 23 knows that early childhood education is a critical 24 factor for success in school, and in life. 25 And if the best we can do is, have a third of 1 the children who need it most, in those programs, 2 and we are willing to watch the progression over the 3 years of failure in 175,000 children in the public 4 schools, in Special Ed programs costing $2 billion a 5 year, someone should stand up and say: Guess what? 6 It is time to make universal free/affordable early 7 childhood education available for everyone. 8 And I presented this to someone at the DOE, 9 who said: Well, that's preposterous. There's not 10 enough money. We don't have the skills around, to 11 do that. 12 And I said, "I did not say we have to do this 13 tomorrow, or say we wish to implement. 14 I would like someone to stand up and say: 15 This should be a goal of our society, of New York, 16 New York State, to say, 'Every child should be 17 enrolled in a program.'" 18 And as ridiculous as it sounded in 1962, when 19 John Kennedy said, you know, "We'll put a man on the 20 moon by the end of this decade," I think if someone 21 said, "In next six to eight years, we wish to have a 22 fully implemented universal, affordable program for 23 all needy children," it could be done. 24 So... 25 SENATOR SAVINO: I agree with you. 1 JAMES MATISON: Thank you. 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Don't go anywhere. 3 Next, we're going to hear from 4 Gregory Brender, from the United Neighborhood 5 Houses. 6 GREGORY BRENDER: Hi. 7 And, thanks for the opportunity to testify, 8 and for all the work that both of you have done for 9 child care. 10 Crisis tends to sometimes breed unanimity, so 11 a lot of what I was going to say has been said by 12 other folks, and probably will be said by others, so 13 I'll try and just summarize. 14 You know, as you folks mentioned, last year 15 we saw the biggest crisis come to child care in 16 New York City in more than a generation, with a cut 17 that would have put 17,000 children out. 18 And, you really saw a tremendous outpouring 19 of parent activism, and parents being engaged; 20 people from communities being engaged; clergy 21 members; elected officials. Advocacy, and labor, 22 probably in way that was more dynamic and aggressive 23 than we'd ever been before. 24 And that was because, we recognized the 25 greatness of the threat to the system, and that what 1 we have in New York City is something worth fighting 2 for. 3 Having a system that allows working parents 4 to stay -- to have child care, instead of only 5 parents on public assistance; 6 Having a system that's contracted, where, in 7 the contracted centers, you are developing better 8 strategies, having higher standards that you can be 9 held to, and, also, being a hotbed for innovation. 10 The blended model that the Early Learn is 11 seeking to replicate has come from the contracted 12 system. And, so, we've seen great things come from 13 this, and we know we have this unparalleled 14 opportunity. 15 As a lot of folks said before, we support a 16 lot of the vision of the Early Learn RFP. But, 17 there hasn't been the commitment from, really, any 18 level of government to make this happen; to say: 19 Because we have this vision, we want to make sure 20 that New York City's children have these 21 opportunities. 22 In fact, you know, when we talk about the 23 10,000 children we're going to lose, 7,000 -- 10,000 24 slots we're going to lose, 7,000 of them come, not 25 from the change in the RFP, but because the Mayor 1 hasn't baselined that the City Council put in last 2 year. 3 We've -- you know, it's a greater amount this 4 year, but, for a while, we've been carrying, parts 5 of the system have been money that, you know, even 6 though the City Council puts it in, that it's a 7 priority that we fight for every year. The Mayor 8 doesn't put in it as a part of his budget, and so it 9 doesn't get into the RFP. 10 So, we need to push for that kind of stable 11 funding to keep this system going, and to, you know, 12 hopefully expand it, because there are -- only 13 27 percent of the children getting it. 14 We can't have the 73 percent go to 15 Zuccotti Park, and say: We are the 73 percent. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: [Laughter.] 17 GREGORY BRENDER: So, in light of that -- and 18 I'll have more specific suggestions in the written 19 part -- you know, we want to reiterate the position 20 that Winning Beginnings and many of our colleagues 21 have put: That the State needs to invest 22 General Fund money in child care -- in the 23 Child-Care Block Grant, and in -- at least cover the 24 $37 million that's being lost from TANF. 25 We strongly support your legislation to amend 1 the welfare work requirements. 2 You know, there are ways to make cuts in 3 time -- or, there's ways to find efficiencies in 4 times of fiscal challenges that are smart, and 5 there's ways that are not. 6 And, this is a smart way to take a program 7 that we haven't seen. And workfare hasn't -- you 8 know, has not always been of great value. 9 I mean, a lot of these programs are of more 10 dubious value. 11 And, to put that kind of money into a program 12 we know works. 13 We know early childhood education is 14 benefiting families. And we know that, you know, 15 the kids who are one now, the kids are two now, 16 they're not going two again, they're not going to be 17 three again. They're losing their opportunities. 18 So, it's -- you know, it's the kind of smart 19 way to find efficiencies, that we're -- we're very 20 enthusiastic. 21 And thank you for supporting that. 22 And, of course, we also want to express our 23 support for funding flexibility for universal 24 pre-kindergarten. 25 For those kids who don't have ACS subsidies, 1 and whose parents are working, a full-day UPK 2 program is really their only opportunity to have a 3 UPK education in a context that works for them as 4 a -- working parents. 5 And, also, I just wanted to say, for the kids 6 who are just older than our preschoolers, they're 7 also facing a crisis. 8 We're having the new RFP for the 9 out-of-school time, which is the primary funding 10 source for after-school, dramatic cuts. The RFP 11 reduces the system by 23,000 slots. 12 And, so, we want to urge the State to 13 maintain the funding for the YDDP and SDPP programs 14 which support OSD. 15 And, thank you, again, for letting me 16 testify, and for all your leadership on this. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Gregory. 18 And, Lisa Caswell, for the Day Care Council 19 of New York. 20 LISA CASWELL: I'm just going to read, 21 because I think it will be faster than if I try to 22 summarize. 23 It won't be too long. 24 Good afternoon. 25 My name is Lisa Caswell. I'm the senior 1 policy analyst for the Day Care Council of New York. 2 The council dates its origins to 3 World War II, when the City made a major investment 4 in child care to support families when women were 5 entering the workforce in large numbers to address 6 labor shortages. 7 This year, the council celebrated its 8 63rd year of service as the primary membership 9 organization for 175 sponsoring boards which operate 10 more than 300 child-care programs, both center-based 11 and family child care, in the five boroughs have 12 New York City. 13 Our member agencies are under contract with 14 the City's Administration for Children Services, to 15 provide accessible high-quality child-care services 16 for low-income families. 17 It is estimated that the Day Care Council's 18 member child-care programs serve more than 19 40,000 children from low-income working families on 20 an annual basis. 21 Before I begin, I would like to sincerely 22 thank you, Senator Diane Savino, for holding this 23 hearing; and for Senator Velmanette Montgomery, in 24 your length of service in this kind of capacity. 25 As the Chair of the New York State Senate 1 Committee on Children and Families, we appreciate 2 the opportunity to express many of the concerns our 3 member agencies are facing at this time. 4 These concerns are truly challenging to the 5 provision of publicly funded child-care services in 6 New York City. 7 We would like to bring to the Committee's 8 attention three major issues facing our member 9 agencies. 10 One: The enormous deficit in publicly funded 11 child care that has already decreased the 12 availability of child-care slots for hundreds of 13 low-income working parents; 14 Two: The anticipated introduction of a major 15 systemwide change known as "Early Learn"; 16 And, three: The City's refusal to recognize 17 the collective-bargaining agreement between the 18 Day Care Council and District Council 1707, 19 representing teachers and other support staff, and, 20 "CSA," the Council of Supervisors and 21 Administrators, which represent the directors and 22 assistant directors. 23 The City's child-care deficit-reference 24 information on the causes and status of the current 25 deficit in the publicly funded child-care system is 1 taken from a report entitled "Understanding the ACS 2 Child-Care Deficit," released by the New York office 3 of the Children's Defense Fund in February of 2011. 4 This report outlined little-known facts, and 5 the need for help from the State to address budget 6 issues before more child-care slots were lost. 7 The system has been grappling with a serious 8 financial deficit for more than eight years. 9 The total yearly funding for subsidized 10 child-care programs in New York City is 11 approximately 976 million, including 18.9 million 12 for TANF, and 957.1 million for child care and 13 Head Start. 14 In the previous fiscal year, the child-care 15 deficit was estimated at 91 million. 16 A concerted and coordinated advocacy campaign 17 by the Emergency Coalition to Save Child Care, a 18 coalition of advocates and service providers, was 19 successful in securing 82 million; a combined 20 allocation of, 40 million from the Mayor, and 21 42 million from the City Council. 22 The child-care community is fortunate to have 23 a City Council that has remained steadfast in its 24 commitment to meet the needs of low-income working 25 families, making sure that the final budget includes 1 critical restorations for child care. 2 Unfortunately, the City Council funding has 3 to be reallocated annually. 4 As such, we may lose the 40 million we 5 struggled to get. 6 The City's child-care deficit has grown 7 steadily due to a number factors. 8 There has been an increase in the enrollment 9 of infants and toddlers who are more expensive to 10 serve; 11 More parents are choosing licensed family and 12 group family child care over informal care; 13 There has been significant growth in number 14 of families seeking public assistance; 15 And, health insurance costs for workers are 16 now around 24 million over budget. 17 The primary reason the City has not been able 18 to address these factors is stagnation in State 19 funding since 2008, making it impossible to keep up 20 with inflation. 21 The total amount of funding in the State 22 Child-Care Block Grant is 736 million, of which, 23 599 million is federal, with 107 million coming from 24 the State. 25 The City was fortunate in 2009, and 2010, to 1 receive federal stimulus funding of between 2 42 to 36 million, but it ended last year. 3 Related to Early Learn: As determined by the 4 Administration for Children's Services, Early Learn 5 is the vision for publicly funded child care in 6 New York City. 7 According to ACS, Early Learn represents a 8 unique opportunity for policymakers, early childhood 9 educators, and parents to embrace a plan that could 10 be successful. 11 Unfortunately, there has been little 12 planning, and no demonstration project, to determine 13 whether the proposed program components and 14 financing structures are viable. 15 ACS plans to implement Early Learn in 16 October of 2012. 17 One of the most troubling aspects of 18 Early Learn is the fact that the financing rates, 19 per child, whether they are enrolled in center-based 20 Head Start or family child-care settings, are 21 absolutely insufficient. 22 In the area of family child care, the City is 23 restricting providers to serving infants and 24 toddlers, which will limit their income due to the 25 ratio. 1 As determined by our member agencies, the 2 per-child rate simply does not meet the central 3 costs; i.e., competitive salaries for certified 4 teachers, staffing to address social-service needs 5 of families, healthcare insurance for the workers, 6 and basic operational costs, such as center 7 maintenance and equipment. 