www.eagletimes.com
2016-09-16 / Front Page New childcare licensing rules lead to closures By TORY JONES BONENFANT toryb@eagletimes.com SPRINGFIELD — New state rules that went into effect on Sept. 1 for child care providers are leading some to close their doors, while others are working on adapting to the changes. The new regulations governing child care centers and family providers are requiring that some individuals go back to school, send their employees into professional development, or shut down their business. Alisha Adams, acting president of the Vermont Child Care Association, said on Thursday, Sept. 15 that she has not surveyed nearby providers and does not have an exact number of how many are affected. “But it has been a concern,” she said. Adams said that she is aware of 11 programs closed in Franklin County, for instance, and a few in the Montpelier area. “The state is saying they will work with us,” she said. Adams has been in the childcare business for 23 years, and holds a master’s degree. She served on the state of Vermont’s rule-making committee, along with approximately 100 other child care providers, child care licensors, and other community stakeholders telecommuting from 12 regions throughout the state, to discuss best practices and recommendations before the new rules went into effect. Adams said that she feels that many of the public comments from child care providers during the public hearing sessions “were overlooked.” The closures are also affecting southeastern Vermont. Rachel Hunter, a child care provider in Springfield, said on Thursday that 11 child care programs, including in-home providers, in the Springfield Agency of Human Services district had closed or become unregulated since Sept. 1 because of the new regulations.That district stretches from Bellows Falls to Windsor, she said. “There are centers closing all over the state, too,” she said. In the Springfield AHS district, this equates to around 100 children without child care in an area that already had a shortage of childcare providers, according to Hunter. In White River Junction area, which is part of the Hartford AHS district, eight providers have closed, she said. Hunter is a home-based child care provider with 16 years of experience. She participates in the Springfield Building Bright Futures Regional Council and serves on an oversight committee for Vermont’s quality recognition and improvement system for early care and learning programs, and on the Blue Ribbon Commission on Financing High Quality, Affordable Child Care. The 133 pages of regulations took Vermont from "having minimal regulations to over-the-top regulations with no grandfathering or grace periods," she said. The new regulations have strict guidelines on the education level required for teachers, teacher associates, child care providers, teacher aides, trainees and other types of employees, according to rules published by the Vermont Agency of Human Services Department for Children and Families. The regulation manual has gone from a 27-page book to more than 100 pages of new regulations. That has caused concern among some providers that a lot of the new regulations are not measurable, and has some providers questioning how the state is going to regulate providers and enforce the lengthy new set of rules, she said. On the plus side, the state is providing a one-year grace period for providers who are not yet up to compliance. If the state finds someone not in compliance — only on new rules — it will “give guidance” instead of issuing a violation, just for that one year, she said. “So they really are trying to work with us. Vermont wants to be in the higher-quality realm,” Adams said. However, the resulting closures by individuals who feel they cannot go back to school or bring their programs up to compliance in the allotted time is still a big concern, she said. Adams said she has a colleague who has run a child care for more than 20 years “and has a great program, but no degree.” The state will not “grandfather” those without a degree, as it has done in the past, she said. “Some had to close, and others felt it was just too much,” she said. She knows of a few providers who will be going back to school, and said there is educational assistance available for those displaced providers, but for those already working 60 hours a week “that’s hard,” she said. Adams said she has spoken with her local legislative representative about the issue, but that the regulations were already approved and are now in effect. She also said she wishes the committee had been allotted more time to go through the lengthy set of new regulations. The good news is that there may be a way to advocate for children’s special or specific needs, even if they are prohibited by the new regulations, she said. For example, she knows a parent whose child will only sleep when swaddled, and due to new rules, the child can no longer be swaddled, and has not slept at the childcare center for a week as a result. For specific needs, Adams said that she recalls from the rule-making committee that there was initially a provision in which parents could potentially write a letter requesting exceptions. “So that may be an angle where we can advocate for parents’ rights,” she said. Adams said that she would “really push” for parents to act as advocates on behalf of their children, and contact local legislators to request exceptions for their children’s individual needs if it appears care providers would no longer be allowed to meet them. However, some providers are moving ahead with the regulations as an opportunity to further staff development and credentials. Heather-Lynn LaPlante, director of Suzy’s Little Peanuts in Springfield, said she is encouraging more staff to go through professional development programs in light of the new regulations. LaPlante said that resources are available through the Community College of Vermont (CCV) and the Vermont Child Care Industry and Careers Council (VCCICC), and that she plans to have most of her staff go through a two year education program offered through those two organizations. With that completed, they would be considered 3(A) on the early childhood career ladder, which they need to meet the new requirements, she said. Also, any staff hired before Aug. 31, 2016 has two years to complete the program. CCV also offers a child care certificate, and applicants can seek financial assistance through grants of up to $1,000, according to LaPlante. “So we have a little leeway,” she said. Additionally, the executive director of Suzy’s Little Peanuts has set up a director’s group in the area to provide directors under her supervision with additional information on the new laws, LaPlante said. The updated Vermont licensing regulations for center-based child care and preschool programs, which govern child care facilities, is a revision of two sets of regulations: Early Childhood Program Licensing Regulations from February 2001, and Children’s Day Care Licensing Regulations for Non‐ Recurring Clientele, from October 1996. Combined, they are known as Center Based Child Care and Preschool Programs. The combined regulations “create consistency in basic standards for all center‐based settings and include reasonable accommodations for specific settings,” according to the regulations booklet. The regulations include sections on licensing, monitoring, safety, emergency preparedness, non-discrimination, disease management, parent communication and background checks, among other aspects.
