Still no reply….

You may recall that April and Jane , our Co-Chairs wrote to Sarah Henry in the Department of Social Services seeking answers to many questions regarding the complex issues that we are currently dealing with in relation to child care and early learning.  We asked for a reply by March 7, 2008 for the following reasons:

• The government’s own fast track schedule for changing the act
• If the department had done the required research to consider any changes, all that we asked for should be ready and pose no problem.

On March 7, 2008 we received the following reply from Sarah via email.

Good morning Jane and April,

Thank you for your letter, and interest in the Child Care Facilities
Act and Regulations. A response is being prepared and will be mailed to
the address provided.

I look forward to our continued conversations about supporting children
and families in Prince Edward Island.

Sincerely,

Sarah

Sarah Henry
Early Childhood Services
Department of Social Service and Seniors
Province of Prince Edward Island
161 St. Peters Road, P.O. Box 2000
Charlottetown, PEI      C1A 7N8
Tel: (902) 894-0260
Fax: (902) 368-6169
Email: skhenry@ihis.org

Well it is now March 28, 2008 and still nothing has come to us via email or regular mail, despite several follow-up attempts.  Guess it is time to step things up a bit…

Guardian Questions Lack of Consultation

Here are some excerpts from an editorial in the Guardian this weekend.  Click here to see the full text. 

The government is hesitant to make a decision until there is a general consensus for or against. It makes one wonder if this government has a firm stand on anything. So it came as a stunning surprise when the government decided late last week to make a major change to the age when children enter kindergarten and school. 

Kindergarten is one area where parents need lots of time to look for the right facility, get on a waiting list, and budget for the expense. Parents didn’t need to be panicked into making rash decisions. The announcement last Thursday came without warning for the majority involved in early childhood learning, who were given just three days warning to modify lesson plans for the rest of the year and accommodate new children who had never been to kindergarten before. It appears that a small, vocal minority stampeded government into making a rash decision, leaving parents and teachers scrambling to make sense of the whole thing.

Parents don’t want to hold their children back while friends move on. So, during a meeting on Monday, the Education Department told early learning educators and operators they don’t have to try to catch them up. Instead, they are being asked to offer these children a ‘readiness program.’ Yet a senior staffer warned parents this is not the recommended route for children. If senior staff hasn’t signed on, why is the department proceeding? The readiness program is not ready because staff is still scrambling to put it together. 

The new eligibility date will put the P.E.I. start date more in line with the rest of the country, so the issue isn’t the change of dates; it’s the absence of consultation with stakeholders. There should have been a year or more advance warning given.The key issue should have been what’s best for the child. That wasn’t addressed properly here. Greenan had better be prepared for some tough questions when the house opens next month. 

Trust – The Key to Power & Government

What happens to a government that can not be trusted? At best, they become immobilized at worst…..

Many Islanders wonder about what went on when the Kindergarten decision was made. Many fear conflict of interest in the process to change the Child Care facilities Act – all the actions of the department so far suggest that it is not being straight with us.

So in an attempt to regain trust, our co chairs wrote last week to Sarah Henry in the department of Social Services asking her to  give the public the information about what is going on in child care that would be expected to be already well tabulated and understood to suggest any such changes.

Our co chairs asked for this information to be ready by today.  The short deadline was determined by:

1. The government’s own fast track schedule for changing the act
2. If the department had done the required research to consider any changes, all that we asked for should be ready and pose no problem.

Well it’s Friday and we are looking forward to getting our reply today. Email will work just fine

Please help us help you – Here is an open and anonymous survey

Welcome to our online survey. A Paper version is at the end of this post

Click
Here to take survey

The PEI Government values the feedback from parents so we (Parents for Choice and Quality) have created this online survey to give you (parents on PEI) a way to voice your concerns and recommendations about early childhood education topics.

Over the past month there has been a lot of media coverage about early childhood education on PEI. From the child care facilities act and regulations consultation to the lack of consultation in regards to kindergarten changes.

This survey is for anyone who is a parent, grandparent, a future parent, early childhood educator or concerned citizen. We are giving you a voice to share your thoughts, ideas and concerns about early childhood education on PEI.

No service is perfect, nor do we as parents expect it to be. We do however, have a right to be heard if we have concerns about the current early childhood education system. Each of us are our children’s advocate and deserve respect.

This survey is a tool that will allow you to give your important feedback which will in turn raise the level of standards of early childhood education on PEI. This will also allow all issues regarding early childhood education to be placed on the table for discussion.

Please tell us your story so we can paint the true image of early childhood education on PEI. Together we can build a framework of concerns and offer recommendations so the PEI Government can give children the best start possible on Prince Edward Island.

For those who are not computer savvy, a PDF copy can be found on our website at http://www.choiceandquality.com. You can then feel free to mail or fax your completed form to the contacts listed on the form. Please feel free to print it off and distribute it to anyone concerned on PEI.

We will compile all the feedback from this survey and present it to Government. We ask that you submit your feedback to us by Monday, March 31, 2008.

Sincerely,

April Ennis, co-chair
Jane Boyd, co-chair
Parents for Choice and Quality

Parents Survey

The mail/fax info is

Parents for Choice and Quality

c/o April Ennis

RR#3, Montague

Civic #3811

Summerville, PE

C0A 1R0

Fax: (902) 892-3351

Excellent conversation on PEI Info

More conversation here on PEI Info

Opposition on the Kindergarten Change

Opposition leader Olive Crane has given the government a failing grade for not consulting with Prince Edward Islanders before announcing a change in the age children can start school. (cbc)

Olive Crane said letting children start younger goes against recent research.
(CBC)

The Liberal government has stressed the need to consult on issues such as where people can smoke, and Crane can’t understand why the government was so quick to change the age at which children can start school.