8 Furthermore, agencies will have to contribute 9 a mandatory 6.7 percent of their total budget 10 through their own private fundraising efforts. 11 This requirement is expected for all awardees 12 of the Early Learn RFP. 13 This mandate is being imposed across the 14 board, including those agencies operating in poor 15 neighborhoods, where it has proven difficult to 16 collect recent parent fee increases, let alone raise 17 additional funding from local business owners or 18 individuals. 19 Unfortunately, ACS has repeatedly stated that 20 no additional funding will be forthcoming for 21 Early Learn. 22 The total funding anticipated is 515 million 23 for 350 contracts. 24 Given the pending deficit, we know this 25 amount will decrease, and fewer families will 1 receive child care, resulting in an inevitable loss 2 of employment in an extremely tough economic 3 environment. 4 This is the last section. 5 The collective-bargaining agreement: Our 6 final comments will focus on the unresolved union 7 contract for supervisory teaching and support staff 8 in the publicly funded child-care system. 9 At this time, these workers have not received 10 an increase in wages for more than five years. 11 The labor contract with DC 1707, Local 205, 12 which represents the teaching and support staff in 13 the centers, expired on March 31, 2006. 14 The contract with the Council of Supervisors 15 and Administrators, which represents the 16 administrative and supervisory staff in the centers, 17 expired on June 30, 2006. 18 A number of our member agencies have inquired 19 as to whether the City will resolve these labor 20 contracts before the implementation of Early Learn. 21 ACS's response is: That the focus of 22 Early Learn is on programs, not labor, and that the 23 labor contract is not in their purview. 24 Such a comment is a direct avoidance of the 25 historic nature of these labor contracts and the 1 City's role in funding them. 2 From the beginning, when child-care workers 3 organized themselves within these two unions, the 4 City worked side by side with the Day Care Council 5 to ensure successful labor negotiations. 6 Now, without notification or discussion, the 7 City has decided that they will no longer be 8 involved in labor negotiations. 9 They have turned the responsibility of 10 contract settlement over to the council and the 11 agency-sponsoring boards without sufficient funding 12 to do so. 13 This issue intersects the City's deficit 14 issue, and is one of the major problems with 15 Early Learn. 16 We cannot stress enough how important it is 17 to resolve this matter before Early Learn is 18 implemented. 19 ACS has proposed -- is proposing to combine 20 the funding and services of three major early 21 childhood funding streams: The Child-Care Block 22 Grant, Head Start, and universal pre-K funding, one 23 of which is not fully unionized. 24 Directors in the child-care sector are 25 unionized, while directors in Head Start are not. 1 Although child-care and Head Start teachers 2 are both unionized under DC 1707, Head Start workers 3 have experienced very different labor negotiation 4 results. 5 Head Start workers were granted a new labor 6 contract in November of '09, effective for 7 three years, which gave them a 3.06 percent salary 8 increase, effective February 1, 2008, through 9 January 31, 2011. 10 It should also be noted that the beginning 11 salary levels and benefits for child-care directors 12 and non-supervisory workers are not comparable with 13 their Head Start counterparts. 14 One of the critical foundations of any new 15 system is the level of compensation and training 16 given to staff to meet new challenges. 17 For a successful earlyhood [sic] childhood 18 system, we need a stable workforce with low turnover 19 and the appropriate level of educational credentials 20 to effectively stimulate learning in young children. 21 The unions have taken a very strong position 22 against the inadequate rates proposed in 23 Early Learn. 24 Advocates share their concern, and are 25 preparing another large-scale campaign to address 1 the rate issue, as well as the shrinking number of 2 slots for families. 3 As the membership body of the City's publicly 4 funded child-care programs, the Day Care Council 5 continues to represent the interests of its 6 sponsoring boards who are committed to maintaining 7 both capacity and quality. 8 We are absolutely appalled at the City's 9 position, to refuse to grant salary increases to 10 workers in this publicly funded sector. 11 It is an issue that must be resolved if 12 Early Learn is to be successful. 13 Last paragraph. 14 It goes without saying, that families rely 15 heavily on these -- this service, and value the 16 educational component; however, the economic impact 17 of child-care services in low-income neighborhoods 18 is not always recognized. 19 The vast majority of workers in this system 20 are African-American and Hispanic women who are 21 heads of household. 22 Many of these workers live and work in the 23 community, which translates into rent payments, and 24 purchases at the neighborhood bodega, laundry 25 facilities, and beauty shops. 1 We must show our gratitude to the dedication 2 of these child-care workers, by properly 3 compensating them for their services while we 4 sustain vulnerable communities. 5 The State could greatly assist the City in 6 its efforts to make up for the losses in federal 7 child-care funding in recent years. 8 Early childhood programs are the most direct 9 means of ensuring the academic success of all of 10 New York City's children while maintaining the 11 long-term economic and racial diversity of her 12 citizens. 13 These hearings are a greatly appreciated step 14 in the right direction. 15 I'm sorry for taking so long. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: Questions, Velmanette? 17 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: Yes. 18 I'm going to apologize. I'm going to have to 19 leave, because I have to go back to my district. 20 But, I just want to thank you for the 21 testimony, and all of the advocates who have come 22 today, to talk to us. 23 You have raised some of the issues that we 24 certainly agree on that are critical to this -- to 25 maintaining some integrity in this system. 1 And, personally, I can tell you, and share 2 with you, my very, very personal disappointment in 3 where we've gotten to. 4 And I am -- unfortunately, I just am so 5 cynical, that the Early Learn is really one of those 6 Trojan-horse programs that the City has gone out of 7 their way to get so many of us, the advocates, to 8 buy into. 9 And once you've given them your vote of 10 confidence that this is a great thing -- we all 11 think this is the right way to go because we want to 12 raise the quality of our program -- and, then, they 13 cut half of the program, so that most of the 14 families in my district who have relied on 15 Head Start and day care, will be without any 16 service. 17 And, so, it's a very sad and dark moment for 18 me, to tell you the honest truth. 19 I hope that we can work together. 20 One: I think we have to clarify what we 21 actually will not agree to allow, because we're -- 22 we are-- the people who are being affected not in 23 this room. 24 I don't see any of them here today. 25 Those children, and those poor families and 1 those providers who are out there struggling to make 2 a life for themselves, of some sort. 3 So, we -- those of us who are at the table, I 4 think it's very, very important for us to think very 5 carefully about the consequences of what we advocate 6 for, and who will ultimately be the ones who will 7 suffer the consequences of all of these decisions. 8 If we're not clear, then we're going to sell 9 out the purpose that we thought that we were at the 10 table to advocate for. 11 So, I thank you, and I look forward to 12 working with you. 13 And, thank God, we have a fighter here, who 14 does not take any tea. 15 I have seen her in many different situations. 16 I know how she fights. 17 She comes out of labor, and she knows how to 18 go toe-to-toe, and eye-to-eye. 19 So, I appreciate that. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, 21 Senator Montgomery. 22 SENATOR MONTGOMERY: And I look forward to 23 seeing all of us more. 24 (Senator Montgomery leaves the hearing.) 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you. 1 Now, before you three depart, I have a couple 2 of questions. 3 So, we -- I have yet to hear from anybody 4 today, who has respond to this RFP. 5 And it sounds like you all responded to the 6 RFP with a gun to your head, because you really had 7 no choice. 8 Correct? 9 You had to, essentially, do this. 10 Nobody seems to be supportive of this new 11 model. And that seems to be in direct contrast to 12 the discussions I have had with the administration, 13 that there's -- you know, they've received enough 14 replies to the RFP to exceed capacity. And, that 15 none of the concerns that I've raised to them have 16 come up in the reply process. 17 Can you -- 18 JAMES MATISON: It's a myth. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: Obviously, it's a myth. 20 JAMES MATISON: A total myth. 21 And -- 22 SENATOR SAVINO: So, the question I have is: 23 When you responded to the RFP -- or, when you first 24 saw it, did you -- the questions that I raised to 25 the administration today, did you and your 1 organizations raise them? 2 And what response did you receive from them? 3 JAMES MATISON: We were told that we could 4 ask questions, and we would get responses; which 5 were returned in the form of nine, I think it was, 6 addenda. 7 We submitted written questions. And, some of 8 them were responded to, others not. 9 There were delays in the responses. And 10 anything that was delicate was brushed off. 11 "It's in the rate," was the typical response. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: I'm going to go back to that 13 "in the rate" thing. 14 Did they give you the rate, or did you have 15 to -- 16 JAMES MATISON: Well, up front, they said, 17 "This is the maximum you will be allowed to receive. 18 Don't ask for a penny more." 19 SENATOR SAVINO: Is that -- was that for 20 the -- for the -- 21 JAMES MATISON: Everyone. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: -- for the in-total 23 contract, or was it per child for? 24 JAMES MATISON: Per child. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Per child. 1 And what was the rate that they gave you? 2 JAMES MATISON: Well, it depended upon the -- 3 SENATOR SAVINO: Obviously. 4 JAMES MATISON: -- they gave you a few 5 alternatives. 6 You could be a day care, you could be a 7 blended Head Start-collaborative event, or, you 8 could be all Head Start, I guess. 9 GREGORY BRENDER: Yeah, I think the highest 10 was probably around, 34, for the blended. 11 SENATOR SAVINO: 3,400. 12 GREGORY BRENDER: No. 34 per day, per child. 13 JAMES MATISON: It was more -- 14 SENATOR SAVINO: $34 per day, per child? 15 GREGORY BRENDER: No. It was -- 16 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: [Inaudible.] 17 JAMES MATISON: Yes. Cynthia Cummings knows. 18 GREGORY BRENDER: Yeah. 19 The rates are in the RFP, though. 20 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: $47.11 was the maximum 21 rate for the Head Start model. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: And was that significantly 23 different than the reimbursement rate -- 24 JAMES MATISON: Well, I think -- 25 SENATOR SAVINO: -- pre -- prior to 1 Early Learn? 2 JAMES MATISON: -- I mentioned last time, 3 that when we ran -- the Brooklyn Kindergarten 4 Society ran the numbers, this was back as soon as 5 the numbers came out, we said: Okay, let's apply it 6 to our organization that has an average enrollment 7 of more than 95 percent of capacity, which is about 8 as good as you get, across the board, for an entire 9 year. 10 And we said, before we heard about the 11 medical-insurance premiums, that we would have 12 gotten $600,000 less. 13 This is on -- we receive $4 million from 14 various government agencies. And we supplement it 15 by aggressive fundraising in communities that 16 support us, and get close had to $1 million every 17 year. 18 So, of the $4 million, we would have lost 19 $600,000. 20 When we then heard, later, that we would lose 21 the medical-insurance premiums, that was another 22 $800,000 lost. 23 So we were looking, and still are, at 24 $1,400,000 out of the $4 million, which is an 25 extraordinary sum. 1 So, I mean, we've gone through all kinds of 2 magical iterations, trying to find out how we can do 3 things differently, and can shave off a little. