Part 20.
TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION
Chapter 809.
CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT
The Texas Workforce Commission (Commission) adopts amendments to the
following sections of Chapter 809, relating to Child Care and Development
without changes to the proposed text as published in the December 30, 2005,
issue of the
Texas Register
(30 TexReg 8828):
Subchapter B, General Management, §809.14
Subchapter C, Requirements to Provide Child Care, §809.42
Subchapter K, Funds Management, §809.231
The Texas Workforce Commission (Commission) adopts amendments to the following
section of Chapter 809, relating to Child Care and Development with changes
to the proposed text as published in the December 30, 2005, issue of the
Subchapter B, General Management, §809.15
The Commission adopts the repeal of the following section of Chapter 809,
relating to Child Care and Development without changes to the proposal as
published in the December 30, 2005, issue of the
Texas Register
(30 TexReg 8828):
Subchapter C, Requirements to Provide Child Care, §809.49
PART I. PURPOSE, BACKGROUND, AND AUTHORITY
PART II. EXPLANATION OF INDIVIDUAL PROVISIONS WITH COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
PART I. PURPOSE, BACKGROUND, AND AUTHORITY
Subchapter C. Requirements to Provide Child Care
The Commission adopts the repeal of §809.49, relating to parent advisory
groups. Among other changes, House Bill (HB) 2961, enacted by the 79th Texas
Legislature, Regular Session (2005), repealed Texas Human Resources Code §44.002(c),
which required licensed child care centers to have a parent advisory committee
if more than 30 percent of a center's licensed capacity was purchased through
the child care subsidy system. The repeal became effective immediately upon
signature of the Governor on May 27, 2005. As a result of the repeal, Commission
rule §809.49, which requires licensed child care centers to have a Parent
Advisory Group, is no longer necessary.
Subchapter B. General Management and Subchapter K. Funds Management
The Commission adopts §809.14 and §809.15, relating to promoting
consumer education and other quality improvement activities, respectively,
in order to describe the allowable consumer education and other quality improvement
activities that Local Workforce Development Boards (Boards) may fund with
Commission child care funds. The Commission also adopts §809.231, relating
to provider reimbursement rates, in order to include providers participating
in certain school readiness models as eligible to receive a higher graduated
reimbursement rate for the provision of direct child care services consistent
with recent actions by the 79th Texas Legislature (2005).
The federal Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) statute (42 U.S.C. §9858(e))
requires that at least four percent of the funds each state receives be expended
on allowable quality activities as set forth in the CCDF regulations (45 C.F.R. §98.51(a)).
These quality activities include:
- providing comprehensive consumer education to parents and the public;
- increasing parental choice; and
- improving the quality and availability of child care.
Until September 1, 2001, the Commission passed down the federal requirement
for quality expenditures to each Local Workforce Development Board (Board).
At that time, Commission rule §800.58 required that each Board use at
least four percent of its total annual child care expenditures on quality
activities. The intent of the rule was to ensure that the state would meet
the federal four percent quality set-aside.
In 2001, the Legislature determined that much of the state's four percent
quality expenditure requirement could be met through the child care licensing
and monitoring activities conducted by the Texas Department of Family and
Protective Services (DFPS), and appropriated CCDF dollars to DFPS for licensing
and monitoring activities. This action signaled a strategic shift in responsibility
for fulfilling the federal quality requirements from the Commission--whose
subsidized child care activities typically are limited to about 12 percent
of the total regulated child care market--to DFPS--whose licensing and monitoring
activities affect the entire range of the regulated child care market. Since
State Fiscal Year 2002 (SFY'02), the Legislature has continued to appropriate
CCDF dollars to DFPS, and the state has relied primarily on those expenditures
to meet the federal four percent quality requirement.
As a result of the Legislature's decision to rely primarily on DFPS licensing
and monitoring activities to meet the federal quality requirement, the Commission's
quality performance measures relating to professional development training
and Texas Rising Star (TRS) Provider certification were reduced and eventually
eliminated by the Legislature.
Based on the funding appropriated by the Legislature for each year beginning
with SFY'02, and the corresponding annual targets for average number of children
served per day assigned by the Legislative Budget Board, the Commission and
the Boards have had to use the majority of CCDF funds appropriated to the
Agency, including the quality earmarked funds, for direct child care subsidies.
The Boards have also continued to fund direct quality child care through higher
reimbursement rates for TRS providers. The Legislature clearly intended that
the Commission focus on providing direct subsidized child care as a support
service for parents who are transitioning from welfare or who are at risk
of becoming dependent on welfare, consistent with the federal direction at
CCDF's creation in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation
Act of 1996. Only minimal amounts of child care funds have been available
each year at the state and local levels for nondirect quality child care services.
To the extent that funds are available in excess of those required to meet
legislative performance targets for direct child care services, the Legislature
enacted several laws in 2003 and 2005 that focus those quality expenditures
on certain activities that prepare children for school. Senate Bill (SB) 280,
enacted by the 78th Texas Legislature, Regular Session (2003), amended Chapter
2308 of the Texas Government Code by adding §2308.319, which encourages
Boards to use local funds for collaborative reading initiatives.
Also in 2003, the Legislature enacted SB 76, amending Chapter 29 of the
Texas Education Code to encourage the coordination and integration of early
childhood development and child care programs and the creation of a school
readiness rating system. The law charges the State Center for Early Childhood
Development (State Center) with establishing pilot sites where child care,
prekindergarten, and Head Start entities may coordinate and share information,
facilities, and resources. It also charges the State Center with designing
a school readiness rating system that determines whether an early childhood
program is preparing children for kindergarten. As a result of SB 76, the
State Center established 11 Texas Early Education Model (TEEM) pilot sites
across the state. In 2005, the Legislature increased funding for the State
Center and expanded the TEEM pilots.