“This is really a big shock as to why cabinet and the premier would be making a decision like this without consulting parents, the department of education, the early childhood educators themselves,” said Crane.

“You can imagine the stress on kindergarten teachers to try and do a readiness program with five-year-olds now to have them ready for school in grade one.”

Last week, the government announced children who turn six before Oct. 31 can start school in September. The previous cut off was Aug. 31.

Crane said the decision flies in the face of research done a few years ago that supported a later age for children to start school. Last week’s announcement has left parents wondering whether to put their children in school at the earlier date or hold them back a year.

While the decision allows about 300 more children to attend grade one in the fall, the Department of Education is cautioning parents against sending children too early. At the same time it has asked kindergartens to prepare special readiness programs for children who will now be moving into grade one.

Crane said the three-month readiness program simply won’t be enough preparation for most children.

The Advisory Council for the Status for Women speaks out

In summary the Council asks for

• The issues of discretion
• A better process of consultation
• An examination into the role of the Board and any opportunity that there might be a conflict of interest

Here’s the text of a letter that the PEI Status of Women submitted to the current round of Child Care Consultations. (A PDF version is also available for download.) For more on our past positions on early childhood care and education, see our Policy Guide:

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in public consultations on the Child Care Facilities Act review that is currently underway. We appreciate the extended period for consultation.

In June of 2003, the Advisory Council published aPolicy Guide to Early Childhood Care andEducation with a suite of recommendations, mostof which are still relevant today. (Available at http://www.gov.pe.ca/acsw/index.php3?number=75172)

Our policy guide acknowledges that both as consumers and providers of early childhood careand education services, women are faced with barriers to their equality and to their full and active participation in society. It is our belief that matters of quality are inextricable from the Child Care facilities act and that giving quality care means helping children meet their developmental outcomes. Such important work requires a solid infrastructure consisting of qualified early childhood educators and safe and healthy learning environments.

The core values in the Early Childhood Care and Education policy guide include the following:

• visibility for early childhood care and education
• availability and accessibilityaffordability
• quality of care and education
• inclusivity
• supportive of parental choice

The scope of these values is wide, and the way we respond to them as a community has significant implications for the wellbeing of our children. The Prince Edward Island government has shown leadership in researching and understanding the importance of the early years, from zero to six. We call on government to respond to what it has learned with active and forward-thinking legislation and policy to support quality early childhood care and education.

The Child Care Facilities Act is an important element of legislation. However, legislation is only part of the story and can only be one part of a solution. Legislation exists in a context where policies and procedures, funds and other resources, and enforcement or non-enforcement can promote or restrain the effectiveness of the Act.

As we review this Act, it is clear that the legislation interacts with policy (including programs, practices, and precedents) and with governance (particularly of the Child Care Facilities Board, a Board given tremendous responsibility under the Act). All of these operate together to determine our ability as a community to create a system for child care and education that reflects core values.

It is clear that questions about the Child Care Facilities Act have sparked a passion in the community. We call on the Province to embrace the opportunity to widen the discussion about how, as a province, we can deliver high quality, affordable, accessible, developmentally focused early learning and care opportunities to our children.

We join community groups that are asking for more consultation so we can bring into clearer focus the hopes and the concerns of parents, educators, owner/operators, children, and citizens. These consultations should help not only to guide changes to the Child Care Facilities Act (or to affirm the Act as it currently stands); rather, they should also engage the public in the questions of policy and governance that work hand in hand to translate the Act into action.

A key point of contention in the current discussion of the Child Care Facilities Act is a question about whether or not the Child Care Facilities Board should have discretion to deny applications for new child care centres, and especially if they should have discretion to deny applications based on number of spaces in a particular region or meeting a particular need. We find that we require more information to assess this issue.

We call on the Province to undertake and to make public a comparative assessment of how “discretion” is legislated and applied in other jurisdictions across Canada.

Specifically, we are interested to learn answers to questions such as the following:

• When did other jurisdictions legislate “discretion” and why?
• Who has discretion to make decisions about new centres in each jurisdiction?
• What measurable effects have followed from allowing discretion? (For example, how many applications for new centres have been rejected, and on what kinds of grounds? Are there measurable improvements in educational and general outcomes for children in regions that allow discretion?)

Answers to these kinds of questions will help us, as members of the community, evaluate the risks and benefits for women as parents and as educators – and for children, as the most important group affected.

Additionally, we ask government to compare the Child Care Facilities Board and its powers in with other agencies, boards, and commissions within the province.

• Are there similar structures with similar powers, exerting control on issues unrelated to child care?
• How does the influence in the two matters compare?
• How do governance procedures and conflict of interest policies apply?

These questions seem important to guiding decisions about what may need to change in the Child Care Facilities Act or in the policy that surrounds it.

We understand that following a research phase and an internal decision-making phase, any revisions of the Act will come forward for public validation. We look forward to opportunities to make input again into the specific issues covered in the Child Care Facilities Act during this validation. We sincerely hope that this consultation will be only a part of a wider consultation and public conversation about early childhood care and education.