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: And in your experience, in 5 the -- you had the same experience as 6 United Neighborhood -- 7 GREGORY BRENDER: [Inaudible] member -- 8 SENATOR SAVINO: -- child care -- 9 GREGORY BRENDER: -- most of our member 10 organizations did. 11 And, yeah, a lot of folks are applying. Not 12 sure that they're going to be able to do it. 13 This is something I've heard, not just in our 14 member agencies, but throughout the system, you 15 know, folks, their mission is to provide child care. 16 And they're going -- they applied. And, they're 17 going to try and figure out how to do it. 18 And I think a lot of folks are going to try 19 and negotiate for a better rate. 20 But, also, there's probably going to be 21 agencies that have applied, that did bulk-up those 22 numbers to level that ACS is saying they're getting, 23 but probably can't do it on -- at the rates they've 24 said; especially, because, even for folks who say, 25 "Oh, this is about the rate we're about to" -- "we 1 got before," that was without paying for health 2 insurance. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: But those rates also 4 fluctuate, depending on where you are; what ZIP code 5 you're in. 6 Correct? 7 JAMES MATISON: In the city -- 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Is there a difference in -- 9 JAMES MATISON: -- it's the same. 10 GREGORY BRENDER: Currently, rates do 11 fluctuate. There's not a standard rate. 12 The Early Learn RFP, one of its changes, is 13 to put in these standard maximum rates that were in 14 the RFP. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: And that would be -- because 16 I didn't have a chance to actually ask the 17 administration this, but I'm a little concerned 18 about the ZIP code -- targeted, and non-targeted 19 ZIP-code issue, because I don't think it adequately 20 reflects the changing communities out -- you know, 21 particularly in Central Brooklyn, where you've 22 have -- you know, you may have had some, you know, 23 intensive gentrification going on. 24 And, so, now you have high-rise condominiums 25 that are very expensive alongside low-income 1 housing. 2 And, how do you determine what the value, or 3 what the costs really should be in that community? 4 If you're going to mix people, you may wind 5 up eliminating eligibility, or the -- for people who 6 really need it. 7 GREGORY BRENDER: Yeah, it's not as if you 8 become wealthy because your neighbors have more 9 money. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Exactly. 11 Wouldn't -- that would be lovely, wouldn't 12 it? 13 GREGORY BRENDER: It would be. 14 JAMES MATISON: This afternoon, you have the 15 director of the Riverside -- Goddard Riverside, 16 who's in the middle of the Upper West Side. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 18 JAMES MATISON: And -- 19 SENATOR SAVINO: We'll ask that question, 20 then. 21 JAMES MATISON: Yes. 22 -- I mean, he will be talking about this, I'm 23 sure, at length, because he's in one of the -- he's 24 in a high-value community, but he's dealing with 25 people in the projects who do not make any more 1 money than those people living in Brooklyn and the 2 projects make. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: And, Lisa, the Day Care 4 Council, you've raised an interesting point in the 5 portion of your testimony about the 6 collective-bargaining agreement. 7 In the past, the Day Care Council, you didn't 8 nego- -- or, your -- the Day Care Council didn't 9 negotiate directly with 1707. They were parties to 10 the contract. 11 It's kind of a complicated system. 12 LISA CASWELL: It's a complicated 13 relationship -- 14 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 15 LISA CASWELL: -- but we are charged with the 16 responsibility of sitting on the other side of the 17 table from the unions, but we were always sitting at 18 the same table with the City. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 20 LISA CASWELL: So, for them to pull out in 21 this kind of way, and act as if they've had no 22 history, is completely unconscionable. 23 The other thing that happened is, that in the 24 concept paper that was issued, there was no mention 25 of the inclusion of the health-insurance costs in 1 the rate. 2 So, that, what you saw in the community was 3 focused initially on the 6.7 provider contribution 4 in low-income neighborhoods. And they couldn't 5 figure out how they were going to do that. 6 Then, when the announcement came with no 7 warning of the health-insurance costs supposedly 8 being included in this rate, we polled our members, 9 and we found that most of them were going to be 10 responding, but only because they were praying that 11 the rates would go up, based on the advocacy efforts 12 of the community. 13 But I think, you know, from this -- at this 14 point, we have no choice but to move forward, and 15 try to begin the process of meeting with the unions, 16 but we feel very conflicted about it. 17 You know, that's been our historic role, but 18 we don't have any good-faith effort on the part of 19 City. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Well, not only that, you 21 would be in a unique position, attempting to 22 negotiate a collective-bargaining agreement, as the 23 employer, when you've never done it before, because 24 you're not -- you don't know how much money is on 25 the table. 1 LISA CASWELL: Well, we -- 2 SENATOR SAVINO: Have they given you a dollar 3 amount that you're supposed to work with? 4 LISA CASWELL: Well, in our annual meeting 5 that happened last week, the new commissioner stated 6 that he did not see any need to increase the rates. 7 And, so, what we're looking at, is what we 8 have now. 9 So, in effect, we do have a dollar figure. 10 What I think is going to be the effect, is if 11 insurance costs are calculated into this, and 12 there's a fixed amount of money, then you're just 13 going to have fewer slots. 14 It's just not going to work. 15 And I think, at this point, our job is to try 16 to figure out how to support our sponsoring boards, 17 who are the employers of these workers, who need to 18 know whether they will accept a contract or not when 19 it's offered to them. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: Here's -- here's -- 21 LISA CASWELL: And we've got brought them 22 together, to ask them what they wanted us to do. 23 And they said: Go ahead, and begin to get the 24 balling rolling. 25 But we've gone forward with great 1 reservation. You know, we feel that the whole thing 2 is a setup. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: I hear -- there's another 4 wrinkle in this that you may not have anticipated. 5 Traditionally, the 1707, and the other -- and 6 CSA, they've always, eventually, when they were able 7 to finally get the City to negotiate on their 8 behalf, essentially, got the same package. 9 You know, pattern bargaining, whether people 10 like it or they don't, is a fact of 11 collective-bargaining and labor relations in 12 New York City. 13 If you are not given the ability to 14 negotiate, you're not given any increased funding, 15 you wind up at impasse, they go to arbitration. 16 Who picks up the cost of your legal fees if 17 you have to arbitrate this case? 18 LISA CASWELL: Right. 19 It's -- right now, we're just beginning to 20 try to figure out how to even approach the whole 21 process, ethically. 22 And we've had preliminary research on 23 health-insurance plans, because, when we polled our 24 members, they said, "The only thing we really need 25 from you is to figure out: Can you become the 1 umbrella provider for health insurance? -- because 2 that's the only way we can compete in this market." 3 So, we've taken that path, and we're trying 4 to at least do preliminary research. 5 But the question you've raise is totally 6 viable. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: I think Steve had a -- 8 STEVE: I think the best question you asked 9 today, which wasn't answered by ACS, is: What 10 happens when these contracts are offered, if a large 11 number of community-based organizations say, 12 "We can't do it"? 13 LISA CASWELL: Right. 14 STEVE: What's going to happen then? 15 I mean, you know, what? It's almost in my 16 mind, there's like an ulterior motive, that, they 17 want to see this, sort of, collapse, so that they 18 can put it together in a different way. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: It's very possible. 20 It is very possible. 21 All right, I want to thank the three of you 22 for your testimony. 23 We're going to move on to the next three. 24 SENATE AIDE: Yeah, Liz Accles. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Liz Accles -- 1 She's been here from the beginning. I see 2 that she's back there, very -- 3 -- from the Federation of Protestant Welfare 4 Agencies. 5 Goddard Riverside Community Center, 6 Pedro Cordero. 7 SENATE AIDE: He's not here? 8 SENATOR SAVINO: He's not here? 9 SENATE AIDE: Then we're going to, Amy Cohen. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Amy Cohen, from JCC. 11 SENATE AIDE: And, then, we'll go to -- 12 SENATOR SAVINO: And, then, 13 Cordelia Grant McNish. 14 Is Cordelia Grant McNish here? 15 Yes. 16 All right. 17 Very patient. 18 She got off the elevator with me this 19 morning. 20 LIZ ACCLES: Patient, and hungry. 21 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, go ahead. 22 LIZ ACCLES: Thank you, Senator Savino, for 23 holding this hearing. 24 I'm Liz Accles. I'm a senior policy analyst 25 at the Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies. 1 And, we appreciate your leadership on this 2 issue, and in particular, appreciate your leadership 3 and partnership around the TANF Workfare Waiver 4 Bill, that we think is critical at this given time 5 when there are so new options, financially, to 6 stabilize funding for early childhood education. 7 And we see this as a clear win-win situation, 8 where, parents who are receiving 9 non-public-assistance subsidized child care can 10 retain child care; and, parents who are receiving 11 public assistance will have their child care 12 protected if they are working, or in a program, as 13 well as -- as well as, have the ability to care for 14 their young children at home. 15 I'm not going to stick to my testimony. I'm 16 going to touch on a few key points, because my 17 colleagues have hit on many of them. 18 So, I will just say a few things. 19 One is, that, in preparing testimony today, 20 you know, the key theme is underfunding. 21 The federal government, it's uncertain what's 22 going to happen. 23 It's, uhm -- funding's retained -- stayed 24 flat on the state level. 25 Over the last -- since 2007, we've seen 1 either a decrease in funding, or flat funding, as 2 people have said before, only to meet what the 3 federal matching requirements are. 4 And, on the city level, we've seen, even 5 prior to Early Learn, again, as was mentioned 6 before, all kinds of reductions, including something 7 that kind of got pushed to the side last February, 8 with the increase in parent fees; and that was, the 9 second increase, very dramatic, that has tremendous 10 impact, both, on families that just can't afford the 11 care any longer, and FPWA has many member agencies 12 that have said that; as well as it adding 13 administrative burdens to programs trying to collect 14 those fees. 15 So, uhm, I'm not going to hit on all the 16 other ways in which early childhood has been cut in 17 the city, and the different kind of, little nicks, 18 and larger hits, that programs have taken, that have 19 made it harder and harder to run programs. 20 So, I'm going to turn to Early Learn, and 21 first say, that: There were many aspects of the 22 Early Learn concept paper, many questions that never 23 got answered. Many that were raised here today. 24 The 6.7 percent match; 25 The assumption of private-pay students at an 1 amount that would make sense to make a budget whole; 2 An enrollment-based system, a needs 3 assessment, that doesn't take into account nuance of 4 community; 5 As well as, the loss of capacity to serve 6 subsidized children. 7 So, you know, even if numbers in centers, 8 depending on where they are, can say the same, 9 what's happening to the ability to serve subsidized 10 children? 11 And, uhm, I say this, starting all this out: 12 FPWA has, roughly, 200 member agencies; 75 of those 13 member agencies run early childhood programs, and, 14 in total about 117 programs. 