Article IX, Rider 14.36 of the General Appropriations Act, 79th Legislature
(2005), states:
School Readiness Model. Out of federal funds appropriated to the Texas
Workforce Commission in Strategies A.3.1, TANF Choices Child Care; A.3.2,
Transitional Child Care; and A.3.3, At-risk Child Care, up to $50 million
for the biennium shall be made available to child care providers participating
in integrated school readiness models developed by the State Center for Early
Childhood Development at the University of Texas Health Science Center. This
initiative shall be implemented in a way to avoid any decline in the number
of children receiving child care during the 2006 - 2007 biennium.
These legislative actions provide a framework for the legislative emphasis
on preparing children for school.
Texas Government Code §531.0312 designates the Texas Information and
Referral Network/2-1-1 Texas (2-1-1 Texas) operated by the Texas Health and
Human Services Commission (HHSC) as the single point of coordination for statewide
information and referral services. Because 2-1-1 Texas is the state's designated
entity for information and referral services, the Commission contracts with
HHSC to provide comprehensive child care information and referral services
to parents and the general public through 2-1-1 Texas.
Additionally, the 79th Texas Legislature, Regular Session (2005), enacted
HB 2048 that directs HHSC expand its 2-1-1 Texas Web site to include information
on all available public and private child care and early education services
in order to provide the public with an accessible online statewide database.
HB 2048 amends §531.0312 of the Texas Government Code to require Boards,
independent school districts, and the Texas Head Start Collaboration Office
to provide 2-1-1 Texas with eligibility and availability information on their
respective services.
Therefore, based on the actions of the Legislature, the Commission adopts §809.15,
relating to quality improvement activities, to provide that, to the extent
that funds are available for quality improvement activities, the Boards may
fund quality improvement activities designed to promote the following:
(1) collaborative reading initiatives;
(2) school readiness, early learning, and literacy; and
(3) support for child care consumer education through 2-1-1 Texas.
The Commission also adopts §809.14, relating to consumer education,
to include provisions relating to recent actions of the 79th Texas Legislature
regarding the Texas Information and Referral System and the 2-1-1 Texas system,
as well as to provide consumer education relating to school readiness and
early learning. Further, the Commission adopts §809.231 in order to include
child care providers participating in the State Center's school readiness
models in the Commission's tiered reimbursement rates.
PART II. EXPLANATION OF INDIVIDUAL PROVISIONS WITH COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
(Note: Minor editorial changes are made throughout Chapter 809, Subchapters
B, C, and K, that do not change the meaning of the rules and, therefore, are
not discussed in the Explanation of Individual Provisions.)
SUBCHAPTER C. REQUIREMENTS TO PROVIDE CHILD CARE
§809.49. Provider Advisory Groups.
The Commission adopts the repeal of §809.49, requiring licensed child
care centers to establish a Parent Advisory Group, as previously provided
in §44.002(c) of the Texas Human Resources Code. HB 2961 repealed §44.002
of the Texas Human Resources Code, thereby removing the statutory requirement
for parent advisory committees.
The Commission received no comments on the proposed repeal.
SUBCHAPTER B. GENERAL MANAGEMENT
§809.14. Promoting Consumer Education.
As provided by 42 U.S.C §9858(e) and further delineated in 45 C.F.R. §98.33(a),
the Commission is required to certify that it collects and disseminates to
parents and the general public consumer education information that promotes
informed child care choices by parents. At a minimum, this information shall
include information about the full range of child care providers available
and health and safety requirements. Since December 2003, the Commission has
contracted with HHSC to provide comprehensive child care information and referral
services to parents and the general public through the statewide 2-1-1 Texas
system. The amendments to §809.14 are designed to enhance the 2-1-1 Texas
system relating to child care by requiring Boards to refer parents--including
those who are not eligible or are no longer eligible for subsidized child
care--to the 2-1-1 Texas system for child care information. The adopted rules
also require Boards to include information concerning child care programs
designed to improve school readiness, early learning, and literacy as part
of the Boards' consumer education information.
The Commission adopts §809.14(a) to require Boards to provide consumer
education information to parents who are eligible for Commission-funded child
care services; parents who are placed on a Board's waiting list; parents who
are no longer eligible for Commission-funded child care services; and applicants
who are not eligible for Commission-funded child care services. The Commission
adopts this provision in order to ensure that the Boards' child care consumer
education is provided to as broad a population as possible. Additionally,
the Commission believes that the requirement to provide consumer education
information to parents no longer eligible for Commission-funded child care
services further reinforces the requirements of §302.0046(b) of the Texas
Labor Code and §809.72(6)(A) of this chapter, which require Boards to
provide information regarding other child care services to parents whose children
have been removed from care in order to serve a child in a priority group.
The Commission adopts §809.14(b) to describe what the consumer education
information shall contain. The new §809.14(b)(1) states that the consumer
information shall include information about the Texas Information and Referral
Network/2-1-1 Texas information and referral system. This requirement is consistent
with recent legislative direction that child care information and referral
be provided by 2-1-1 Texas.
The new §809.14(b)(2) states that the consumer education information
shall also contain the Web site and telephone number of DFPS, so parents may
obtain health and safety requirements, including information on the prevention
and control of infectious diseases (including immunizations), building and
physical premises safety, minimum health and safety training appropriate to
the provider setting, and the regulatory compliance history of child care
providers. Because DFPS is the designated entity for the State of Texas to
regulate child care providers, the Commission believes that the consumer information
shall direct parents to the DFPS Web site and phone number to obtain this
information. The Agency has reviewed the DFPS Web site and has determined
that it contains the information required by federal child care regulations
regarding health and safety. Although not required by the adopted rules, the
Commission encourages Boards to review periodically the information provided
on the DFPS Web site and provide printed material from the Web site to parents.