Kindergarten – A Father Speaks – from the Comments in the Guardian

Here is a father speaking his mind:

Nick from PE writes: The decision to change the cutoff for grade one during the middle of a school year was an extremely poor decison by the Department of Education and the remarks given by Linda Lowther are ridiculous.

One of the main reasons for kindergarten is for students to learn the structure of a class environment before grade one and to be make sure all students have the basics. My son is academically ready to start grade one but I would have liked him to have the option to learn how a school day goes and more socializing skills before grade one.

They are the ones who made the obvious mistake.Do not put this on parents.

The fact they used the excuse that many parents phoned to say their children are ready for school is crazy. If hundreds of people phoned and said they needed one hundred dollars, would they just give it to them without thinking about it or talking to the people if would affect.

I am sure the reason they moved the date is because Nova Scotia changed their date from OCT.1 to Dec.31 for this upcoming school year and this is the date the majority of Canada uses for their cutoff.

Anyone could have figured out that you don’t change a date all at once during a school year but maybe this is what is wrong with our education system on PEI. They don’t put any thought into decisions.

Consultation – Now Kindergarten! – What are these bureaucrats thinking about?

Many parents may be thrilled to learn that they can send their kids to school earlier.

But why would all of those who have to deliver on this promise find out about all the work that they are going to have to do as a surprise? In the middle of the school year? (Link to Teresa Wright’s article in the Guardian here)

Sonya Corrigan, president of the Early Childhood Development Association, said since that announcement she has been overwhelmed with calls from parents wanting to put their children in kindergarten for the next three months so they’ll be ready for school in September

“Looking at what’s left of the school year – we’re talking weeks,” she said. “I really and truly don’t think we would be offering programs that would be in the best interests of children and that parents would be making the best choice.”

It is the parents’ choice, and many feel their children are ready.

But Corrigan wants to know why no one from the sector was contacted or consulted before this government decision was made.

“It’s not so much the change in date, it’s the absence of consultation with our sector. Our sector was called by parents who read it in the newspaper. And they weren’t even aware of what the change was.”

“We’re not sure where this came from, how the decision was come to, what input there was into coming to that decision.”

What kind of advice has the department also been giving the Premier? Here is a key statement in the press release:

“Premier Robert Ghiz says the revised policy reflects Government’s commitment to lifelong learning beginning in the early years. “There is a great deal of new research that indicates young children benefit from being in a structured learning environment,” he said. “We want to do everything possible to support early literacy and learning, to identify learning difficulties at an early age and provide the necessary early interventions,“ he said”

“Young Children benefit from being in a structured learning environment” is the key phrase. Well folks the opposite is the case.

Who is offering this advice? It’s not true. It’s wrong and if it was offered to the Premier as the truth, then someone is at best misleading the Premier.

Here is a link to a long and recent interview in MacLeans Magazine that reviews the research. At the core is the potential damage done to boys, who are already doing poorly, by adding structure too early. Here is a snippet:

Q: So when do you think boys should start kindergarten, if the focus remains on learning to read and write?

A: Seven years ago I wrote an article for the American Psychological Association saying the default age of entry should be five for girls, six for boys. That created quite a stir. I have since abandoned that assertion, though I still think it’s a good idea, because parents generally don’t understand it. They say, “Oh, you think my son’s dumb?”

Q: Obviously there’s going to be individual variation. How many boys are ready at age five to start kindergarten?

A: On the order of 12 per cent; 88 per cent would do better if they started at age six. The key to success in early elementary education is doing the right thing at the right time. Farmers understand this. You can have the best farmland in the world and the best feed corn in the world, but if you try to plant your crop in the middle of a January snowstorm, you will not be successful. Likewise, you may have a very bright boy, but if you’re asking him to do things that are not developmentally appropriate, he won’t be successful. And the danger is that he will develop negative attitudes toward school, and it will be very difficult to change them.

So here we are again – we have a department that will not engage with the public and with those affected by their decisions. We have a department that is briefing the premier with information that is wrong.

If I was the Premier I would be asking myself “What is going on?”

Trust and Full Disclosure

So here then is a test of good intentions and of trust. April Ennis and Jane Boyd, our co chairs have written to Sarah Henry, who has the file, and asked her for the following information. The full text of the letter dated Feb 28 is attached in pdf form below.

We have asked Sarah Henry to reply by March 7th – the tight deadline is driven by the department’s own tight deadline.

We are asking for the information that any valid and authentic process of consultation would have offered up as a matter of being professional. An analysis based on such information would have been given to every MLA  after the Minister would have had a thorough briefing prior.

This is what a professional public servant would think is routine.

Here is a summary of the questions:

In February 15, 2007 a press release issued from the Premier’s Office, indicated the following:

• There are approximately 8500 children between the ages of 0-5. There are 4800 licensed child care spaces on PEI.

• 82% of the child care spaces are occupied. This would indicate that 3936 children between the age of 0-5 are in licensed childcare programs.

• 80% of mothers with children aged 0-5 are in the labour force. That would indicate that approx 6800 are in need of child care services.

Based on the above please clarify the following points for us:

Where are the approximately 2000 children (6800-4800) aged 0-5 being supported if 80% of mothers with children ages 0-5 are in the workforce? Is unlicensed child care fulfilling this need? How many unlicensed child care spaces are currently on PEI?

2. During a recent CBC interview, Kathy Jones stated that “there are 67% presently of our early childhood centres that are operating below their license capacity”.

• If 82% of the child care spaces on PEI were occupied as of February 15, 2007, what percentage of child care space spaces are currently occupied? How many spaces are unoccupied at the moment?  How and why have these numbers changed over the past year?

