BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2592|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2592
Author: Buchanan (D), et al
Amended: 8/4/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 5-2, 6/23/10
AYES: Romero, Alquist, Liu, Price, Simitian
NOES: Huff, Emmerson
NO VOTE RECORDED: Hancock, Wyland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 7-4, 8/12/10
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Corbett, Leno, Price, Wolk, Yee
NOES: Ashburn, Emmerson, Walters, Wyland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 50-27, 6/3/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Early Learning Quality Improvement Rating Scale
Pilot
Program
SOURCE : Preschool California
DIGEST : This bill requires the California Department of
Education to implement an early learning quality rating
scale, including a pilot program, that measures the quality
of early child care and education providers and facilities
until June 30, 2017.
ANALYSIS : SB 1629 (Steinberg), Chapter 207, Statutes of
2008, established the Early Learning Quality Improvement
CONTINUED
AB 2592
Page
2
System Advisory Committee (advisory committee), comprised
of 13 members, for the purpose of developing the policy and
implementation plan for an Early Learning Quality
Improvement System (quality rating scale). The advisory
committee was required to submit an interim report in 2009,
and is required to submit a final report by December 31,
2010.
The advisory committee held a number of meetings in
different locations throughout the state in 2009 and issued
a preliminary report in January of 2010. The advisory
committee focused its work mainly on two of the four
elements of quality required to be considered and learned
about existing local systems as well as features of systems
from 19 other states. According to the report, some of the
common elements found in the quality rating and improvement
systems from other states include standards, accountability
measures, program and practitioner outreach and support,
financing incentives, and parent/consumer education.
According to the repot, some of the lessons learned from
other states' experience include:
1.Conduct a pilot and have the training for the rating
infrastructure in place before implementing the quality
rating system statewide.
2.Set clear standards from the outset of the rating system.
3.Use environment rating scales as a core element of the
quality rating system, although they can be expensive to
administer.
4.Determine who should conduct the quality ratings,
recognizing that this is a key decision.
5.Accompany ratings with financial incentives and technical
assistance, given that participation in most quality
rating systems is voluntary, and that providers are
taking some risk to be rated.
The advisory committee has approved a preliminary general
design of a quality rating system featuring a non-weighted
block system. Six quality elements - family involvement,
ratios and group size, environment rating scales, staff
AB 2592
Page
3
education and training, teaching and learning, and program
leadership - makeup the evaluation components. According
to the report, all the quality criteria in each tier need
to be accomplished to obtain that rating, and the criteria
included in each tier builds upon those in previous blocks.
The interim report stresses that what has been developed is
not final. The advisory committee is scheduled to complete
a design structure of the quality rating system in 2010.
On November 16, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger issued
Executive Order S-23-09, which established the California
State Council on Early Childhood Education and Care for the
purpose of submitting an application for American Recover
and Reinvestment Head Start funding by August 1, 2010.
This executive order cites the requirement that states have
an advisory council pursuant to the federal Improving Head
Start for School Readiness Act of 2007. This advisory
council is comprised of the Early Learning Quality
Improvement System Advisory Committee members plus five
additional representatives.
This bill requires the California Department of Education
(CDE) to implement an early learning quality rating scale,
including a pilot program, until June 30, 2017.
Specifically, this bill:
1.Requires the CDE to implement a quality rating scale
based on the final recommendations developed by the Early
Learning Quality Improvement System Advisory Committee
that reflects the cultural and linguistic diversity of
California's young children.
2.Requires the quality rating scale to be implemented on a
pilot basis, with the sunset date of June 30, 2017.
3.Authorizes the quality rating scale to do any or all of
the following:
A. Measure the quality of services of an early care
and education provider. Measurements may include,
but are not limited to, the following characteristics
of the children and families:
AB 2592
Page
4
(1) Socioeconomic demographics.
(2) Ethnic, linguistic, and cultural
demographics.
(3) The providers' demonstrated ability to
address the learning needs of English learners and
children with disabilities.
B. Measure elements of quality in an early care and
education program and facility that include, but are
not limited to, the following:
(1) Quality of the learning environment.
(2) Quality of adult-child interactions.
(3) Adult-to-child ratios.
(4) Provider's education, experience, and
professional qualifications, including those
recognized by the Commission on Teacher
Credentialing.
(5) Parent and family involvement.
C. The elements of quality will be used to measure
and assess various early care and education providers
and programs and to determine childrens' outcomes.
D. Inform parents and other consumers of early care
and education services about the quality of a
facility in a simple and easy to understand manner.