Adopted §809.14(b)(3) requires that the consumer education information
provide a description of the full range of eligible child care providers meeting
the requirements set forth in §809.41 of this chapter, including the
option for parents to choose self-arranged care. The Commission includes this
in order to implement the federal child care requirement in 45 C.F.R. 98.33(a),
which states that parents be provided information on the full range of providers
available to them.
Adopted §809.14(b)(4) requires that the consumer education information
also include a description of programs available in the local workforce development
area (workforce area) relating to school readiness and quality rating systems,
including the school readiness models developed by the State Center, and the
TRS criteria. The Commission includes this provision in order to emphasize
the direction of the Legislature, particularly Article IX, Rider 14.36 of
the 2005 General Appropriations Act, relating to school readiness, early learning,
and literacy. The Commission includes a description of the TRS criteria because
the TRS system is provided for in state law pursuant to Texas Government Code §2308.315.
Finally, the Commission adopts §809.14(c) requiring Boards to cooperate
with HHSC to provide 2-1-1 Texas with information, as determined by HHSC,
for inclusion in the 2-1-1 Texas statewide information and referral network.
The Commission adopts this in order to implement the provisions of HB 2048,
enacted by the 79th Texas Legislature (2005), which amends §531.0312
of the Texas Government Code to require Boards to provide 2-1-1 Texas with
eligibility and availability information on their respective services.
Comment: One commenter supported the efforts to educate the public about
the 2-1-1 Texas information system and supports the use of CCDF funds for
the statewide development of a fully functioning 2-1-1 Texas system for child
care information. In addition, the commenter supported providing consumer
education information to the broadest population.
Response: The Commission agrees with the comment and appreciates the support
of the rules.
Comment: One commenter inquired if §809.14 requires only that customers
be referred to 2-1-1 Texas and if the referral could be provided orally.
Response: The information required in §809.14(b) encompasses more
than an oral referral to 2-1-1 Texas. The consumer information details the
contact information for DFPS so parents may obtain health and safety information,
a description of the full range of eligible child care providers, and a description
of programs available in the workforce area relating to school readiness and
quality rating systems, as well as information on 2-1-1 Texas. The Commission's
intent is that this consumer information be provided in writing.
Comment: One commenter stated that the consumer education information should
also include information on existing child care programs that already meet
or exceed the school readiness criteria outside of the school readiness models.
Response: The Commission appreciates the comment and emphasizes that the
school readiness models currently being tested by the State Center represent
the first step in the development of a school readiness rating system. When
fully developed and implemented, the school readiness rating system is expected
to include school readiness programs that may not currently be participating
in the TEEM pilots. The language in §809.14(b)(4) is designed to anticipate
the development of a statewide school readiness and quality rating system.
Comment: One commenter stated that the Board will bear a financial cost
of replacing existing consumer guides with the new consumer education information
and asked if the new requirements could be implemented once the existing guides
have been depleted.
Response: The Commission does not believe that this requirement will result
in additional costs for the Boards. The previous rules required Boards to
update the consumer guides on a regular basis with information on individual
child care providers in their workforce areas. By removing the requirement
to provide information on individual providers, the Commission believes that
the amount of consumer information will be reduced, which will result in reduced
overall costs for the Boards. The Commission intends that the new requirements
for consumer education be implemented as soon as practicable following the
date these rules become effective.
Comment: One commenter requested guidance on whether the information related
to quality rating systems applies to state accreditation from the State Center,
the National Association for the Education of Young Children, or other accreditation.
Response: The Commission appreciates the commenter's request for guidance
on including quality rating systems information. The rules require information
related only to the school readiness models developed by the State Center
and information related to TRS. However, Boards may include information related
to other school readiness and quality rating systems that may exist within
each workforce area.
§809.15. Quality Improvement Activities.
The Commission adopts amendments to §809.15, relating to quality improvement
activities, in order to align the allowable quality child care activities
with the legislative direction relating to collaborative reading initiatives;
school readiness, early learning, and literacy; and support for 2-1-1 Texas.
The new §809.15(a) states that local public transferred funds and local
private donated funds, as well as child care funds allocated to the Boards
under Chapter 800, Subchapter B of this title (including the CCDF quality
earmarked funds), to the extent used for nondirect care quality activities,
may only be used for:
- collaborative reading initiatives;
- school readiness, early learning, and literacy; and
- local-level support to promote child care consumer education provided
by 2-1-1 Texas.
During the rule development process, several Boards requested clarification
from the Commission concerning the types of activities that may be funded
to support collaborative reading, school readiness, early learning, and literacy.
The Boards noted that professional development and training, as well as the
purchase of resource materials and curriculum for professional development,
are key components in providing early learning and literacy activities for
children. The Commission adopts §809.15(b) to allow professional development
and training for child care providers as well as the purchase of curriculum
and curriculum-related resources, provided that the professional development
and training and curriculum and related resources are designed to support
collaborative reading initiatives, school readiness, early learning, and literacy.
In order to provide additional guidance to the Boards, the Commission offers
the following guidelines and examples of the types of activities that may
be funded to support the allowable quality initiatives. It is the Commission's
intention that Boards be allowed to expend quality dollars for professional
development and training using research-based curriculum, as well as the purchase
of resource materials that support a print-rich environment designed to aid
in the early learning and literacy development of children. Examples of activities
to support collaborative reading initiatives, school readiness, early learning,
and literacy include, but are not limited to:
- professional development relating to early learning workshops;
- Center for Improving the Readiness of Children for Learning and Education
(CIRCLE) Train the Trainer training;
- literacy kits for child care providers;
- school readiness, early learning, and literacy awareness campaigns;
- scholarships for college courses relating to early learning, literacy,
and school readiness; and
- training using research-based curriculum approved by the State Board
of Education, Texas Education Agency, or recognized by the State Center.