• If there are 67% of centres who are operating below capacity, how many children are on waiting lists at the 33% of child care centres that are full? Please provide us with details how the 67% was determined.

3. During the February 27, 2008 public consultation meeting you made reference to “increasing good outcomes for children” on PEI. How are these outcomes currently being measured? What time period are the children monitored for ongoing development? Please provide us with information on both the tools that are being used to measure these outcomes and a copy of the most recent report regarding the findings of this measurement.

4. At the February 27, 2008 public consultation, there was reference made to the “phase(s)” of the consultation process. Can you please provide a thorough explanation and timeline of each phase of theChild Care Facilities Act and Regulations consultation process?

5. Is the consultation process (as of February 27, 2008) the same as what it was at the onset of the initial consultation as identified in the February 25, 2008 memorandum from the Department of Social Services and Seniors. If not, why and how has it changed?

6. What is the legislative procedure for the Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations to be amended during the sitting of the House?

7. Is it still the intention of government to table the proposed amendments during the upcoming spring sitting of house? If so, is there sufficient time to give the consultation process a fair chance?  Please provide us with a specific date as to when you expect the
proposed amendments to be tabled.

8. What amendments of the Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations have been proposed to date by your Department? What is the reasoning and research behind each of the proposed amendments?

9. At the February 27, 2008 consultation meeting you quickly showed a slide which gave an overview of which Provinces have “shall” and “may” in the Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations regarding the issuing of licenses.  We request a complete copy of the benchmarking research that has been done regarding this issue by your Department.

10.We request a detailed breakdown of the number of infant spaces available across the province.

11.We request a complete copy of the information/feedback that has been gathered during the public consultation process, including the HRA online survey.

12.We would like a complete list of each board member’s affiliation’s with respect to child care (for example, ELOPEI, owner/operator, etc). We also request a copy of the policy or procedure the board has in place regarding conflict of interest procedures.

13.Are the minutes of the child care facilities board public information? If so, we request the minutes of each meeting dating back to January 1, 2007, as well as any future meetings that take place.

Letter to Sarah Henry asking for full disclosure dated Feb 28 expecting a reply by March 7

Consultation and Trust

Surely the key to politics is to establish and to keep Trust – if people can trust you – you will get re-elected.

Actions by bureaucrats are threatening the Trust that Islanders have in their elected government.

The loss of trust had begun last fall when there was an attempt to pass changes to the act with no public consultation at all.  The current consultation was offered to Islanders in recognition that there was a trust issue.

I went to the new consultation meeting last night hoping to see that the officials would be working hard to re-establish trust. The bottom line is that they did not acknowledge that they had lost it and worked diligently to erode it further.

Here is what I experienced.

About 80 people turned up and the Holiday Inn Express. This meeting took place because of the protest at the original planned process for consultation. Many had felt betrayed by a process that offered only a week’s notice and a time for Charlottetown parents in the afternoon during working hours and the end of school. The large numbers attending might give you a sense of the feeling in the room.

How right we were to feel mistrustful was made clear early in the meeting last night when were told that the Island-wide consultation had met with 30 people! Only about 30 people had also gone on line and answered the questionnaire.

Many of us came to the meeting last night hoping that we could deal with the most important trust issue –  a difference in the core assumptions between the department and many parents about how quality is achieved.

In addition many of us had fears that control would be given to a body that had a conflict of interest.

We needed to have these points well exposed and dealt with last night to gain any trust back.

The difference in core assumptions is this:

The department has publicly stated that daycare quality was threatened because there were too many vacancies in the current system. Their stated public position was that they could ensure quality by limiting the number of new licenses.

Here is the key sheet used in the prior meetings:

This was the issue – is this a valid assumption? Many parents do not accept the logic of this. They believe that quality is found in choice.

Worse – We feared a conflict of interest. Here are the reasons for this fear.

When the act was attempted to be changed in the fall – the critical change was one word. Under the current act, if you as an operator meet the standards for being given a license you “Shall” be given a license.  The proposed change took out “Shall” and put in the word “May”.

What this means is that the people who have the authority to grant the license now have total discretion bounded by no limits. So you can meet the needs of the regulations and be refused. No reasons need to be given. The decision maker was being given a blank cheque.

The blank cheque was going to be given to whom?  To a Board. Why such a board and who is on it? No other province has such a body. In other provinces, the authority to grant or not grant a license is given by a person who is directly accountable to the minister. If you have a problem, you have recourse to the minister.

Key people on this board are owners of existing centres and leaders of the staffing association. If the act had passed in the fall – this body that is strongly influenced by a group of operators and staff –  would have had complete discretion.

These are the issues that I had hoped would be addressed full on last night. We expected a fully transparent debate about the difference in assumptions and about the conflict of interest.

Instead of full disclosure and a debate, we were treated like 6 years olds!

There was a very opaque context setting presentation full of platitudes about partnership and the need for quality and the fears for safety of children. There was a slide that showed that all but 3 provinces had discretion given to licensing. The object of the presentation was to give us the sense that there was some thing wrong with the act and that there were big but unstated risks if we did not change it.

What these risks were and what was proposed to be changed was not described.

Then we were asked to talk only about the questions that they wanted us to talk about. We were given a few forms to fill out and told to discuss these in small groups. The entire process was designed to control the meeting and to not empower the people in the room. I felt as if I was back in kindergarten. It was a shameful and degrading experience. 80 people had been muzzled.