15 So, we've heard from a bunch of our 16 organizations. 17 We have programs that are of a wide range in 18 size, capacity, and outside resources. 19 So, even before we go into Early Learn, and 20 the rates, the underfunding with, the 6.7 percent 21 match, we knew was fantasy for many programs, in 22 many places. 23 I mean, you know, what -- even larger 24 organizations -- settlement houses, multi-service 25 organizations -- that may have more capacity to 1 bring in foundation money and private money; when 2 you talk about just, at that base, underfunding, at 3 6.7 percent, and then say, "Figure out how you're 4 going to make that happen," as said -- it was said 5 before, hundreds of organizations are going to 6 foundations for money. 7 You know, foundations are struggling. They 8 won't pay for operation -- operating costs, uhm -- 9 and so on. 10 So, not to belabor that point, because it's 11 been brought up, but, I think, for us, at FPWA, and 12 the other membership-based organizations, what has 13 been most striking, is that, in May, when the RFP 14 came out, all these other concerns that we've had 15 were completely eclipsed by the rate issue. 16 As programs started running budget numbers, 17 and saying, "What would this look like?" as we've 18 heard today, we've heard budget gaps, from $100,000, 19 to over $1 million. 20 So, what has been clear about that, and, 21 basically, as it's come to the health-insurance 22 costs and the facilities costs; so, we've seen that 23 the City is clearly trying to shift those expenses 24 from a City expense. 25 And as -- they said, that they kept raising 1 that over the years, but they never explicitly said 2 in the concept paper, or anywhere, that that was 3 what they were looking to do: get out of the 4 business of health insurance and facility costs. 5 And that's, clearly, what they've tried to 6 do. 7 And when this first came up, you know, 8 basically, they cynically answered, "Programs are 9 going to have to negotiate rates, as they can." 10 And we all know that that is just -- as you 11 said before, it just doesn't -- the numbers don't 12 match. 13 So, you know, the other piece that became 14 obvious, that was mentioned earlier, about the 15 collective-bargaining agreement, was that, this 16 underfunding was kind of a side-handed way to go 17 about getting out of transferring the costs of the 18 health insurance onto the programs. 19 And I frankly think, if things don't work, 20 transferring the responsibility of things, of the 21 programs not being able to retain their ability to 22 keep programs open, will fall to the non-profit 23 sector, rather than the government pulling back. 24 So, you know, under the guise of quality -- 25 and this is what I think is so troubling about 1 this -- under the guise of quality, what they're 2 talking about is, underfunding these programs, 3 making workers' situations more vulnerable. 4 And, not just from a worker point of view, 5 but we've heard, across the board, from programs, if 6 you're looking to increase quality, programs, even 7 now, have a tremendous difficulty retaining 8 qualified workers because of the pay scales. 9 So, this will make that even more difficult 10 with fewer resources. 11 So, uhm -- 12 SENATOR SAVINO: But now you're the bad guy. 13 LIZ ACCLES: Well, I -- that's what I -- I 14 think that's an interesting thing to look at; the 15 way -- you know, part of what's underlying here, as 16 you say: We're cutting the rate by.... Or, this is 17 what the rate is. 18 If you can't make it whole, and the system 19 implodes because programs can't come up with the 20 money. Or, they give fewer contracts and negotiate 21 some, up, then you're talking about a drastic 22 wholesale cut in capacity. 23 It's one way or the other. It has to give 24 one way. 25 There either needs to be an infusion of money 1 to meet a proper rate and capacity, or, you know, it 2 either goes up, this way, or -- or -- 3 SENATOR SAVINO: Or you're put in the 4 position -- your agencies will be put in the 5 position, where you will be responsible for reducing 6 capacity and reducing wages. Depressing wages -- 7 LIZ ACCLES: Right. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: -- and benefits. 9 That's -- but, now, you are responsible for 10 that, as opposed to the City. 11 LIZ ACCLES: The City, that's right. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: And that's a dangerous 13 precedent. 14 LIZ ACCLES: I think that's the most cynical 15 thing. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: Yes, it is. 17 LIZ ACCLES: And, you know -- 18 SENATOR SAVINO: I've been around a long 19 time, Liz. [Inaudible] cynical. 20 LIZ ACCLES: Yeah, no, you know -- and the 21 City kind of putting it forward as quality. And it 22 becomes this false argument about quality, and -- 23 quality and capacity. 24 And I think as, Tammie Miller said earlier, 25 it's a false argument, because the children that 1 lose care, where's the quality? 2 Where's the quality there? 3 And one of the things that -- just going 4 quickly into our recommendations -- that FPWA has 5 been saying all along, is that, there are elements 6 of Early Learn that the advocacy community supports. 7 But, we've said, this is a really bad time to be 8 doing this. 9 We know the City argues otherwise. 10 If this was a time where -- of money coming 11 in, where resources could be there to support this, 12 this vision, or many elements of the vision, that 13 would be good. 14 We think it's a dangerous time to do this. 15 And, we've been calling for, whether it's a 16 pilot or a gradual rollout, ACS has done this in 17 other service areas, where, they can test what the 18 rates really are, they could test elements of the 19 program, and do it in a small and manageable scale, 20 that that would be a good way to go. 21 On the state level, of course, we support the 22 TANF Work Waiver Bill. 23 And, we, along with our partners at 24 Winning Beginning NY, call for a restoration of the 25 $37 million that we're losing in federal funding; as 1 well as really having the State make a significant 2 investment, begin to start making a significant 3 investment, in early childhood education, in terms 4 of subsidized child care, by adding 10 percent above 5 of the total amount that we currently have. 6 And that's -- that's where I will end. 7 Thank you. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: And next we're going to hear 9 from, Cordelia. 10 Right? 11 Is that who's next -- oh, no. Amy is next. 12 Amy. I'm sorry. 13 Amy, you're next. 14 I have them out of order here. 15 AMY COHEN: If you don't mind, I am going to 16 read excerpts of my testimony. 17 I will skip over the things that I know 18 everyone's said earlier today, to the best of my 19 ability. 20 My name is Amy Cohen, and I'm the director of 21 government contracts for the Jewish Child Care 22 Association, one of the oldest and largest child- 23 and family-care agencies in the nation, which 24 provides non-sectarian services to over 25 16,000 children and family members, each year, 1 throughout the Greater New York Region. 2 And, nearly 200 years old, JCCA provides an 3 extensive array of child welfare, mental health, 4 education, youth development, and day-care services. 5 My colleague Sandy Katz is director of 6 early childhood education services, and is 7 responsible for the supervision of, both, the 8 agency's day-care programs, the Forest Hills 9 Child-Care Center, as well as our family-to-family 10 program of home-based child care. 11 We are particularly pleased to testify today, 12 because our agency operates a lesser-known 13 child-care option: a licensed family child-care 14 network, also known as "family day care." 15 Our family-to-family program is one of a 16 dozen such networks throughout the city which, 17 collectively, provide oversight for approximately 18 10,000 children in home-based day care. 19 This service model involves trained providers 20 who deliver day care in their licensed homes, with 21 regular oversight from network agencies. 22 JCCA's family-to-family program, which was 23 founded in 1952, recruits, screens, trains, and 24 monitors providers who are independent contractors, 25 and places eligible ACS-subsidized children in their 1 homes. 2 While providers are licensed by the 3 New York State Office of Children and Family 4 Services, and regulated by the State Department of 5 Health, requiring them to comply with all child-care 6 regulations, Article 47, as well as any written 7 requirements issued by ACS or JCCA. 8 JCCA monitors provider homes with a minimum 9 of eight visits a year, three of which also assess 10 the children's nutritional needs, and, at least 11 three of these visits are unannounced. 12 Providers, children, and families in our 13 network also benefit from a wealth of other services 14 provided by JCCA, including, but not limited to, 15 assistance with the enrollment process, helping with 16 matching families with providers, assessment of 17 child development via formal screenings, provision 18 of educational materials, and delivery of, both, 19 group training and individual technical assistance 20 for providers so that they are kept abreast of 21 educational trends and regulatory requirements. 22 JCCA's family-to-family programs currently 23 serves approximately 1,000 children a year, from 24 infants to toddlers and preschoolers, to older 25 children who need after-school care. 1 JCCA's current enrollment consists of, both, 2 ACS-contract-funded families, as well as 3 approximately 500 children whose families pay 4 privately. 5 Our network currently oversees 130 licensed 6 family child-care-provider homes which serve 7 families residing in Queens, Brooklyn, and 8 Staten Island. 9 So, it's because of our expertise with family 10 child care, we wanted to point out to you today some 11 of the unique impact of the things our colleagues 12 have talked about, including the decline of funding, 13 which you'll find in my testimony, and you've heard 14 a lot about today, so, I'm going to skip that 15 portion. 16 But, obviously, the decline in funding has an 17 impact on all providers, including family 18 child-care. 19 And one that's unique, that we are very 20 concerned about, is the methodology being used in 21 New York City to determine allocations of the 22 increasingly scarce day-care resources. 23 As the system shrinks, New York City's ACS 24 has been forced to eliminate vital services for 25 thousands of New York City families, and has 1 accomplished this reduction by proposing to restrict 2 services to high-needs neighborhoods. 3 While it may appear that this is a good 4 strategy, in fact, the methodology by which ACS has 5 identified these neighborhoods, based on poverty 6 levels of an entire ZIP code, is highly problematic, 7 and ends up disenfranchising many poor children. 8 As Ginia Bellafante illustrates in her 9 compelling "New York Times" article, which we 10 encloses for your reference, many poor families live 11 in mixed-income neighborhoods that not identified as 12 high-needs by ACS, and are in danger of losing this 13 essential service. 14 We are deeply concerned about the many 15 families we serve who will lose child care as a 16 result of a ZIP-code demarcation which often 17 overlook pockets of poverty, particularly for 18 immigrants who happen to live in enclaves within 19 mixed-income neighborhoods. 20 Family child-care homes, which serve nearly 21 20 percent of families who receive subsidized care, 22 are often located in a ZIP code where the 23 predominant income of their neighbors masks their 24 very real poverty. 25 As Ms. Bellafante eloquently points out, 1 "Many children, for example, in City projects live 2 within the same ZIP codes whose neighbors are in 3 multi-million-dollar co-op owners. 4 "The ultimate result of the cost 5 savings"...blah, blah. 6 Talks all about the -- you heard a lot about 7 that today. 8 [Laughter.] 9 AMY COHEN: But, you know, it's a real issue 10 for family day-care providers, because the whole 11 concept is, you have these things spread out into, 12 you know, the outer boroughs, primarily, where there 13 isn't a lot of center-based facilities available. 14 And those are the ZIP codes that are going to 15 be cut. 16 So, we really feel like the family day care 17 will be disproportionately affected by the cuts, 18 and, is a very vital resource. 19 I'm going to turn it over to Sandy Katz, 20 who's going to talk about another serious concern we 21 have. 22 SANDY KATZ: Thank you. 23 Our final issue, is that the child-care cuts, 24 ironically, are coupled with increased expectations 25 for service deliveries from our providers. 