It is not the intention of the Commission that Boards use quality dollars
to purchase classroom consumable materials such as pencils, crayons, or art
supplies. While the Commission recognizes that these materials are a supporting
element that aid in a child's progress toward school readiness, the Commission
believes that quality dollars should be targeted toward building the infrastructure
necessary to provide early education professionals with the training, curriculum,
and curriculum-related resources needed to promote school readiness, early
learning, and literacy.
During the rule development process, several Boards expressed concern that
the focus on school readiness, early learning, and literacy would lead Boards
to direct quality dollars toward preschool children and away from infants
and toddlers. In the preamble to the proposed rules, the Commission emphasized
that Boards would not be limited to funding quality activities only for preschool.
The Commission believes that the proposed rules provide Boards with the flexibility
to fund early learning and literacy activities for all age groups, including
infants and toddlers.
However, in response to concerns addressed through public comment, the
Commission has added new §809.15(c), which explicitly allows Boards to
fund quality improvement activities designed to meet the needs of children
in any age group eligible for Commission-funded child care, as well as children
with disabilities. The Commission intends to allow Boards the flexibility
to fund collaborative reading initiatives and school readiness, early learning,
and literacy activities that meet the specific needs of any target population
or age group within each workforce area.
New §809.15(d) allows Boards to give priority in funding allowable
nondirect child care quality activities to child care facilities:
- participating in the integrated school readiness models developed by
the State Center;
- implementing components of school readiness curricula approved by the
State Center; or
- participating in or voluntarily pursuing TRS Provider certification.
The Commission includes these provisions to address concerns by the Boards
that they will not be able to continue providing appropriate professional
development activities designed to promote the TEEM model or TRS certification.
The adopted §809.15(e) states that expenditures certified by a public
entity may include expenditures for any quality improvement activity described
in 45 C.F.R. §98.51. The Commission included this subsection to allow
public entities and the Boards the flexibility to use the maximum amount of
public expenditures allowed under federal regulations.
The Commission adopts the removal of §809.15(a) requiring Boards to
ensure that providers receive orientation, technical assistance, and ongoing
training to improve the quality of child care. The Legislative Budget Board
has eliminated the Commission's quality performance measure relating to professional
development training; therefore, the Commission finds this requirement is
no longer necessary in Commission rules.
The Commission also adopts the removal of §809.15(b) requiring that
Boards recognize TRS providers. However, the Commission clarifies that Boards
are not prohibited from providing professional development and training to
TRS providers. As mentioned previously, the Commission includes provisions
in §809.15(b) and §809.15(c)(2) in order to include professional
development training to TRS providers.
The Commission adopts the removal of §809.15(c) requiring Boards to
provide quality activities described in 45 C.F.R. §98.51. This provision
is removed in order to emphasize that child care funds, to the extent used
for quality child care activities, shall be directed at activities described
in adopted §809.15(a).
Finally, the Commission adopts the removal of §809.15(d) allowing
Boards to establish other voluntary criteria for improving quality. The Commission
removes this provision to emphasize that child care funds, to the extent used
for quality child care activities, shall be directed at activities described
in the adopted §809.15(a).
Comment: Five commenters supported the emphasis and focus on school readiness.
Response: The Commission thanks the commenters for their support.
Comment: One commenter was supportive of the Commission's emphasizing that
Boards are not limited to funding quality activities targeted to serving preschool
age children.
Response: The Commission appreciates the commenter's support.
Comment: One commenter supported the Commission's efforts to increase the
number of three- and four-year-olds who have access to quality child care
and early education.
Response: The Commission agrees and appreciates the commenter's support.
Comment: Ten commenters urged the Commission to continue to support quality
child care for all children, including those between birth and three years
of age, as well as children with disabilities. Two of the commenters expressed
concern that under the proposed rules quality improvement activities geared
toward infants and toddlers will not be promoted and the term "school readiness
activities" implies a primary focus on three- and four-year-olds. Other commenters
noted that meaningful professional development opportunities for child care
providers are an essential factor in improving the quality of child care.
The commenters also noted that specific training in the areas of serving children
with disabilities, infants, and toddlers must be included in professional
development activities. Additionally, one commenter recommended that the proposed
rule changes include language specifying that quality activities will be designed
to meet the needs of children of all ages receiving child care services.
Response: The Commission agrees and adds new §809.15(c) stating that
allowable activities may be designed to meet the needs of any age group eligible
for Commission-funded child care services, including children with disabilities.
The Commission believes that the skills of each age group build upon each
other and early learning, literacy, and school readiness activities should
not be geared toward one specific age group.
Additionally, the Commission emphasizes that the rule provides Boards with
the flexibility to fund early learning, literacy, and school readiness activities
for children with disabilities. The Commission encourages Boards to explore
professional development opportunities for child care providers that focus
on strategies to assist children with disabilities in becoming prepared to
enter school.
Comment: Five commenters noted that in the past Boards have utilized CCDF
funds for caregiver training specifically related to the unique needs of infants
and toddlers, including training on topics such as brain development and shaken
baby syndrome.
Response: The Commission agrees that funds may be used for caregiver training
to meet the needs of infants and toddlers. The Commission believes that elements
of brain development training are related to early learning and would be allowable
activities. However, training specific to shaken baby syndrome is related
to health and safety and is a requirement for child care licensing. Therefore,
it is the Commission's understanding that funding for training related to
health and safety requirements would be provided through DFPS.
Comment: One commenter stated that investing in young children, starting
at birth, to help them develop to their full potential, impacts the long-term
economic outlook for all communities and that the TRS program is an important
component in meeting those needs.
Response: The Commission agrees that investing in young children impacts
the long-term economic outlook for communities. The proposed rules do not
change the TRS program, which remains intact.