Worse, they had taken the key issue off the table. The heading that you see above was replaced with an anodyne question about what do you think is important in granting a license. Any direct reference to the spaces and control issues had been removed. Debate was replaced by Cumbya.

What is going on? It all feels very bad. Every step of the way so far has degraded trust.

• First of all legislation that has huge impact on families and on our society is sneaked into the legislature.
• When smoked out a consultation is promised. This process is bogus and involves only 30 people mainly bureaucrats.
• A better process is then offered and it too is bogus and is designed to limit debate and offers no disclosure.

It gets worse.

My discussions with MLA’s tells me that they too are in the dark. Here we have a public process of consultation about a topic that has the potential to give PEI the chance to have the best human potential possible or the opposite. The future of our society depends on how well we do in helping kids from 0-6.  There is a major public fear about the process and the MLA’s have not been briefed.

How can you have public consultations, as we are having now, and leave out the MLA’s who are not then equipped to consult with the people directly?  I think our MLA’s are not being served.

I end with where I began with the issue of Trust.

Trust is hard to win and it is easy to lose. In truth the real reason to have any consultation is to develop trust.

Trust is the real product: for not all ideas will make it into the end product. But we can all accept what happens, if we feel that those that we trust to run the day to day operations of government have the interests of our community truly in their heart.

In this case – this is not so. By their actions they are judged.

Only a legitimate and authentic process can regain the trust that has been lost.

• The core assumptions have to be put on the table.
• The reality of quality has to be addressed.
• Any conflict of interest has to be exposed and removed

The Guardian in its editorial yesterday questioned the effectiveness of all the many consultations that are under way right now.  The reputation of the government is on the line.

What will be the result if Islanders feel that the officials are taking us all for granted?

Press Release – Postpone the Change to the Act – Have a real Consultation

Here is the Press Release that we have issued today – we ask that the government hold on changing the legislation and that they offer Islanders an authentic consultation process.

The attached 1 page backgrounder will provide the reasons for this request

NEWS RELEASE

For Immediate Release
February 26, 2008

PARENTS FOR CHOICE & QUALITY ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION TO MINISTER CURRIE

CHARLOTTETOWN – Parents for Choice & Quality recommend to Minister D.W. Currie, Department of Social Services and Seniors that any changes to the Child Care Facilities Act/Regulations be put on hold until a more comprehensive review of the issues and their potential impact on this critically important matter can take place. This would include a more authentic community consultation process, in addition to a review of such issues as why PEI is the only province in the country with a Child Care Facilities Board; and why the provincial government is considering allowing this structure the latitude to refuse licensing applicants who qualify.

“Our group has grown quickly since it became clear that the Act may be changed in a way that would limit parental choice and possibly impact the quality of child care in PEI.” said April Ennis, Co-Chair of Parents for Choice & Quality.  “After hearing from countless parents, child care professionals and concerned citizens we feel confident in recommending that any changes to the Child Care Facilities Act/Regulations be put on hold until a properly designed community consultation process has been completed.  The current consultation process is not sufficient.  We welcome the opportunity to come to the table and work with the Government in a productive and collaborative manner.”

“We have heard from Minister Currie that he wishes to broaden the consultation process and we support that concept.” said Robert Paterson, a concerned citizen and well known Island blog writer.  “The entire Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations should be thoroughly examined and ample time must be allowed for this work to proceed; it is not something that can be rushed through if we are concerned about enhancing the quality of child care in PEI.”

Parents for Choice & Quality is making this recommendation based on concerns that they have identified related to the following areas; lack of proper community process to date, the potential for conflict of interest from certain members of the current Child Care Facilities Board, the great variance in levels of quality in current child care facilities across the Island, the lack of infant child care spaces currently available and the fact that limiting spaces really means limiting choice and quality. Further information can be found about these issues in the attached Backgrounder.

Parents for Choice & Quality are a group consisting of mothers, fathers, grandparents, child care centres, industry professionals and concerned citizens of PEI that has grown quickly because the current consultation process was designed in reality to limit informed input.  The group is working to ensure that parents get the choice and quality that they deserve for their children.  A website has been established by the group at http://www.choiceandquality.com as well a Facebook group called PEI Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations; which now has in excess of 150 members.

BACKGROUNDER
For Immediate Release
February 26, 2008
Quality & Choice– The stated assumption of the ELOPEI (Early Learning Operators of PEI) and the Department of Social Services is that limiting the number of spaces will create quality. There are 3,000 children on PEI under the age of 24 months. There are 72 licensed child care spaces available for these children. Are 72 spaces sufficient to meet the needs of all of the mothers/fathers who have to go back to work after maternity and parental leave? There are centres that have spaces and there are centres with waiting lists – what does this say about quality? What does this say about the risks of limiting the spaces to the existing centres? How does limiting the number of centres help employees?

Quality and Conflict of Interest– Daycare and Kindergarten on PEI are owned and operated privately (both private and non-profit). We have to remember that. When has limiting competition given the public or employees better quality? Why should the interest of private operators stand ahead of parents and children and the society of Prince Edward Island? Why should child care operators have access to a Board that licenses their competitors? Is this not a conflict of interest? No other province has such a Board that sits between the regulations and the public. What then is the true aim of this Board?

Quality & Risk–We are at risk of not getting the quality that we need if we act too early, before we know what is best.  The opportunity now is to look authentically at what we have and then what we really need and then change the Act.