Thank god for Rachel Hunter what would the world of child care be without her.
ReplyDeleteI got snagged for a second on the phrase 'or go unregulated'. Meaning there are more of those now?
ReplyDeleteI'm sure that these new state rules didn't come completely out of the blue. I'm sure these organizations had plenty of advanced warning to comply with the new regulations. Plus, I think the one-year grace period is pretty generous.
ReplyDeleteThe rules pretty much did come out of the blue. They require experienced, capable child-care people, possibly with extensive course-work under their belt and state CDA certifications kept up to date, to now enter college (or return there), on their time, to obtain an associate or bachelor degree. It's not clear anything was broken to warrant this complicated, difficult, one-size-fits-all fix.
ReplyDeleteWhen I moved to Vermont, I had to find child care for my 5-year-old. His previous setting was an urban, parent-controlled day care with excellent staff. Two weeks after I placed him at a home day care, he told me he didn't like it. It was run by a woman who had three other kids in a room with the TV on all the time, something that hadn't been featured in the initial visit. I changed day cares.
ReplyDeleteThese rules set a bar for people like her to clear before they hang out their shingle.
Someone with a degree might still ignore children in their care. How does requiring 2 or 4-year college degrees fix that, or the situation you describe?
DeleteIt eliminates the person who will lay mattresses on her living room floor, smoke and watch TV all day with five or six kids of other parents who are working their second of three jobs, the sort of situation I used to encounter in my work.
DeleteAll of us grow up believing our childhood was more or less typical of everybody else's. When somebody proposes that day care providers have a certain minimum level of education, we tend to think of that being imposed on the babysitter who cared for us, rather than the caretakers of today's children.
It requires a liberal stretch of the imagination to imagine children who didn't get as good a nurturing as we did. It also requires that we have a curiosity about the development of children and an inclination to ponder what is good for Vermont and America.
Children who are not exposed to the possibility of developing their attention span (the anti-TV habit), indulging their curiosity, and safely experimenting in actions and consequences in the first five years of their life are usually left on the back burner for the rest of their life. Day care needs to be as good as or better than the parents expect.
In Bolivia, peasants care for laborers' children consists of taking them along to the marketplace to sit in the stall like stuffed dolls as the peasant tries to sell her wares. Of course the children also grow up to be peasants, which is pretty much what we can expect if our children's day care is not held to higher standards.
There have to be rules for day care, but there also has to be a balance. Over regulation and the bureaucracy it supports and creates have made VT one of the unfriendliest States for business. Affordable day care is hard to find. The new rules force more costs on the providers so likely costs will rise at the centers that stay open. Meanwhile taxes keep going up to pay for a lot of State workers who come up with these kind of rules, and then track and administer them. These kinds of overbuilt bureaucracies affect almost every facet of our businesses and our personal lives. Obviously oversight and regulation is necessary, just saying there needs to be a better balance.
DeleteIf businesses were more "employee friendly" there would be little need for "affordable child care" since they would be cared for by a parent, and not an overworked, underpaid staff or by some lazy slob who sticks them in front of a TV. My family was never rich, but my dad made enough to allow my mom to stay home and raise us. It is really insane that we are even having conversations about who will raise our kids. Think about it.
Delete@ 7:09, What you have witness is the exodus of technology sector jobs in Vermont due to over regulation, taxes and inability to attract young professionals. These jobs are likely gone for good. The future is packing rutabagas, farmer's markets, unskilled assembly lines and loading ski lifts. You just need to lower your standard of living. Or, you could vote out your state representatives and senators this fall that created this plight. But I bet you really don't care enough.
DeleteHey 1:40, I upped my standard of living, UP YOURS! It was corporate greed and supply side economics that destroyed this town, along with the country. The reason my father made enough money to allow my mom to raise me? THE UNION! You are the one who votes for the problem!
DeleteI have to agree with Chuck on this one (gasp!) After all, a degree is required to teach children; caring for them is a much greater responsibility. Although a degree, or lack of one, would not necessarily make a difference, I would feel a whole lot better knowing the staff caring for my child have an education.
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with Chuck, and the horse he is riding. There was already sufficient regulation, just inadequate enforcement. The situation he describes is obviously both substandard and illegal. Adding the college education requirement to existing regulations is grotesque, even for Vermont.
ReplyDeleteSo, who wants to raise taxes to have better enforcement, and who wants to have the providers ensure their own competence by paying out of their own pocket for an education? You can't have it neither way...
ReplyDeleteEducation and enforcement are not on the same page. There'll be just as much to enforce with people holding degrees.
ReplyDeleteActually, no, there won't.
Delete