Comment: Eleven commenters noted that Boards need to have local flexibility
in designing quality improvement activities that meet the unique needs of
their workforce areas. The commenters stated that Boards have utilized CCDF
funds for caregiver training on quality components of child care and on specific
topics such as working with children with special needs; providing technical
assistance to home-based providers; providing essential materials and equipment
for classrooms; and providing lending libraries. Commenters also cited specific
training on topics as indicated through local training needs surveys has included
training on working with children with special needs, positive guidance techniques,
recognizing child abuse and neglect, child growth and development, stress
reduction for children, and applying developmentally appropriate practices.
The commenters also stated that CCDF has a broad focus and expressed appreciation
for Boards' efforts to support a broad range of innovative programs and activities
to strengthen the child care infrastructure and improve parents' access to
high-quality child care services. The commenters also stated that Boards must
have the flexibility to work with their communities to determine their individual
needs and to develop supportive activities to meet those needs.
Response: The Commission believes that, given the limited resources of
CCDF and the legislative priorities on early learning, the statewide focus
must be on early learning, literacy, and school readiness. The Commission's
intent in the proposed rules is to provide Boards the flexibility to focus
on early learning for home-based providers or professional development activities
specific to the training needs of the local area. The Commission agrees with
the need for sustainability at the local level and believes that focusing
the limited CCDF funds on building the infrastructure necessary to provide
early education professionals with training, curriculum, and curriculum-related
resources will lead to long-term investments with tangible outcomes. Further,
the Commission believes that, with the exception of child abuse and neglect
and stress reduction for children, all of the training topics in the commenters'
list relate to early learning, literacy, and school readiness. Training on
abuse and neglect and stress reduction are related to health and safety, the
focus of DFPS, the agency that regulates health and safety of child care facilities.
The Commission believes the proposed rules allow flexibility for Boards to
work within their communities. In fact, the Commission encourages Boards to
use CCDF funds for early learning, literacy, and school readiness to create
partnerships with other groups in the workforce area to leverage their funds
for other types of quality initiatives.
Although the CCDF program has a broad focus, a primary goal of the CCDF
program is to assist low-income working parents in purchasing child care services.
CCDF was not designed to be the only funding source for quality improvement
initiatives. In fact, the Commission subsidizes direct child care services
for about 12 percent of the total capacity of the regulated child care market.
However, the licensing and monitoring activities of DFPS affect the entire
regulated child care market. Therefore, Boards are encouraged and expected
to work with local community partners to determine how quality activities
allowed by §809.15 can contribute to the broad child care needs of the
community.
Comment: Three commenters requested that scholarships for both associate's
degrees in child development and teachers currently working in licensed facilities
be included as allowable quality activities. The commenters stated that child
development fundamentals that are taught in college-level courses are essential
to quality child care, and professional development training does not replace
these fundamentals.
Response: The Commission believes that the rules allow flexibility for
Boards to provide scholarships for specific courses related to early learning,
literacy, and school readiness. However, the Commission believes that scholarships
for degree plans that also include general coursework--such as English composition,
college math, college algebra, and personal computing--are too broad and would
not be considered allowable activities. The Commission includes professional
development activities in college courses that are related to early learning,
literacy, and school readiness.
Comment: One commenter urged the Commission to clearly define the types
of professional development activities needed to ensure that very young children
are "pre-school" ready.
Response: The Commission does not believe it is necessary to provide a
precise definition of the types of professional development activities that
are allowed in rule as this may unduly limit the flexibility of Boards to
fund early learning and school readiness programs in their workforce areas.
Comment: Three commenters noted that, because of the recent hurricanes,
Boards need the flexibility to give child care providers the necessary training
to serve children who have been displaced from their homes and are in need
of mental health services.
Response: The Commission agrees that the need exists for mental health
training for child care providers in order to meet the needs of the families
and children displaced by the hurricanes. However, the Commission recognizes
that CCDF alone cannot meet the needs of those displaced by the hurricanes.
For that reason, the Commission applied for and has received a National Emergency
Grant to provide child care services to children displaced by the hurricanes.
The Commission encourages Boards to work with the Texas Department of State
Health Services, the agency charged with the delivery of public mental health
services for adults and children.
Comment: One commenter stated that proposed §809.15(a) is too narrow
and that quality indicators related to ratios, group sizes, and physical facilities
should be addressed. The commenter noted that low child-to-staff ratios are
positively correlated with good outcomes for children; group sizes allowed
under DFPS place children in jeopardy of cognitive and academic delays; and
physical facilities are directly responsible for academic delays.
Response: The Commission appreciates the comment that environmental factors
related to ratios, group sizes, and physical facilities may be important factors
in school success; however, the Commission does not believe these are the
determining factors that affect academic success. Additionally, the Commission
believes that issues related to child-to-staff ratios, group size, and physical
facilities (especially related to child safety) are best addressed through
child care licensing and regulation. The Commission again emphasizes that
it subsidizes direct child care services to about 12 percent of the total
capacity of the regulated child care market. However, the licensing and monitoring
activities of DFPS, which include standards for child-to-staff ratios and
physical facilities, affect the entire regulated child care market. Additionally,
the Commission has encouraged DFPS to establish a tiered-licensing system,
which may include lower ratios for any licensed facility (beyond just those
with subsidized children) seeking to exceed minimum licensing standards.
Comment: Regarding §809.15(b), one commenter noted that there is no
mention of the ability to purchase assessment tools and that a teacher's planned,
purposeful interaction with young children and the ability of a teacher to
have objective information about a child's understanding and skills is essential
to school readiness. The commenter questioned whether assessment tools would
be considered a curriculum-related support resource.
Response: The Commission believes assessment tools are curriculum-related
support resources. However, the Commission emphasizes that assessment tools
must be connected to the implementation of a specific curriculum and include
training related to school readiness, early learning, and literacy.