Quality and Authentic Consultation– To define quality and to get the best system, we need a consultation process that can define true quality. The process of consultation offered to the people of Prince Edward Island so far cannot be justified in a democratic
society. There was already an attempt in the Fall to pass changes to the Act.  These changes would have limited child care spaces.  This occurred with no public input. The changes to the Act were delayed so that a better consultation process could be set up. This has not happened. Very limited time and no context have been offered to the key stakeholders or the general public. Even the recent time extension given does not
compare with other Acts under review; such as the Child Protection act which has a process of months. As important as the time extension is, without the proper context or risk analysis being made available it is virtually impossible for key stakeholders or the general public to provide informed input.

Parents for Choice & Quality are a group consisting of mothers, fathers, grandparents, child care centres, industry professionals and concerned citizens of PEI that has grown quickly because the current consultation process was designed in reality to limit informed
input.  The group is working to ensure that parents get the choice and quality that they deserve for their children.

A website has been established by the group at http://www.choiceandquality.com as well a Facebook group called PEI Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations; which now has in excess of 150 members.

Press Release in PDF form Download here

February 27, 2008 is the next Consultation Meeting – Plan to Attend!

Never actually saw the original letter or advertisement inviting people to participate in the PEI consultation meetings regarding the Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations? 

Well here they are (see below).  Note the date on the letter.  Not much advance warning given regarding the meetings for busy ECE’s, parents or interested community members. Also, no information was provided about what the proposed changes were or the actual consultation process.  Considering that the Department is “in the process of drafting new legislation” it might have been helpful to share what the actual draft legislation was.  As we now know, the main proposed change has to do with limiting the number of new child care spaces to be created on PEI.

I, like many others,  did not make any of these meetings – due to the short notice.  I wonder how people actually did?  Did you?  In any case, it does seem that the dialogue has now moved to a new level. The dialogue is happening online, in the media, within the Government, in the child care communities, among parents and with interested citizens.  This is good…people are finally aware of what is happening and there is discussion truly happening. As Rob notes, there are now many members on the Facebook Group regarding this issue and it is growing by the hour…this evening it has increased to 108 members.  I wonder if this is more people than attended the original consultation meetings?

It is important to note that in a recent Press Release

…the Minister said that it would be premature to comment on the status of the legislation until government receives further input. “Consultations will proceed to completion and another public consultation meeting is scheduled for February 27 to allow this important discussion to continue,” said Currie.
 

I am thankful that the Minister has agreed to extend the process and provide additional opportunity for dialogue. Hopefully more people will be able to attend the upcoming meeting (Feb 27 – The meeting will be from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the Holiday Inn Express on Trans Canada Highway in Charlottetown). It is important that the conversation continues and that it becomes broader in scope.  I do hope that Department staff recognize this. It is no longer appropriate to just discuss the issue of limiting new licenses.  Let’s talk about quality, staff child ratios, how licenses are issued, staff qualifications, how qualifications are assessed, the role of the PEI Child Care Facilities Board, funding to enhance quality and support operations and much, much more.  There is much room for improvement and this can only really occur through a proper consultation process.

Plan to be there!   This issue is very important to the future of PEI’s children and families.

Here is a copy of the original meeting letter.

Also, here is a copy of the original ad that ran in the paper.

Child Care Consultation Example – Alberta

Alberta recently went through a review of their Child Care Regulations.  Have a look at what they did for their process. Here is the discussion document that they issued in the second phase of their process.  This is report that was issued at the end of the first phase.  Certainly there is good information provided here for people to consider as they participate in the process. Is there anything that PEI can learn from this example that could enhance the Child Care Regulation Review Process that is currently underway?

A Model Consultation

Jane Boyd who has recently set up a new Montessori in Summerside writes this about what a “Real Consultation” would be like:

Over my many years of being involved in child care I have seen many different variations of consultation processes in communities across the country. Certainly, there can be ranges in the level of quality in these processes, that is to be expected. Sometimes consultations are hurried along faster than what any of us might like. Sometimes they are slow and methodical and seem to take forever to complete. Sometimes they are just right. Unfortunately, what has happened on PEI in recent days seems to be fairly hurried and almost predecided. This is certainly concerning. How can a consultation truly be a consultation if it appears that the answers are already in place? How can a consultation be open and accountable if it is over before anyone even knows that it is happening?

I Googled the definition of the word consultation. Here are a few of the definitions that came up:

A technique of social interaction where opinions of all stakeholders are sought before a decision is made.

Seeking information or advice from another person taking into account their feelings, interests and expertise.

Communication between persons/groups. May have a range of purposes including the collection or dissemination of information, or identification or resolution of issues. There must be a willingness to listen and change, adequate information and sufficient time.

Here is an example of a Press Release for a child care regulation consultation process that took place in British Columbia a few years ago. The date of the Press Release was September 10, 2004. See below for key timelines related to when and how people could make submissions. My point in listing this is simply to demonstrate that successful consultation processes should allow for ample time, stakeholder notification and dialogue. This is especially essential if major changes are anticipated as an outcome of the consultation process.

The consultations will take place through to Oct. 28, 2004 and will enable people in care, their families and care providers, advocates and the public to review and discuss the proposed changes. Members of the public are encouraged to submit written presentations at the consultation meetings or via the ministry’s website at…until the end of December. The consultation documents will be posted to the website following the public meetings. The updated regulations are expected to take effect in spring 2005.