1 We, of course, like all other programs, JCCA 2 supports the many initiatives underway to improve 3 the quality of care, New York City's Early Learn, 4 Quality Stars, and the Race to the Challenge, goals; 5 particularly, those grounded in a commitment to 6 ensuring that the critical components of health, 7 safety, and, emotional, physical, and educational 8 development are satisfied for all children in our 9 care. 10 And I assure you, that all the programs in 11 this room have been fighting every day for that 12 cause, always. 13 However, without the adequate funding to 14 achieve these milestones, the entire child-care 15 system is put at risk. 16 We have serious questions about the viability 17 of programs, such as ours, if the increased 18 expectations are not matched through -- with 19 increased funding. 20 For example: Our family child-care 21 providers, who, typically, are not individuals with 22 college degrees, will now be expected to perform the 23 function of early childhood educators by 24 implementing a standardized curriculum, conducting 25 developmentally appropriate assessments, and 1 screenings to assess for developmental disabilities. 2 All of these goals are admirable and 3 well-intentioned, and the instruments and curricula 4 will prove extremely valuable for raising 5 educational standards. 6 However, if there is a desire to have a 7 higher-qualified cadre of home-based caregivers, 8 there needs to be an commensurate increase in 9 provider payments so that network agencies can 10 recruit and retain these qualified providers. 11 Unfortunately, given the anticipated 12 reductions in funding, ACS, at this time, has no 13 plan to increase provider payments under the 14 Early Learn initiative, and does not even, at this 15 time, always pay the currently daily market rate set 16 by OCFS. 17 Moreover, in order to reduce spending in 18 New York City, there may even be an additional cut 19 to some of their existing providers as ACS seeks to 20 reduce the number of higher-paid group family 21 day-care providers who can serve a larger capacity 22 of up to 12 children in the home. 23 If these providers are unable to sustain 24 their services with lower rates and fewer slots, 25 there is a high likelihood, and risk, that 1 child-care services will become deregulated and 2 destabilized, as many provider will opt out of 3 networks, such as ours, which provide the expertise, 4 training, oversight of health, nutrition, and safety 5 standards, and a safety net for children, families, 6 and providers. 7 This will result in less oversight of the 8 homes, less communication with families and 9 community, less educational support, and, 10 ultimately, much greater cause for worry regarding 11 the supervision and care of the children. 12 For those who leave the field entirely, there 13 will be a sea of change which will result in fewer 14 trained, qualified providers to care for the 15 children of New York City. 16 And, as noted, if parents are left without 17 viable options for safe, reliable, and regulated 18 care for their children, they may be forced to leave 19 their positions of employment, to care for their 20 children themselves, thereby shrinking the economy 21 in, yet, another serious way. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: I have a few questions for 23 the three of you. 24 You both all -- so far, nobody likes this 25 Early Learn. That's pretty clear. 1 Right? 2 We all know that. 3 You all have mentioned the issue of increased 4 parent fees. And I guess we anticipated they'll 5 probably go up somewhat, as a result of this 6 Early Learn, too, because, we're shrinking capacity, 7 you guys have to make up the money. And, somehow or 8 other, it's going come out of somebody's pocket. 9 How much are the fees now? 10 So, if you're a working parent, and you earn 11 $50,000, you're not eligible for subsidized aid. 12 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: [Inaudible.] 13 SENATOR SAVINO: No, you're not. 14 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: [Inaudible.] 15 SENATOR SAVINO: No, you're not eligible. 16 So, what's the -- $40,000 is the maximum to 17 be eligible for -- for -- 18 CORDELIA GRANT MCNISH: One parent working 19 can make $40,000, and she'd be paying $132 a week. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: $132 a week. 21 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: [Inaudible.] 22 SANDY KATZ: Depends on the age of the child, 23 but -- 24 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, so if you have two 25 children. It's -- 1 CORDELIA GRANT MCNISH: That's a family fee. 2 It would be 132. 3 SENATOR SAVINO: So, you would pay 200, and 4 whatever it happens to be. 5 AMY COHEN: It's the same fee regardless of 6 how many children you have. 7 CORDELIA GRANT MCNISH: Oh, one flat fee. 8 AMY COHEN: It's a family fee. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: So if you have six kids, 10 it's cheaper. 11 It's cheaper by the dozen; right? 12 That's what they used to say. 13 But I think that was -- Liz, you mentioned 14 that there's -- they don't offer any support. 15 What happens if you can't get parents to pay? 16 You know, if they just don't have the money, 17 so you absorb it? 18 AMY COHEN: The agencies absorb it, and we 19 always have a huge amount of parents who cannot pay. 20 And we have the choice of either, evicting them, or 21 trying to keep them on, and use -- we basically have 22 raised private funds to cover the people who are, 23 you know, not able to pay. 24 And oftentimes we have families who have paid 25 for years, and then they have a rocky period. And, 1 so, you know, it feels inhumane to kick them out, 2 when, you know, like anybody else, they are 3 struggling. 4 So, it becomes, in effect, the 6.7 percent 5 match for us is much higher, if you incorporate that 6 added burden. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: I was going to raise that 8 issue. 9 So, now, you're already drawing from private 10 donations to cover the cost of families who don't 11 have the income to pay their parent fee. 12 So, now, you're going to have to go to the 13 well more than once, because that's -- you need to 14 raise 6.7 percent of the cost, just to keep your 15 place operating, and provide what you have. 16 Now you have to find someone else to make up 17 for the parents who can't pay, who just, you know, 18 hit, you know, whatever -- rock bottom. 19 But, in the past, did they -- when they 20 calculated the rate, did they take into 21 consideration the number of parents who don't pay? 22 Was there any consideration given to that? 23 AMY COHEN: No. We're just expected to 24 collect it all. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Just eat the cost 1 yourselves. 2 LIZ ACCLES: And this is where the -- the -- 3 as you were saying, the match is false. 4 Steven Antonelli was saying, that, if you put 5 all the pieces together, you're talking about, 6 really, more like a 30 percent match. 7 You know, like, if you're looking at the 8 6.7 percent, you're looking at the increased fee, 9 and where that falls short. And then you're looking 10 at the transfer of health-insurance costs, and, for 11 some places, facilities costs. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 13 Now, since your agencies are some of the, you 14 know, largest and oldest, they've been around for a 15 long time, and, they don't just do day care. You 16 also do child-welfare services, and foster care, the 17 staff that you have that work in those divisions, 18 you negotiate health insurance for them, don't you? 19 Or, you provide health insurance to them? 20 AMY COHEN: We're -- I don't want to speak 21 for you. 22 We're a not-for-profit that -- because we're 23 family day care, we're not part of this health 24 issue. 25 The providers are independent contractors, 1 and the staff who oversee them are JCCA employees. 2 And neither of them have been subject, ever, to the 3 day-care union. 4 We happen to be a union shop, and we have our 5 own union negotiations, but it's outside the -- 6 SENATOR SAVINO: Who are you with? 7 Who's your union shop? 8 AMY COHEN: We're 1707. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: 1707. 10 So -- but they have the same -- your -- 11 LIZ ACCLES: We don't -- we're a membership 12 organization, so we don't provide direct service. 13 But -- it -- 14 AMY COHEN: You're talking about your 15 members. [Inaudible.] 16 SENATOR SAVINO: But, FPWA, you have members 17 in your organization -- 18 AMY COHEN: Yes. 19 SENATOR SAVINO: -- so -- who do -- who are 20 the direct employers -- 21 AMY COHEN: [Inaudible] the day-care centers. 22 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 23 -- who run the day-care centers. 24 AMY COHEN: Yes. 25 And here's an example [indicating]. 1 CORDELIA GRANT MCNISH: Hi. I'm 2 Cordelia McNish. I'm from Episcopal Social 3 Services, and Sheltering Arms Day Care Services. 4 We operate, both, the family day -- 5 child-care network. And, we also have the fully 6 funded programs. And, we also have the limited 7 purchase of service child-care program. 8 The union with the day care, their benefits 9 are covered through the union. However, the 10 employees that are not in the union, the agency 11 covers. And, which is a higher rate. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 13 And that's the point that I was trying to 14 make; because, earlier today, the general counsel 15 for ACS, they seem to think there wouldn't be any 16 problem with your member organizations negotiating, 17 or covering, the day-care workers or the child-care 18 workers through the -- the -- because they do it now 19 for their -- if they run a foster-care program, if 20 they have a preventative-service program. 21 AMY COHEN: And they have the day-care 22 centers. 23 I mean, I think we're an anomaly, of, uhm -- 24 you know, we also have the luxury, probably, of the 25 [inaudible] today. 1 So, many of the day-care centers are very 2 small organizations. We are not representative of 3 that group. 4 It is going to be an immense burden for them, 5 and it will put many out of business -- 6 LIZ ACCLES: Right. And I think -- 7 AMY COHEN: -- that are not capable. 8 LIZ ACCLES: I think, for FPWA, we have a -- 9 organizations of a range of size, as does the 10 Day Care Council. 11 And for the smaller organizations, 12 community-based organizations, this is -- this is 13 going to be especially hard, uhm, that have, you 14 know, functioned high-quality, good programs, but 15 may not have the community private funding, board 16 money, let alone, foundation money. 17 I mean, the whole non-profit sector is 18 suffering from foundation problems. 19 I mean, you know, this is all directly 20 connected to the economy. 21 So -- 22 SENATOR SAVINO: It's going to get, 23 potentially, worse. 24 AMY COHEN: And the informal response was, 25 that, for some of the larger agencies, like ours, 1 maybe we want to consider absorbing some of the 2 smaller agencies, so that they can continue to 3 exist. 4 But, if we're forced to take on their match, 5 their health-insurance problems, you know, many of 6 us, our boards are not willing, in this fiscal 7 climate, to do that. 8 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 9 There's been a lot of discussion today from, 10 I mean, all the advocates and the organizations, 11 that, one of things that's needed, is for the State 12 to make up that $37 million; which, you know, if we 13 have it, we'll definitely work on it, and put it 14 there. 15 But, my sense from talking to the 16 administration is, this is not necessarily just a 17 money issue. 18 If we were to restore the $37 million, or to 19 make sure it's there, and -- from the child-care 20 money, and then send it to the City of New York, as 21 you know, we have no control what the City does once 22 we give them the money. 23 Has there been any discussion with your 24 organizations, that, if they had all the money in 25 the world, would they suspend this idea of going 1 forward with Early Learn? 2 Or, do they view Early Learn as the model 3 that they want to pursue, regardless of whether 4 there's sufficient money? 