Comment: One commenter noted that the rule change would not allow the use
of quality funding to purchase adaptive equipment for a child with a disability
if it was needed by a provider, which seems contrary to the requirements of
the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Response: The Commission believes that the adopted rules do allow for the
purchase of adaptive equipment, as long as the purchase is in conjunction
with training. However, the Commission encourages Boards to consider supplying
the training and collaborating with local governments, local early childhood
intervention offices, private nonprofits (such as Easter Seals and United
Way) to identify other funding sources to provide adaptive equipment.
Comment: One commenter stated that the proposed rule changes do not sufficiently
define "collaborative reading initiatives."
Response: The Commission agrees that guidance should be provided, but believes
that a definition in rule would unnecessarily limit Boards' flexibility. The
Commission will issue a Workforce Development Letter to provide further guidance
on collaborative reading initiatives.
Comment: One commenter requested clarification on the definition in the
proposed rules of providers who are "voluntarily pursuing participation" in
the TEEM project. The commenter noted that a provider may voluntarily pursue
participation in TEEM, but regardless of quality funds, may never meet the
TEEM requirements. The commenter did not believe those providers should receive
priority in the funding of quality activities.
Response: The Commission appreciates the comment and has revised language
in §809.15(d). The Commission recognizes that child care facilities may
not have the option to voluntarily participate in the TEEM project. Therefore,
the Commission adds rule language to clarify that Boards may give priority
for quality activities to providers that may wish to implement components
of school readiness curricula as approved by the State Center. The Commission
appreciates the concern that child care facilities may not be in a position
to meet the TEEM requirements. The rule language is not intended to require
Boards to fund any facility implementing components of the school readiness
curricula. Rather, the Commission intends that if a Board chooses to prioritize
quality funds for non-TEEM facilities in order to assist facilities with implementing
components of the curricula, the Board should provide such funds using criteria
that includes the child care facility's willingness to make a commitment to
meeting school readiness criteria.
Comment: One commenter stated that the local community has benefited from
participation in TEEM and that the community will continue to support it.
However, the commenter noted that not all child care centers have the structural
support to successfully participate in the TEEM system. The commenter noted
that expansion of TEEM should continue, while quality funds are directed toward
provider training for quality components and specific topics such as children
with special needs, technical assistance to home-based providers, essential
classroom materials and equipment, lending libraries, and more.
Response: The Commission appreciates the commenter's concerns and is aware
that not every child care facility may be in a community with a TEEM site.
However, the Commission believes that the proposed rules allow Boards to provide
professional development and curriculum support for child care providers (including
home-based providers) who are not participating in TEEM, as long as the activities
are directed toward caregiver training involving early learning, literacy,
or school readiness. The Commission also believes that a focus on early learning,
literacy, and school readiness does not exclude children with special needs.
Caregivers working with children with special needs may benefit tremendously
from training on preparing children with special needs for early learning
and school readiness.
Comment: One commenter requested clarification of "TEEM activities" and
whether center classrooms participate in TEEM in its entirety or whether the
center can participate in selected components, such as only teacher training,
use of CIRCLE curricula without instruction, or use of assessment tools without
teacher training.
Response: The Commission clarifies that TEEM activities refer to child
care providers participating in integrated school readiness models. In addition,
the Boards may choose to fund quality activities for providers that are not
included in the TEEM partnerships, but are incorporating components of the
State Center's CIRCLE training. However, the Commission emphasizes that the
purchase of curricula or resource materials must be linked with appropriate
training.
Comment: Regarding the requirements under Article IX, Rider 14.36, relating
to school readiness models, one commenter noted that the Board serves a 12-county
workforce area, yet only one TEEM partnership currently exists in the urban
part of the workforce area. Additional resources for this one project would
divert funding away from the rural counties, thereby creating inequity.
Response: The Commission believes that Boards have the flexibility to design
quality activities that will benefit the entire workforce area, and the Boards
are not limited to directing activities solely to a TEEM project. The Commission
emphasizes that Boards may choose to fund professional development activities
for providers that are not included in the TEEM partnerships, but incorporate
components of the State Center's CIRCLE training.
Comment: One commenter requested assurance that Boards can use quality
funds to provide necessary tools to support home-based child care providers
as well as providers caring for children with special needs.
Response: The Commission agrees that quality funds may be used for professional
development specifically designed to meet the early learning and school readiness
needs of children with disabilities or designed for home-based providers.
Comment: One commenter noted that collaboration between the private sector
and public sector, as well as the for-profit and nonprofit sectors, should
continue to be encouraged.
Response: The Commission agrees and encourages Boards to seek public-private
partnerships in their workforce areas. The CCDF State Plan documents evidence
of public-private partnerships such as the 2-1-1 Texas collaboration. TEEM
also is an excellent example of collaboration among profit, nonprofit, and
publicly supported providers.
Comment: Eight commenters expressed concern that the proposed rules imply
an overly narrow definition of school readiness and early learning, one that
places too heavy a focus on cognitive development at the expense of children's
social and emotional development-two critical components in achieving school
readiness. The commenters noted that a child's emotional and social well-being
is as critical to early learning and literacy as phonemic awareness and print-rich
environments. One of the commenters recommended that language be added in
the proposed rule to include activities that support the social and emotional
development of all children.
Response: The Commission disagrees that the proposed rules imply a narrow
focus only on the cognitive development of children and only address the reading
and literacy aspect of a child's development. The Commission agrees that each
of the developmental domains is important for children. Dr. Susan Landry,
Director of the State Center for Early Childhood Development, issued a report
in 2005 entitled "Effective Early Childhood Programs." The report discusses
the fact that all of the developmental domains are intertwined and linked
in children's growth. Dr. Landry states that children's primary developmental
domains--physical, social/emotional, and cognitive--have complex interrelations,
and that school readiness requires a solid development, not only in the cognitive
domain, but also in all of the major developmental domains. The Commission
does not believe it is necessary to specify in rule that activities supporting
the social and emotional development of children are included as quality activities.
The rules do not limit activities to one particular developmental domain.