4.Requires the CDE to develop criteria for the selection of
an early care and education providers and facilities to
participate in the pilot program. Requires the CDE to
ensure that the providers and facilities selected are
geographically diverse and provide services to low income
children, children with special needs, and English
learners.
5.Requires the California State Advisory Council on Early
Childhood Education and Care (advisor council) to do all
of the following:
A. Conduct an annual review of the pilot program and
provide ongoing recommendations for the improvement
of the quality rating scale.
AB 2592
Page
5
B. Develop criteria to be used to evaluate the pilot
program.
C. Select an evaluator to conduct an evaluation of
the pilot program established pursuant to this bill.
D. Submit the evaluation to the appropriate policy
committees of the Legislature on or before January 1,
2016.
6.Requires the CDE to develop and implement any rules and
regulations necessary for the implementation of this
bill.
7.Prohibits this bill from being implemented unless federal
early care and education funds are provided for the
purposes of this bill.
9.Sunsets the provisions of this bill on June 30, 2017,
and, as of January 1, 2018, is repealed, unless a later
enacted statute, that becomes operative on or before
January 1, 2018, deletes or extends the dates on which it
becomes inoperative and is repealed.
Comments
License-exempt child care providers must be fingerprinted
and meet background check requirements, but are not
required to meet education or training requirements,
staffing ratios, and are not monitored or overseen by the
state. This bill does not include license-exempt child
care providers in the quality rating scale.
California has a system of reimbursement rates that does
not always incentivize providers to improve program quality
(e.g., child care programs in high-cost counties that meet
only basic health and safety requirements can earn higher
reimbursement rates than child care and development
programs that meet higher standards). In addition, child
care providers need education and training in order to
improve the quality of programs. These issues are
longstanding but remain unresolved.
AB 2592
Page
6
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12
2012-13 Fund
Quality rating scale Likely in the millions, pending
the final Federal
pilot evaluation of the
advisory committee
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/16/10)
Preschool California (source)
Advancement Project
Association of California School Administrators
AT&T
Bay Area Council
Berliner Cohen - Attorneys at Law
Business-Education Alliance of Merced County
California Business for Education Excellence
California Child Development Administrators Association
California Community Foundation
California Federation of Teachers
California Head Start Association
California Kindergarten Association
California State Parent Teacher Association
Children Now
County of Los Angeles
D&D Associates Management Consultants
Delhi Unified School District
Family Resource Council
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids
First Five California
Fresno County Office of Education
Leap/Carpenter/Kemps Insurance Agency
Livingston Union School District
Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
Los Angeles Preschool Advocacy Initiative
Memorial Hospital Los Banos
Merced City School District Preschool Program
Merced County Board of Supervisors
AB 2592
Page
7
Merced County Department of Workforce Investment
Merced County District Attorney
Merced County Economic Development Corporation
Merced County Office of Education
Options - A Child Care and Human Services Agency
Orange County Department of Education
Policy Roundtable for Child Care
Sacramento County Office of Education
Santa Clara County Office of Education
San Diego Regional Economic Development Corporation
San Diego County Office of Education
San Mateo County Office of Education
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
United Way of Merced County
University of California, Merced
Worldcolor
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/16/10)
Child Care Providers United
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
"this bill is necessary for California to compete for $9
billion from the federal Early Learning Challenge Fund
(ELCF) proposed by President Obama as part of the 2011
budget. This competitive grant proposal challenges states
to develop effective, innovative models to raise quality
through high standards, incentivizing excellence, and
focusing on outcomes. Draft legislation in Congress (HR
3221, Miller) has identified the Quality Rating Scale (QRS)
as the primary vehicle for early learning systems change,
and it is likely to be a requirement for states to complete
for the ELCF, which could mean from $100 million to $200
million a year for California to implement in QRS."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Child Care Providers United is
opposed to this bill because they believe that there are
many significant issues that still need to be addressed.
They believe that this bill is premature since the final
ELQIS report is due to the Legislature on December 31 of
this year, and, if this bill were to become law, it would
not have the benefit of the final recommendations in the
report.
AB 2592
Page
8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Bass, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles
Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De
Leon, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani,
Galgiani, Hall, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman,
Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Monning,
Nava, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas,
Saldana, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres,
Torrico, Yamada, John A. Perez
NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Blakeslee, Conway,
Cook, DeVore, Emmerson, Fletcher, Fuller, Gaines,
Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Harkey, Jeffries, Knight,
Logue, Miller, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, Silva,
Smyth, Tran, Villines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Tom Berryhill, Audra Strickland, Vacancy
CPM:cm 8/17/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****