5 AMY COHEN: Let me answer it in a different 6 way. 7 When there's less money to go around, they've 8 been forced to make some of the decisions, like, you 9 know, ZIP-code demarcations, like we outlined; 10 Like, increased expectations for family 11 child-care providers, without increasing their 12 rates; 13 Like, the union, you know, they're pushing 14 the union responsibility off on someone else. 15 If we had more money, will they do all four 16 of those things we don't like? 17 No, but they may do one or two. They 18 probably won't do all four. 19 Can I predict which ones they'll proceed 20 with? No. 21 But, I do think the situation that so many of 22 us -- so much of what we're faced with as a result 23 of shrinking funds, they're pushing costs off, and 24 making cuts wherever they can. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh, but the problem is, 1 if this contract, these -- 2 This Early Learn program is supposed to go 3 into effect this year; correct? 4 Sometime in this spring. 5 AMY COHEN: They're going to do -- this 6 spring, they'll do the awards [inaudible]. 7 SENATOR SAVINO: Okay, so the State 8 Legislature, our budget, is due on April 1st. 9 The City Council is required to complete 10 their budgets. 11 So, let's assume we restore the $37 million, 12 or we find it, you know, we look in the seat 13 cushions, and we -- you know, $37 million, it's not 14 a lot of money in a budget of 136 billion. 15 But -- so, we find the 37 million, we've put 16 it in the budget. We allocate it to, day care, and 17 early childhood education, in the City of New York. 18 It comes to the City Council. 19 So, that's April 1st, when the State is done. 20 City Council doesn't adopt a budget until 21 July 1st. 22 This contract is done. 23 AMY COHEN: No. This contract -- I'm sorry. 24 The awards are, allegedly, being announced in 25 the spring, and the contract starts September 1st. 1 I say "allegedly," because, having just gone 2 through the competitive bid for foster care, it was, 3 like, way over a year overdue. 4 So -- I mean, I think, as more information 5 comes out, it may delay the process. 6 I do not think, just because your process is 7 in the spring, that poses a problem. 8 I think the timing is perfect. 9 SENATOR SAVINO: I'm just concerned that, as 10 the Mayor puts forward his Executive budget 11 recommendations, that he will budget with the -- 12 with the -- you know, with the expectation that 13 Early Learn will be in effect with the lower rates. 14 So -- so, it's not enough for us to just 15 advocate for the 37 million. 16 AMY COHEN: That's right. 17 SENATOR SAVINO: Then we have to advocate 18 that it be included -- 19 Let's assume we get it. 20 -- it be included in the way the City Council 21 begins their budget negotiations; that there should 22 be a higher -- there's more money on the table, 23 therefore, the rate should be higher, to reflect the 24 reality of what it really costs to provide the 25 service. 1 LIZ ACCLES: That's right, that it needs to 2 be more, because, the 37 million, anyway, is 3 statewide. 4 SENATOR SAVINO: Right. 5 LIZ ACCLES: And, then, that's just keeping 6 it -- 7 AMY COHEN: Flat. 8 LIZ ACCLES: -- flat. 9 And, uhm -- 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 11 LIZ ACCLES: -- exactly. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: All right, thank you -- but, 13 we didn't hear from Cordelia. 14 I didn't realize she was there. 15 CORDELIA GRANT MCNISH: Thank you. 16 SENATOR SAVINO: And, Cordelia Grant McNish, 17 is the assistant executive director for the 18 Episcopal Social Service, Early Childhood 19 Department; and, Sheltering Arms Day Care Services. 20 Before you start, let's bring the next two, 21 and put them in place. 22 And that would be, Randi Herman, from CSA. 23 Come on down. 24 And, then, Jamila LaMont -- 25 Is Jamila here? 1 -- from Area 145 Day Care Center? 2 Then, after that -- after that, we have two 3 more speakers. That would be, Howard Milbert, the 4 New York State Association of Directors of NFP Child 5 Day Care -- 6 Is Howard here? 7 Yes. 8 Okay. 9 -- and, then, Kelly Owens, of the YWCA. 10 They are our final testi- -- 11 Is Kelly Owens here? 12 No? 13 No? 14 All right. 15 So, Howard you can kind of move down into 16 position, because you will be the final speaker for 17 today. 18 But, go ahead, Cordelia. 19 CORDELIA GRANT MCNISH: Good afternoon. 20 Senator Savino, thank you very much for 21 holding these hearings. 22 I know you've heard it 50 million times 23 today, but I'm thanking you again. 24 I'm going to just briefly make a comment on 25 just a few things that's been said, because you've 1 heard it several times. 2 One of the things is about that 6.7 percent 3 contribution that sponsors have to make under 4 Early Learn. 5 The whole concept of Early Learn, I don't 6 have a problem with. 7 I think, that, anything that would enhance 8 the lives of the childrens [sic] and families, I'm 9 for it. 10 It's just, that, everything that is a value, 11 unfortunately, has a cost to it. 12 And I think this is what -- there's a concept 13 that you want to provide quality, but you don't want 14 to pay for it. 15 And I think this is what this is all about. 16 And, when they talk about that 6.7 percent, 17 we just looked at our year-end audit this year; and, 18 that's not counting if you were paying for the 19 medical costs. 20 The agency would have to come up with an 21 additional $155,000. 22 And that doesn't count any of the extras. 23 Like, every time the City has another mandate 24 for our programs; like, for instance, the additional 25 costs for fingerprinting, that's additional costs 1 that we weren't anticipating. 2 And, one of the things that I would like to 3 address -- everyone has addressed, basically, the 4 funding -- it's just the, basic, how they're 5 operating. 6 You have a ACS. You have DOE. You have DOH. 7 They're the players in this game. 8 And what we're not getting, we're kind of 9 caught in the middle. 10 Like, for instance: With the UPK program, 11 you've asked very much about it. 12 We were -- we were one of the contractors in 13 the very beginning, when it was just a DOE contract. 14 We started out with part day. We were able 15 to increase it to a full-day program. 16 It helped our program tremendously, because 17 we were able get -- first of all, we were able to 18 pay more for some of the employees in order to hold 19 on to our certified teachers. 20 And, we were able to get enhancements for the 21 programs that we would not have been able to get 22 before. 23 Once it went over, in 2007, was it cut? Yes, 24 it was cut. 25 Did we feel it? Yes, we did. 1 However, I just think, that, if there's the 2 collaboration between the two, then I think it will 3 work, but, it has to be where you have, a DOE 4 consultant coming into programs, you have ACS into 5 the programs. 6 Just the operation is putting, not only the 7 financial, but just the stress on the directors and 8 the teachers in the classrooms, because they're 9 listening to so many bosses. 10 And I think that, if, in this system, if 11 they're really on the same page, people need to get 12 together in terms of what they're really offering. 13 And, when you're talking about the blended 14 model, how are we going to work? 15 We're talking about in-kind costs. 16 ACS, nor anyone else, has sat down with 17 programs, and says: Okay, these are some of the 18 in-kind contributions you can make, and use this 19 towards this year. 20 We haven't heard any of that, but, yet, we're 21 supposed to be planning. 22 Programs that have used to their blending 23 funding before, they might have the experience. 24 But, those who have not, don't have that experience. 25 So, therefore, we're supposed to plan for a 1 new system, without proper guidance. 2 And my last thing I'd just like to say, is 3 that: In the staffing, we have -- ACS has always 4 encouraged employees to improve themselves. 5 And what has happened once our teachers 6 became certified? 7 They walked out the door. They went across 8 the street, and then got a job at the Department of 9 Education. 10 If we're going to expect these children, 11 everybody's expecting the same criteria now -- 12 whether you're in a UPK in the Board of Ed, or 13 whether you're in a UPK and a day-care center, or 14 private -- if you're expecting the same benefits for 15 the children, and the same results, you should be 16 getting the same pay. 17 And that's just as simple as that: you should 18 be getting the same pay. 19 Because, what you're really telling an 20 employee, is that, your value increases when you go 21 work for a different organization, or a different 22 intergovernmental entity. 23 And I think that if we want our children to 24 feel good about themselves, our employees have to 25 feel good about themselves. 1 And, if that is going to come from, it's 2 going to have come from the top; and those are going 3 to have to be from the lawmakers. 4 Thank you. 5 SENATOR SAVINO: I agree. 6 Thank you. 7 Now, CSA, finally. 8 We've heard from all the workers, now we're 9 going to hear from the directors. 10 DR. RANDI HERMAN: Good afternoon. 11 My name Randi Herman. I represent "CSA"; the 12 Council of School Supervisors and Administrators. 13 We happily represent 357 day-care members 14 located at 278 centers around the city. 15 As you've heard, they too are without a 16 contract for six years. 17 But let's look a little further than 18 day care, right now. 19 Student achievement, we know, is inextricably 20 linked to early childhood. 21 Principals and teachers are now being 22 evaluated on student achievement, as are the 23 New York City public schools. 24 So, does it make sense, in the scheme of 25 things, to serve fewer children? 1 That's a question we have to ask at this 2 time. 3 Can we allow less than a third of eligible 4 children in New York City, and -- to be served in 5 early childhood, and still have the expectation that 6 Cordelia spoke about, of student-achievement 7 excellence? 8 Doesn't make any sense to have that 9 expectation if you're taking away the service. 10 So, in this time of diminishing resources, we 11 ask again: Is this the right time to put in a new 12 initiative that will result in serving fewer kids? 13 Or, do we stop and think for minute, and say: 14 Gee, half a billion dollars is a lot of money to 15 invest in a program that has never been piloted? 16 We don't have any data to say that this 17 works. 18 And you're right, Senator Savino, it seems to 19 be a shell game, of sorts. 20 It's just, about, worthy of Bernie Madoff. 21 Right? 22 Jim thought of fencing. I thought of Bernie. 23 Uhm, we say, as a city, that we put children 24 first. 25 I mean, clearly, that's not true. The first 1 cuts that were talked about, were the easy ones: 2 women, and children. 3 When the economy takes a downturn, they're 4 the hardest hit in their communities. 5 To put this on top of that will break the 6 community, and, perpetuate the cycle of poverty that 7 everybody keeps saying early childhood will help 8 break. 9 I'm not getting the logic here. 10 So, over a half a century of experience in 11 City-funded day care: it works. 12 I think Quality Stars will confirm that it 13 works, if we let Quality Stars go through first. 14 And, if Quality Stars says that what we have 15 works, we're okay with that. 16 If Quality Stars shows that, oh, our centers 17 can't meet the standard, then we improve them. 18 But, why throw everybody away? 19 That doesn't make sense. 20 You cited, that, sending all the 5-year-olds 21 to the public schools was a big mistake? 22 Boy, was it a big mistake. 23 What you may not know, was that, the day that 24 the Commissioner told us that it was going to 25 happen, we gave him a counterproposal: to leave all 1 of the children where they were, and bring the 2 services to them. 3 Would have made sense, no? 4 SENATOR SAVINO: Uh-huh. 5 DR. RANDI HERMAN: That was not to be 6 considered. The answer was a flat-out "no." 7 They wouldn't even discuss it. 8 They had already made the decision to move 9 those children. 10 See, what I'm seeing a pattern of here, is 11 that, whenever ACS wants to make a big change, 12 everybody gets very upset, and we all come to the 13 hearings, and, we make recommendations. 14 And, then, what does ACS do? 15 They, very quietly, pull the funding, and 16 they say: Oh, we didn't close those classes. We 17 don't close classes. 18 They just withdrew the funding, so that 19 forced the sponsoring boards to close the classes. 20 So, they back off when they need to back off, 21 and say: We didn't do it. 22 Here, at least they're saying they're 23 generating this. 24 But if they're generating this, they won't 25 even tell you the bidders. 1 Secrets. Lots of secrets. 2 Why is it so secret? 3 SENATOR SAVINO: I would think you're all 4 bidding. 