Comment: One commenter recommended the continued use of funds for children
with disabilities and school age care.
Response: The Commission agrees with the comment and believes that the
rules provide Boards with the flexibility to focus on professional development
activities related to early learning and school readiness that meets the specific
needs of school age children and children with disabilities. Collaborative
reading activities that encourage reading may also be geared toward school
age children.
Comment: Regarding the use of local match funds for quality activities,
one commenter stated that Boards should be given the flexibility to continue
supporting the needs of both children and providers.
Response: The Commission agrees that Boards should support the needs of
both children and providers and believes that the proposed rules allow for
that flexibility.
Comment: Two commenters noted that if a Board is meeting or is on track
to meet its performance target, then the use of local match funds for quality
activities is an excellent avenue to support the needs of the workforce area.
One of the commenters recommended that the Commission allocate additional
local match for direct care and, if it is not needed for Boards to meet the
performance target for children in care, then reissue the funds for any quality
activities.
Response: The Commission disagrees with the contention that as long as
a Board is meeting, or is on track to meet, its performance targets it should
be allowed to fund any type of quality activities with CCDF funds not needed
to meet performance targets. The Commission believes that, in an environment
of limited funds, quality dollars must be focused on statewide goals with
high impact. Otherwise, funding for quality activities will be scattered and
largely ineffective.
Comment: Two commenters noted that the Board depends upon its local partners
to secure local match and the availability of quality funds enables the Board
to continue building good relationships with its local partners because the
Board needs to be giving back to the community in terms of quality, not just
more children in care. The commenters also stated that at some point local
contributors would not provide the level of local match if there were no return
on their investment.
Response: The Commission acknowledges the support provided by local partners
in the securing of local match. It is not the Commission's intent to limit
local donations and the Commission believes that this will not happen. However,
given the limited funds available, the Commission believes that it is essential
that quality activities focus on early learning and school readiness. Furthermore,
by specifying that CCDF quality funds be used for activities related to school
readiness, early learning, and literacy as well as support for 2-1-1 Texas,
Boards and local child care organizations should look to other funding sources
to expand the total amount of dollars spent on quality child care. Viewing
CCDF as the primary source for any and all quality initiatives reduces the
incentive in local areas to look to other available funding sources that complement
and enhance CCDF in order to meet the broad child care needs of local communities.
Comment: One commenter requested clarification regarding the use of matching
funds derived from certification of expenditures from public entities for
quality activities. The commenter inquired whether the federal funds could
be spent on any quality activities.
Response: Regarding the use of federal funds derived from certification
of expenditures from a public entity, the local funds can be expended on any
quality activity allowed in the federal regulations set forth in 45 C.F.R. §98.51.
However, pursuant to this chapter, the resulting federal funds can be expended
only on activities related to early learning, literacy, school readiness,
collaborative reading initiatives, or local support for 2-1-1 Texas.
SUBCHAPTER K. FUNDS MANAGEMENT
§809.231. Provider Reimbursement Rates.
The Commission adopts §809.231(d) to require Boards to establish graduated
reimbursement rates for child care providers participating in integrated school
readiness models developed by the State Center. The Commission adopts this
amendment to implement the direction of the Legislature as provided by Article
IX, Rider 14.36 of the General Appropriations Act, 79th Texas Legislature
(2005), which requires the Commission to make available up to $50 million
of the federal funds appropriated to the Commission for Choices, Transitional,
and At-Risk Child Care in the 2006-07 biennium, to child care providers participating
in State Center integrated school readiness models. By making more funds available,
through higher reimbursement rates, to providers participating in the school
readiness models, the Commission will be in a position to demonstrate its
intention to implement the intent of Article IX, Rider 14.36, as required
by the Legislature. The Commission also emphasizes that graduated reimbursement
rates for TRS providers will remain a direct care quality expenditure, as
directed by Texas Government Code §2308.315.
The Commission adopts §809.231(e) to provide that the minimum reimbursement
rates established under §809.231(d) shall be at least five percent greater
than the maximum rate established for providers not meeting the requirements
of §809.231(d) for the same category of care up to, but not to exceed,
the provider's published rate.
Finally, the Commission adopts the removal of §809.231(g), which allows
Boards to provide incentives to providers to recognize other quality criteria
in addition to those in §809.231(d). The Commission removes this provision
to limit the use of graduated reimbursement rates to those programs recognized
by state statute, such as programs participating in the integrated school
readiness models (as provided in Article IX, Rider 14.36 of the General Appropriations
Act, 79th Legislature) and the TRS providers (as provided in Texas Government
Code §2308.315). The Commission emphasizes that it is not removing the
ability of Boards to provide incentives to providers that voluntarily meet
or attempt to meet quality criteria. The Commission believes that the new §809.15(b),
which allows Boards to provide professional development and to purchase curriculum
resources--as well as the newly adopted §809.15(c), which allows Boards
to prioritize nondirect quality funds for providers participating in or pursuing
participation in school readiness models and TRS certification pursuant to
Texas Government Code §2308.316--provide the Boards the opportunity to
focus incentives on quality programs recognized by the Legislature.
Comment: One commenter expressed support for higher reimbursement rates
for providers participating in TRS or TEEM.
Response: The Commission appreciates the commenter's support of higher
reimbursement rates for TRS and TEEM providers.
Comment: One commenter questioned whether providers participating in TEEM,
but not participating in TRS, will be required to have a provider agreement.
Response: The Commission will not require Boards to have a provider agreement
with providers that are participating in the TEEM project.
Comment: One commenter noted that the TRS program is the only program recognized
by the state to receive higher reimbursement rates; however, the TRS criteria
do not measure school readiness.
Response: The Commission recognizes that the current TRS criteria do not
measure school readiness outcomes of children. However, §2308.315 of
the Texas Government Code requires Boards to establish graduated reimbursement
rates for TRS providers. Section 809.221(d)(2) reflects this statutory requirement.