Your Voices – Comments from the Guardian

There is an article in the Guardian about the issue of less spaces – here is the link – what is even more interesting are the comments that follow. Here are some of them:

Darryl from PEI writes: Its interesting that Ms Hogan suggested in another article that We’re hoping, instead of every centre having one good early childhood educator, then if there was less centres then you would have more of a pool to pick from. So maybe I could have two or three really strong childhood educators, said Hogan.

If I was working within her facility I would wonder if I was the good one or not. If I was a parent I would wonder as well about her staff now being unmotivated due to her comments. I know my sons daycare has more than one strong staff member, they are all strong educators. Maybe Ms Hogan should concentrate on making sure she has happy staff instead of trying to limit her competition. I think her comments are a slap in the face to those people she employs and supposedly represents.

a parent of 2 from charlottetown, pei writes: I am just wondering about all the oversupply of spaces in the day cares, I am on a waiting list at 3 differant charlottetown days cares for months now. seems like all the top childcare centres are full..
…things that make me go hmmmm..

I agree from PE writes: Ok, so this time i do not agree. I don’t agree with the comments on keeping a parent home to look after the children. Also downsizing isn’t always an option.

We are a professional couple, with student loans to pay, along with regular bills. We do live in a small house.. 1100sq ft (no basement) and 5 of us. We only own one vehicle, and well there is still no option for one of us to stay home.

GIve your heads a shake. There is a problem with finding decent childcare. In some areas we need more centers, in others it should be regulated. I am not sure where they are finding the extra spaces or where the daycares are that are laying off staff, but they certainly can’t be within the Charlottetown or Cornwall areas, and if they are, there is probably a reason why parents don’t bring their children there.

I think the focus should be more on investing in QUALITY childcare, not making new rules for what is already there. Why bother spending time on this when things can be done about what is already there.

Being home would be a great option, if it were still the 50’s and fuel/groceries/mortgage/propane were priced as then as well. Its just not an option these days for most families.

sick from the drink writes: Part of my problem with all of this is that much of what we are hearing in support of this limitation comes sector representatives. So the Early Learning Operators of PEI support the changes that would limit the ability of others to open new daycares – those with existing childcare facilities are lobbying to prevent the creation of new childcare facilities. No kidding. What business owner wouldn’t want to prevent competition. So, let them state their case – but recognize that this lobby is heavily invested in the outcome, and can’t possibly be neutral in this issue.

The bottom line is that if a centre is well run and offering a good experience for the child, parents will put their children in that centre, regardless of whether or not the bargain bin centre down the road is a few bucks cheaper. The free market has its flaws, but promoting competition between businesses does provide give an incentive for businesses to meet the needs of their customers.

Oh, and to the folks who are slamming those who have kids in daycares, get over yourself. I make pretty decent money on a PEI scale and my wife stays home with our kids. But with only my income, and the ever-rising costs of owning/heating/maintaining a home, we are still barely able to make ends meet. And that is with a wage that is better than many others. The reality is that many families need two parents in the workforce just to pay the bills, and they don’t have family who are able or willing to meet their childcare needs.

Thersa M from PEI writes: This is old news folks. They tried to push this through back in the Fall. Now they are trying again only this time, they are being sneaky about it. ‘Extending the deadline’ to Feb 15th when many people did not even know that there was any consultation process going on.

Something is not right here. Why is the Department of Social Services even thinking of limiting spaces when the current system clearly does not work.

I agree with the person who said that we need quality and that we need to focus our attention on that point. A monopoly will not produce quality. Tried and true.

I say keep things open and encourage healthy competition. If weeding out needs to happen then let it happen naturally.

Our children will be the ones who benefit.

When a ‘social worker’ plays economist it hurts from laughing AND crying after, all, market intervention writes: Absolutely frightening that a social worker appears to be heading up a market intervention via limiting the number of facilities.

This is th esame approach used for lobster licences where prices were driven through th eroof for product and entry into the industry.

Ms. Jones ought to be aware that limiting access to free markets is not simply ‘protecting little people.’ As to her reference to Tim Horton’s – it’s highly inappropriate and unprofessional.

Moreover, if I was in the employ of Tim Horton’s, why couldn’t my children be able to attend a company sponsored facility?

If I wasn’t feeling so charitable, the word idiot would be rolling off my keyboard…

Kristine Nagata from Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island writes: Placing a freeze on new childcare centres may impact a parents freedom to choose what they feel is most appropriate to the needs of their child. Could this decision cause complacency in the sector? The number of people entering the childcare field has declined – it’s been proven that low wages, lack of respect, and little support, have the greatest impact on staffing in the childcare sector. Until owners and/or operators improve wages and working conditions, there will continue to be a shortage of qualified childcares providers. It sounds as though one of ELOPEI’s concerns is that new centres are taking away from and jeopardizing the sustainability of existing programs. They feel they may lose children and staff to new facilities making them vulnerable. It begs the question, why do some childcare centres have vacant spaces while others have wait lists? What’s the real issue here?

Bitter from PEI writes: I don’t understand how they can say that 67% are operating under their capacity. When my maternity leave was up, I was still on several waiting lists for daycares, and had gone to see many private child care givers, none of whom I felt were suitable to be looking after children. Maternity leave is only one year, and very few daycares and even very few private childcare givers are willing to take in a one year old. So what’s a mom to do when faced with no choices? Do I send my child to a place that I find depressing after spending only twenty minutes there, or do I quit my job? Neither one is an ideal situation, however, for the sake of my child, I chose to quit my job and as a result, I can barely make ends meet. So thank you child care on PEI.

