Editor's note: This post originally appeared on New America's Early Education Initiative blog. Conor Williams recently joined the Early Education Initiative as a Senior Researcher. He's just completed a PhD in Government at Georgetown University, a degree he pursued after teaching first grade in Crown Heights, Brooklyn. Conor's research addresses the challenges immigrant families face in the American education system, educational equity as a means to increased social mobility, and the history of education in the United States.
In an era of Washington gridlock, there’s almost nothing quite as gratifying as seeing big policy changes that echo one’s recent arguments. Along those lines, Thursday was a great day for advocates of more and higher-quality child care in the United States. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced a new Obama administration proposal to raise the federal baseline for subsidized child care centers across the country.
She introduced the new rules at CentroNía, a bilingual community center in Washington, D.C. that includes early childhood programs, a PreK-5 charter school, and parent outreach initiatives.
The proposed rules would considerably improve American child care in three ways:
1) They would require states to raise child health and safety standards at child care centers. Before becoming licensed, child care providers would have to submit to criminal background checks and fingerprinting; enroll in training on safe sleep for babies, CPR, and first aid; and go through (unannounced) safety inspections.
2) They would allow parents more access to providers’ track records by posting these on websites. The rules would push states to develop systems for measuring the quality of care—and to take these quality metrics into account when setting reimbursement rates for public subsidies.
3) They would make child care subsidies more “family friendly.” Specifically, the rules would allow parents to continue receiving public child care subsidies if they lose their jobs and need coverage during their job search. What’s more, they would ask states to streamline application procedures.
During the press conference, Sebelius and other members of her team repeatedly noted that many parents believe that rules like these are already in place. Unfortunately this is not the case. State regulations for child care providers vary considerably. The proposal would address this by requiring states to update their regulations as a condition for accepting any of the $5 billion in annual federal subsidies for child care.
Why now? Why regulate instead of revamping CCDBG legislation? Secretary Sebelius offered this rationale:
Tragedies...do finally provide momentum for stronger regulations and more safety standards. I think it is always in tension—and we hear it constantly here in the nation’s capital—between the federal government reaching into state policies and practices and states wanting flexibility, but I think that there’s no question that 15 years and the fact that too many states have not actually voluntarily stepped up their standards, it’s clearly overdue that the federal floor be raised and incorporate what we know are best practices.
Furthermore, on page 17 of the proposal (.pdf), the HHS describes the changes as filling gaps in existing law:
In large part, the changes in this proposed rule articulate a set of expectations for how Lead Agencies are to satisfy certain requirements in the CCDBG Act, which the current regulations either only minimally address or where they remain altogether silent.
Regardless of their impetus, the proposed rules reflect a growing consensus among those who study child care in the United States. For instance, Brigid Schulte, a Schwartz Fellow here at New America, has been tracking the heavy bureaucratic barriers that prevent many low-income parents from getting child care subsidies (click here for her Washington Post coverage of the HHS press conference). This week, at a New America panel discussion of Jonathan Cohn’s recent New Republic piece, “The Hell of American Day Care,” Early Education Initiative Director Lisa Guernsey argued that American child care needs higher professional standards. Cohn, meanwhile, bemoaned the low quality and inconsistency of many state child care regulations. He noted that, in too many cases, weak regulations and inadequate enforcement have led to horrifying tragedies.
Clearly, the proposed rules could do much to allay these concerns, but they’re only a first step. During the press conference, Shannon Rudisill, Director of the HHS’ Office of Child Care, noted that further progress is limited by other constraints. For instance, the Obama Administration has requested additional funding for the Child Care and Development Fund for several years—to no avail. This money would expand access to high-quality child care and close the gap between public reimbursement rates and the total cost of child care for low-income families.
Nonetheless, it’s no use weeping for the best in the presence of the better. Early childhood advocates have good reason to be cheered by these new rules. As several speakers at the press conference noted, child safety is a prerequisite for excellent early childhood education.
The public has 77 days to comment on and make suggestions for improving the proposed rules (commenting ends on 08/05/2013). Comments are being accepted here.