The Commission also notes that in 1999, when the Legislature required higher
reimbursement rates for TRS providers, school readiness was not a stated goal
of the TRS criteria. However, the Commission is currently considering adding
school readiness as a criterion for TRS providers. Additionally, the Commission
recognizes that TRS was the only program available in 1999 to receive the
higher reimbursement. By adopting the new §809.221(d)(1), the Commission
adds child care providers participating in the State Center's school readiness
models as eligible to receive higher reimbursement rates.
Comment: Regarding provider reimbursement rates, one commenter requested
clarification on TEEM providers being eligible for the graduated rate increase.
The commenter asked whether the provider would only receive the rate increase
for the age groups participating in the TEEM project (three- to four-year-olds)
or would the rate increase apply across all of the provider's rates.
Response: It is the Commission's intent that the graduated reimbursement
rate for a provider participating in the TEEM project will apply across all
of the provider's age-group rates, not just the three-to-four year old age
group. The Commission recognizes that separate reimbursement rates based on
classroom age groups may pose an administrative burden for providers and Boards.
Comment: One commenter recommended that reimbursement rates need to be
increased and should be based on the quality of the program. In addition,
the commenter noted that reimbursement rates should be determined by an annual
market rate survey that encompasses all providers from all socioeconomic levels.
Response: The Commission notes that the existing rule requires Boards to
establish reimbursement rates based on a market rate survey and other local
factors. The Commission also notes that an annual market rate survey encompassing
a representative sample of provider types is conducted annually and the Commission
provides the results of the market rate survey to the Boards.
Comments were received from:
Senator Judith Zaffirini, Texas State Senate
Deborah L. Butts, East Texas Workforce Development Board
Woody Engebretson, Rural Capital Area Workforce Development Board
Ann McCain, Central Texas Workforce Board
Alan Miller, Alamo Workforce Development Board
Lisa Witkowski, Workforce Solutions for Tarrant County
Peggy Grunwell, Converse Child Care Center Board Liaison
Frank Guevara, Palo Alto College
Kaitlin Guthrow, Texas Early Childhood Education Coalition
Nancy Hard, Family Service Association
Suzanne Hinds, Collaborative for Children
Susan Hoff, Child Care Group
Tere Holmes, The Children's Courtyard
Sandra Lamm and Louanne Aponte, Texas Association of Child Care Resource
and Referral Agencies
Ruth Lightfoot, Alamo Area Council of Governments
Dr. Teri Perryman, Texas Medical Association
Josette Saxton, Texans Care for Children
Jennifer Vogel, San Marcos Consolidated Independent School District
John A. Whitcamp, Child Care Associates
Dr. Stephen Barnett
Earlene Gonzales
The Agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal
counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the Agency's legal authority.
Subchapter B. GENERAL MANAGEMENT
40 TAC §809.14, §809.15
The amended sections are adopted under Texas Labor Code, §301.0015
and §302.002(d), which provide the Commission with the authority to adopt,
amend, or repeal such rules as it deems necessary for the effective administration
of Agency services and activities, and the Texas Human Resources Code, §44.002,
regarding Administrative Rules.
The adopted amendments affect Texas Labor Code, Title 4, particularly Chapters
301 and 302, as well as Texas Government Code, Chapter 2308.
§809.15.Quality Improvement Activities.
(a)
Local public transferred funds and local private donated
funds, as provided in §809.20 of this subchapter, as well as child care
funds allocated to the Boards in Chapter 800, Subchapter B of this title,
to the extent used for nondirect care quality improvement activities, shall
only be used for the following:
(1)
Collaborative reading initiatives
(2)
School readiness, early learning, and literacy
(3)
Local-level support to promote child care consumer education
provided by 2-1-1 Texas
(b)
Allowable activities may include the following to support
the quality improvement activities described in subsection (a) of this section:
(1)
Professional development and training for child care providers
(2)
Purchase of curriculum and curriculum-related support resources
for child care providers
(c)
Activities in subsection (a) of this section may be designed
to meet the needs of children in any age group eligible for Commission-funded
child care, as well as children with disabilities.
(d)
In funding quality activities allowable under this section,
a Board may give priority to child care facilities:
(1)
participating in the integrated school readiness models
developed by the State Center for Early Childhood Development at the University
of Texas Health Science Center;
(2)
implementing components of school readiness curricula as
approved by the State Center; or
(3)
participating in or voluntarily pursuing participation
in Texas Rising Star Provider certification, pursuant to Texas Government
Code §2308.316.
(e)
Expenditures certified by a public entity, as provided
in §809.20 of this subchapter, may include expenditures for any quality
improvement activity described in 45 C.F.R. §98.51.
This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed
by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of
the Secretary of State on April 11, 2006.
TRD-200602097
Reagan Miller
Deputy Director for Workforce and UI Policy
Texas Workforce Commission
Effective date: May 1, 2006
Proposal publication date: December 30, 2005
For further information, please call: (512) 475-0829
40 TAC §809.42
The amended section is adopted under Texas Labor Code, §301.0015
and §302.002(d), which provide the Commission with the authority to adopt,
amend, or repeal such rules as it deems necessary for the effective administration
of Agency services and activities, and the Texas Human Resources, Code §44.002,
regarding Administrative Rules.
The adopted amendments affect Texas Labor Code, Title 4, particularly Chapters
301 and 302, as well as Texas Government Code, Chapter 2308.
This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed
by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed
with the Office of the Secretary of State on April 11, 2006.
TRD-200602098
Reagan Miller
Deputy Director for Workforce and UI Policy
Texas Workforce Commission
Effective date: May 1, 2006
Proposal publication date: December 30, 2005
For further information, please call: (512) 475-0829
Subchapter C. REQUIREMENTS TO PROVIDE CHILD CARE