5 How would you survive if you didn't? 6 DR. RANDI HERMAN: That's the next question; 7 because, this is one was the first time a proposal 8 was opened to not-for-profits and for-profit. 9 So, who would be the agency, or the entity, 10 that had the capacity to raise that 6.7 percent 11 match, and, maybe provide healthcare, maybe provide 12 some permutation of that. 13 But, certainly, not paying union wages, 14 because they wouldn't have to be a unionized center; 15 wouldn't have to be a unionized workplace. 16 So, nobody has yet to ask where this 17 half a billion dollars came from, that, all of a 18 sudden, they have to invest in this RFP. 19 Could it have come from squirreling it all 20 away as they closed centers over the past few years? 21 Could be. 22 But, if they had money, how is it that this 23 city agency was allowed to operate in a state of 24 deficit, and not reinvest the money in itself to 25 ameliorate that deficit? 1 Why is this half a billion dollars free and 2 clear? 3 I don't know. 4 So, bottom line is: The cost isn't going 5 meet the need. 6 There is no plan B. 7 What if it doesn't work? 8 And, what happens to all of these people if 9 it doesn't work? 10 I don't know where that leaves us. 11 The RFP doesn't detail how they expect you to 12 build capacity, to continue with this flat rate, as 13 costs increase. 14 Are you going to be asked to make up more on 15 your own? 16 Now, I know, in a grand situation, the funder 17 very often asks that the grantee provide some of the 18 capital, and, demonstrate capacity. 19 What happens after the grant is over? How 20 will you continue? 21 But this isn't a grant. 22 This is an RFP. This is a contract. 23 I don't know of anybody going into business 24 who's asked to provide their own capital. 25 And I will tell you, that there is at least 1 one center that was approached by Wal-Mart as a 2 sponsor. 3 So, this opens a whole different avenue for 4 consideration. 5 What happens if there are businesses that 6 want to come to New York, and see this as a way in 7 to buy a space in the community? 8 Something to think about. 9 So, what are we asking from you, and your 10 colleagues? 11 Well, a couple of things. And, they're not 12 totally cost-neutral, but, they're not going to cost 13 half a billion dollars either. 14 Before any proposal, such as this, that has a 15 magnitude of change, as this one does at a local 16 level, we're asking: 17 That there be some oversight, to examine it, 18 to considerate it. To look at the research that 19 recommends it. What are the pitfalls? 20 You'd heard the words "impact study." 21 What would the impact be on the community? 22 We need some help at the state level, to give 23 that some teeth. 24 Because, right now, you can ask for an impact 25 study, but we don't have to have one. Nobody's got 1 to consider what the ramifications will be. 2 So, that, I think is something you and your 3 colleagues can do. 4 You can also give us a bill that would 5 require a committee to development a consistent 6 structure and policy for subsidized early care and 7 education, with a consistent fee-reimbursement 8 schedule. 9 And that isn't as easy as I'm making it 10 sound. 11 Social Services really hasn't caught up with 12 current events. 13 So, the measures that they're using right now 14 for poverty, don't really reflect what poverty is. 15 There are current studies that do. 16 They actually looked at the proportion of a 17 family's income that is spent on rent, on child 18 care. 19 All that's in the written testimony. You can 20 look at that later. 21 But, we need sufficient time for children to 22 achieve developmental milestones. 23 That's what happens in the safety net that we 24 call "early care and education." 25 That's where the early intervention services 1 can be given without anybody saying there's an 2 achievement gap; because early childhood doesn't 3 have an achievement gap. 4 Learning is developmentally appropriate. 5 Teaching is developmentally appropriate. 6 Kids have developmentally appropriate 7 experiences; so, that, when they go knock on the 8 public-school door, they're ready. 9 Now, what happens in five years, when they 10 come knocking on the public-school doors, and 11 they're not ready? 12 Student achievement tanks. Teacher 13 performance is rated poorly, because it's connected 14 to student achievement. Principal performance is 15 connected to teacher performance. 16 So, the school's rating and the principal's 17 rating are in jeopardy, all because we pulled out 18 the safety net. 19 So this has very, very far-reaching 20 implications, far, far more into the future than 21 right now, or even next year. 22 Now, in the past, there were efforts made to 23 leverage funding by co-locating services. 24 That was a political minefield, and there 25 were so many obstacles, it never happened. 1 Every agency was so territorial, nobody 2 wanted to play nice in the sandbox. 3 We were talking about co-locating the 4 day-care center, the senior center, and community 5 health services. 6 We thought that would make sense. 7 And there are places in the city that operate 8 very nicely doing just that. 9 So, the funding is leveraged, costs have gone 10 down. 11 Why we can't do this throughout the city? 12 Like I said, political barriers. 13 If your colleagues were so inclined, they 14 could probably be helpful in smoothing that road 15 out. We could preserve a lot of services if they're 16 willing to collaborate. 17 Let's look at Title 1 funding. 18 Now, Title 1 funding, traditionally, doesn't 19 go to day-care center. 20 But, that's because of the age of the child? 21 In a year's time, that kid will be Title 1 in 22 public school. 23 The community is probably Title 1-eligible. 24 So, if you look at this model, like they do 25 in Pennsylvania, they use a community-eligibility 1 model. The whole community is Title 1. 2 So, why aren't they eligible for some Title 1 3 funds? 4 It all went, last go-round, to public 5 education. None of it went to early childhood. 6 So, more equitable distribution there, would 7 help. 8 Relaxing the requirements for eligibility 9 would be helpful, both, to the centers, and to the 10 schools at this point, because the schools 11 redistributed the Title 1 money, to make it appear 12 that there was more money, because there just isn't 13 enough in the pot. 14 Now, we can't admit to the public that we 15 can't afford to educate our children, and to support 16 our families. 17 How bad does that look? 18 This is New York. 19 This is New York State, and New York City. 20 We're going to announce to the world that we 21 can't afford to educate our children? 22 That, as a New Yorker, I find to be 23 unacceptable. 24 As a mom, I can tell you, the brain of a 25 newborn weighs about three ounces. The brain of an 1 adult weighs three pounds. 2 We have a very, very serious responsibility 3 here, because, that brain development is going to 4 depend on the decisions we make, and what we do, and 5 the battles we choose to fight. 6 So, I really think we have to put children 7 first here. And, really stand for children. 8 You've got labor here. You've got 9 not-for-profits here. 10 None of us like it, so, maybe it isn't so 11 good. 12 SENATOR SAVINO: I agree. 13 Sadly, Randi, it seems to be the 14 administration's utilizing one of their age-old 15 tactics of pitting the children against the 16 workforce. 17 Last year, it was children against seniors. 18 Hopefully, we won't see that rear its ugly 19 head again in the Governor's budget proposal. 20 Those of you who don't remember the shift of 21 Title 20 money to child welfare, and closing senior 22 centers. 23 And, we were able to fight that one, but, you 24 know, this is a trend: We pit seniors against 25 children. Children against workers. Teachers 1 against, you know, principals. 2 And, in the end, you know, we're happy when 3 we're able to restore the funding to where it was 4 the year before, and we don't realize that we're 5 losing. 6 Because, if we're not moving forward, we're 7 going backwards. And if we're not adding, we're 8 losing. 9 And it's, you know, it's unfortunate. 10 But, I hear you. 11 Thank you. 12 And we now have, Jamila LaMont. 13 JAMILA LAMONT: Good morning. 14 My name is Jamila LaMont, and I represent 15 Area 145 Day Care in Harlem. 16 Thank you, Senator Savino, for having this 17 forum, to allow us to express our concerns. 18 I'm not going take out the paper. 19 I did leave my concerns with you, but there's 20 some things that I feel I would like to address on 21 the behalf of the school; and that is, to paint the 22 picture of what they went through when this proposal 23 was submitted. 24 I work with directors there. I've seen the 25 stress. 1 I sat at the Day Care Council, with other 2 directors. It was very stressful, because Area 145 3 Day Care Center does not have Head Start; so, it's 4 just, basically, child care and UPK. 5 And, so, we talk about all these different 6 ways. 7 What if we don't get the funding from this 8 proposal? What do we do? 9 Well, right now, we're in a, "Let's get to 10 the meat and potatoes of the problem," because, 11 while everyone is fighting it out, to figure out how 12 they're going to help our children, we have to do 13 something now. 14 So, some of the things that -- the only thing 15 that we could do, is just look at the current 16 problems that were taking place. 17 And that was, it's a scary transition. You 18 know, they have -- the ideas are wonderful. They're 19 fabulous. 20 But, okay, now what? 21 We've been -- this school has been servicing 22 children in the community. It's a pillar since 23 1972. 24 There are people on the board who have seen 25 students graduate, go to college. 1 You know, it's a family, it's a community, 2 that is rich, and they are just as important as the 3 other schools that are -- that are 4 Head Start-collaborative, and have all -- or maybe 5 more resourceful programs. 6 But there were a lot of directors that fell 7 like they weren't worthy, because they just felt 8 like they couldn't address this proposal. Like, 9 they have so many demands, and so many things to do. 10 So, one of the things that, we sat down, and 11 some of the things that were brought to the table, 12 it's just finding that time to really go to the 13 community and -- and bridge that gap, because, the 14 community, our children; children that go to the 15 school, the parents, "Are you aware that this school 16 may be closed?" 17 Is it a possibility this school may not be 18 here anymore if we do not support each other. 19 So, if we don't get this money, if something 20 should happen, we have to have a backup plan. 21 Selling in bake sales, and cookies, that's 22 not going to work. That's not going to get the 23 money that we need. 24 But, guess what? There are a lot of small 25 businesses in this area that are struggling, that 1 you go over to day, that you shop at every day. 2 We need to know each other's faces. We need 3 to know your patrons. And we need to know -- and as 4 parents, and supporters of community, we need to 5 know why your business is important. 6 We need to talk. Because, there is a time 7 when you have to get out and do something. 8 And that's where we're being -- we're in this 9 position now, where I -- I'm going to take my hat 10 off from representing Area 145 Day Care Center, 11 working with them, and say, "I am a parent." A 12 single mother of three children in three different 13 schools. 14 I know the reality of wondering about 15 child care, and I understand it. 16 I understand it. 17 So as we sit, and go back and forth, I feel 18 it, and see it. 19 And that's why I have such a passionate 20 commitment to this school. 21 And, hopefully, through all of the adversity, 22 the people that come together, and come up with 23 these really beautiful and wonderful ideas for our 24 children, take into consideration the support that's 25 needed to really make it stick, and make sense. 1 It has to be digestible at everyone's table. 2 Some people are choking on these chunks, some 3 are swallowing it easily, but, it has to be fair. 4 And when we talk about getting these kids 5 ready, now, with the -- what is it called? -- the 6 common-core standards, that's no joke. 7 Kindergarten, it's like mini college. You 8 have to know how to read. You have -- there's no 9 more "Duck, Duck, Goose," and naps, like it was 10 before. 11 It's real. 12 And, with UPK, they have like a non-academic 13 kind of approach. And a lot of parents that we talk 14 about way, where to get extra money, say, private 15 funding; right? 