Concerned? Sign the petition

Here is a link to a petition – Concerned that we are being rushed and that there are risks in confining the issue to spaces?

Here is the text – if you agree please go to the link here and sign.

The Prince Edward Island Government has quickly and quietly asked for public input into the proposed amendments to the Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations. I am only addressing one proposed amendment of the Act in this petition.

I do not feel the government gave due notice and opportunity to educate the public on the proposed changes to the Act and allow for quality feedback during public consultations.

1. Little notice was given to allow for working families or public to attend public consultations.

2. Little information was given as to the actual proposed changes to the Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations. A link to the Act was advertised (link below), but there was no way of knowing what amendments have been proposed.

3. The Child Care Facilities Act and Regulations states:
“12. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the Board “shall” issue a license to operate a facility, to an applicant if it is satisfied that
(a) the applicant and the facility comply with all prescribed requirements;
(b) the facility complies with all pertinent provincial and municipal laws; and
(c) the applicant has paid the prescribed fee.”

Through word of mouth, I have heard that the government would like to change the word “shall” to “may” so that they can have the final say over whether a new child care license application is awarded even if they meet all the required criteria as stated in the Act and Regulations.

This one word change could have huge implications to many on PEI, including parents, students, employees, and entrepreneurs or organizations who may wish to open or expand their services in other communities.

4. If parents allow this to pass, and the Board decided to freeze any new licenses, parents would lose their freedom of choice when looking for a child care facility for his/her child. There would be limited competition. Full centres would remain full with the potential of long waiting lists. Working parents may be forced to place their children in lower quality centres in order to earn an income.

5. Students in early childhood education programs may have limited job opportunities on PEI due to no job openings or growth. Other graduates would not be able to fulfill their vision of starting their own business.

6. The first five years of a child’s life is very critical and lays the foundation of learning for the rest of their lives. It all comes down to the best interests of the children of Prince Edward Island. The children of today are the future leaders of tomorrow.

Please do not let the PEI Child Care Facilities Board decline a license application if an applicant has met all the required criteria. They should not have the authority to limit the amount of child care spaces on PEI.

You can sign here at this link

Welcome – Consultation?

Will limiting spaces help quality and all our kids?

Welcome to this site where we can deepen our understanding of the issues related to Child Care and the Act on PEI

There is quite a stir on PEI right now – at stake is who comes first in Child Care – the operators of the businesses who provide Child Care or the interests of the parents and their children.

A quick heads up on the context for this.

On PEI all child care centres and all Kindergarten are run as businesses. In the case of Kindergarten, the province pays approved operators a fee per child. All operators are licensed under the act in question. The heart of the act are two things:

• If an operator meets the stated guidelines of the act they “Shall” get a licence
• The process of granting the license has been delegated not to a bureaucrat working under the authority of the Minister but to a board. This board is weighted towards the existing operators and staff of the system. There is one parent member who is appointed.

The challenge for many operators and owners is that some centres are not doing well and have many open spaces. Others are doing very well and have waiting lists. Parents have an excellent network and know which centres are better than others.

The Operators of the existing centres obviously would like to spread the wealth around.

Prior to the Fall session of the legislature in 2007, they met amongst themselves and made a decision – to amend the act. There was one word change in the proposed new act.

In the old act, the guts of the act was this. If a new operator met all the regulatory tests in the act – the Board “SHALL” grant the licence. The word change was to “May”. In other words the board – heavily influenced by the operators – would have discretion on who was given a licence

The public – parents and those not part of the “Club” were not consulted. In fact no one outside the “Club” knew anything about this until the act was tabled. When, at the last moment this text was discovered, this lack of consultation was pointed out and the government withdrew the act with the promise that a better consultation would be offered.

The point of this post is to ask whether the following process can be seen to be an honest attempt to consult or something else. You make up your mind.

In the week of Jan 28th, a letter dated Jan 25th (a Friday) was received by many in the Child Care business stating that a series of meetings would be held the next week to discuss the new act. No details of any changes were highlighted. The Charlottetown meeting – affecting nearly 50% of the Island was set for Feb 4, a Monday, in the afternoon during the working day. Meetings in Montague were set for Feb 6 and Summerside on Feb 7.

So in reality, busy people were given no more than a week’s notice. Anyone who had a job would not have been able to attend the key meeting.

At the Charlottetown meeting, the few attendees, mainly from government, were handed a piece of paper headed like this.

Attendees were given no list of any proposed amendments of the act. Nor did they get any brief that describe the implications of any changes.

None of the material online defines the changes or implications.

Since then, a spokesperson has spoken on the radio in response to concerns raised by parents. She said that there were too many open spaces. The department’s proposed solution was to limit the creation of any further spaces. The spokesperson said that the future quality of the system would be protected if the number of spaces were limited to the existing system.

No further information about any of the proposed changes has been made available.

Rumours abound. One is that one further seat on the board that will make the call on who gets licensed will be given to a representative of ELOPEI – the operators association. The current sitting member for the ECDA is also a member of ELOPEI.

In the radio interview on Monday this week. The CBC asked the spokesperson who was pressing for this change. Her answer was the ECDA and ELOPI.

There are no doubt good reasons to have a good look at the act. What is quality and how is it obtained are powerful questions. How can we do better for kids is a great question.

But the process does not allow this deep debate and seems in reality set to railroad one idea and one set of interests.

Is this right?

More – a lot more – later