16 Parents want to see something. 17 With private funding, they want to see 18 something that is relative to the transitioning, 19 from the day-care center to kindergarten and 20 elementary school. 21 And if you're saying, that, Okay, we want to 22 keep it non-academic, and we're going to give you 23 these tools, and this money, but we only want you to 24 do this, and you can't -- so, it ties the hands of 25 the facilitators and the teachers, and everyone is 1 frustrated. 2 And, again, once they move from this safety 3 net, to the elementary school, now what? 4 Because, these standards are in place now. 5 This common-core standard is in place. 6 And, it's just scary. 7 It's scary. 8 So, again, everyone has talked about the 9 statistics and the numbers. 10 My concerns are pretty much the same as 11 everyone else's concerns. 12 But, again, in considering all of these 13 things, consider the investment, and more support in 14 transitioning, because that is what makes it stick 15 and work. 16 The program, has wonderful ideas. You have 17 the people, but the gap in getting people there, and 18 holding their hands, and make sure it's successful, 19 is what is important to us. 20 SENATOR SAVINO: It's interesting. 21 So -- again, and I've not heard from one 22 organization yet, today, that doesn't say, from the 23 beginning: It's a good idea, it's a great concept. 24 We want to improve standards. We want to improve 25 education. We want to improve training. We want to 1 make it a better program. 2 Everybody agrees on that. 3 But, you can't do it at the rate that ACS is 4 saying you're going to do it at, which puts you in a 5 very bad position, because, you can't get out from 6 underneath of your union contracts anyway, because 7 there is this thing called "Collective Bargaining 8 Law" in New York State. 9 And if you tried to, you'd get sued, and 10 you'd lose money. And, who would represent you in 11 court? 12 So that's problem; which means, it's going to 13 force you guys to reduce capacity, and reduce the 14 service to children. 15 Or, if you're, you know, a fancy, you know, 16 somewhat private school, you could just charge more 17 tuition to people who have the money. 18 But, for the most of you, you're not going to 19 be able to do that, so you're going to have to 20 reduce the capacity, and eligibility -- not 21 eligibility, because eligibility is determined by 22 other people -- but, capacity. 23 How do you then decide who doesn't get to 24 come anymore? 25 Is it, you know, kind of, like, last in, 1 first out? 2 How do you determine which child you don't 3 have room for? 4 CORDELIA GRANT MCNISH: The way that it's set 5 up now, it's going to be that anyway, because, with 6 parents that are in family child care, there's only 7 one option for them: That's the child care, only. 8 Whereas, when you go into the day-care 9 centers, you have the Head Start. You have -- and 10 you have the child care, too. 11 But, most of it, most of the funding that's 12 coming down, is Head Start funding. 13 So, if you're with child care, those parents 14 may not even be able to go into the centers, 15 because, depending on where their income is, in 16 terms of their eligibility. 17 And even with that, even with the numbers, 18 because, with a family day care, you're dealing with 19 more -- a larger number of children. So, therefore, 20 just the numbers going into the center, the groups 21 are smaller. 22 So you won't have -- there is no 23 follow-through; although, on paper it is. 24 But when you start looking at it, where are 25 you going to refer all these children to? 1 SENATOR SAVINO: Yeah, where are they going 2 to go? 3 JAMILA LAMONT: No seats. 4 CORDELIA GRANT MCNISH: Yeah. 5 Yes. 6 SENATOR SAVINO: Mm, mm, mm. 7 All right, ladies. 8 Thank you for your testimony. 9 And our final presenter for the day is, 10 Howard Milbert, who is the co-chair of the 11 New York State Association of Directors of NFP Child 12 Day Care Centers. 13 Hello. 14 HOWARD MILBERT: Good afternoon. 15 SENATOR SAVINO: Good afternoon. 16 HOWARD MILBERT: My name is Howard Milbert. 17 I'm co-chair of the New York State Association of 18 Directors of Not-For-Profit Child Day Care 19 Centers, Inc. 20 Our name was chosen by a committee, and that 21 explains it. 22 On behalf of this organization, I would like 23 to thank you for the opportunity to comment on 24 challenges facing the child-care community in 25 New York State in 2012. 1 Our association is composed of executive 2 directors and program directors of not-for-profit 3 day-care centers located throughout New York State, 4 outside of New York City, with a greater portion of 5 our membership from the Lower Hudson Valley. 6 The majority of our members' agencies serve 7 low-income working families that rely on state and 8 county subsidies to be able to afford licensed, 9 high-quality child care. 10 I'm here this afternoon to discuss the crisis 11 in subsidized child care brought about by the 12 current funding cuts, and potentially disastrous 13 consequences if the projected funding further cuts 14 are enacted. 15 As far as we know, every county in the state 16 has, or is intending to, raise parent fees, lower 17 the eligibility ceiling, freeze access to subsidized 18 child care, or do some combination of the above, as 19 a response to shrinking tax dollars. 20 The effects of these funding cuts has been 21 threefold. 22 First: To substantially reduce the number of 23 low-income working families receiving child-care 24 assistance; 25 Second: To force these parents to choose 1 between working, and placing their child in 2 potentially unsafe conditions, or not working; 3 And, third: To ruin the child-care 4 infrastructure, by making the provision of 5 subsidized child care financially unfeasible. 6 The following examples will serve to 7 illustrate these points: 8 In Oneida County, as of January 1st, 425, or 9 30 percent, of the 1,375 families currently getting 10 help paying for day care will be eliminated as a 11 result of lowering the eligibility ceiling, from 12 200 percent of the poverty level, to 100 percent of 13 the poverty level. 14 This will mean that 1,000 children will be 15 without child care in the new year. 16 Centers throughout Greater Utica that serve 17 primarily low-income families, like the Neighborhood 18 Center established in 1905, in the Thea Bowman House 19 founded in 1986, are therefore projecting a 20 50 percent reduction in their enrollment, with 21 substantial cuts in personnel, and the possibility 22 of becoming financially insolvent. 23 In Albany County, the sequence of events, in 24 terms of funding, has led to a calamity for families 25 and their providers. 1 Prior to 2010, Albany funded working parents 2 up to 200 percent of the poverty level, with a 3 parent's share of 15 percent. 4 Beginning in the fall of that year, the 5 funding for new day-care cases was frozen. 6 Then, in August of 2011, Albany County 7 increased the parent share for existing families to 8 25 percent. 9 Finally, last month, Albany County began to 10 open new cases, but then reduced the eligibility 11 ceiling to 125 percent of the poverty level. 12 This series of devastating cuts in funding 13 has caused three well-established child-care 14 programs to close. 15 The Ten Eyck Tykes center established in 16 1991, was shut down in July; 17 The Downtown Day Care Center, which opened in 18 1968, closed in November. 19 And, the Seton Family Resource, which opened 20 in 1911, and is the oldest day-care center in 21 Albany County, will close in December. 22 Many other day-care centers have had to cut 23 classrooms and downsize staff. 24 These are small businesses that hire locally, 25 spend locally, and are part of the economic 1 infrastructure of their communities, hence a 2 negative domino effect for the Albany economy as a 3 whole. 4 In 2010, Westchester County cut 1.5 million 5 in child-care spending by eliminating the 6 Westchester County Child Care Scholarship Program 7 which assisted over 230 families, and freezing new 8 Title 20 child-care subsidies between 200 and 9 275 percent of the poverty level. 10 Since these cuts were implemented, day-care 11 centers have reported huge reductions in the 12 enrollment of subsidized families. 13 Classrooms have been closed, and many 14 facilities are on the brink of financial collapse. 15 Families unable to afford unsubsidized fees 16 have had no other choice but to place their children 17 in less-expensive, potentially dangerous, unlicensed 18 care. 19 The current proposal to raise the parent 20 share, from 15, to 35 percent, will further 21 exacerbate this trend. Families that earn 30,000 a 22 year, that currently pay $45 a week, would now pay 23 $104 per week in 2012. 24 Clearly, a rate increase of this magnitude is 25 untenable. 1 Finally, by making day care unaffordable to 2 low-paid workers, it will undermine a major goal of 3 welfare reform, which was, to make families 4 economically self-sustaining. 5 While we understand the difficulty of 6 balancing budgets in this painful economic 7 environment, we believe that cuts to child-care 8 assistance have been ill-advised. 9 Working families should not be placed in the 10 stressful position of having to scramble for 11 child care at the end of every -- of every county's 12 budget cycle. 13 In the short-term, additional funds need to 14 be allocated to day care throughout the state if the 15 present system is going to remain functional. 16 And in the long-term, we need to develop a 17 cohesive statewide system to ensure adequate funding 18 for child care. 19 The current patchwork, county-by-county 20 day-care funding system, is inequitable during the 21 best of times, and falls apart during economic 22 downturns. 23 Affordable child care is a necessary 24 component of economic development, it helps to move 25 low-income families up the social ladder, and it's 1 also important for young college-educated working 2 families. 3 It sustains local businesses by ensuring a 4 stable workforce, and promotes school readiness. 5 It is, therefore, an investment in the 6 state's economy that pays current and future 7 dividends, and, as such, deserves the State's full 8 support. 9 Thank you. 10 SENATOR SAVINO: Thank you, Mr. Milbert. 11 Your -- you raised a couple of important 12 points that I don't want to get lost. 13 HOWARD MILBERT: The [inaudible] is very 14 different than in -- 15 SENATOR SAVINO: Right -- 16 HOWARD MILBERT: -- down here in New York 17 City. 18 SENATOR SAVINO: -- I -- right, we don't want 19 it to get lost. 20 HOWARD MILBERT: So it feels a little -- 21 SENATOR SAVINO: And, you know, in bigger 22 issue of Early Learn, which is such a big problem 23 here in the city of New York. 24 But, it's -- I think it's important that 25 we -- that we do work on legislation this term, that 1 addresses the inequity in the funding formula, and 2 the eligibility requirements, and what parents are 3 required to pay in different parts of the state. 4 It should be a standardized as much as 5 possible. 6 And, we're capable of doing that. 7 We established a basic formula for child 8 support, and we've established, a basic formula for 9 post-marital maintenance. 10 So, we can do these things. 11 It's something I think the Committee will 12 work on, going forward, because, you can take into 13 consideration what they call "the area standard," in 14 different parts of the state, certainly providing 15 care. 16 And determining costs in New York City is 17 different than it is in Oneida, but there still 18 should be a formula that can be applied, so you 19 don't have these, you know, swings back and forth, 20 because, it doesn't make any sense. 21 But I want to thank you for coming down. 22 Where did you come down from? 23 HOWARD MILBERT: I was the closest. 24 Westchester. 25 SENATOR SAVINO: Oh, that's a hop, skip, and 1 a jump. 2 Thank you for coming, and sitting through, 3 and participating in today's hearings. 4 And, I want to thank all of the presenters 5 and all of the organizations that participated 6 today. 7 We will be certainly speaking to all of you 8 as we move forward on this issue. 9 Hopefully, we'll get some clarifications from 10 ACS. I have a whole set of new questions to send to 11 them. 12 And, I will share the responses with all of 13 the organizations that have been here today. 14 Thank you. 15 Thank you, everyone. 16 17 (Whereupon, at approximately 3:30 p.m., 18 the public hearing held before the New York State 19 Senate Standing Committee on Families and Children 20 concluded.) 21 22 ---oOo--- 23 24 25