1

Building an Infrastructure for QualityBond Bill ProposalEEC Advisory Council:Business/Civic & Contract Relationship Subcommittee

November 16, 2012

Children’s Investment Fund’s Background Information

Children’s Investment Fund (CIF) provides loan and grant financing, technical assistance, and training to non-profit early childhood (ECE) and out-of-school time (OST) programs planning capital improvements.

Since 1991, CIF has invested $32 million in 500 projects, helping create and improve 23,000 slots for low-income children, and leveraging an additional $48 million for capital projects.

2

Challenges Presented to ECE and OST Providers

ECE and OST providers cannot develop better facilities without a source of capital financing.

Without a predictable source of capital, ECE and OST providers are forced to forego improvements, or to spend five or more years assembling the financing for capital improvements.

3

CIF’s Research Project

CIF undertook a research project to review the condition of child care facilities across MA.

In 2011, CIF completed a statewide inventory of 182 randomly selected ECE and OST sites that serve children on subsidy.

The Inventory found that a significant number of programs fell short on measures that included access to daylight and suitable ventilation, indoor air quality, safety, thermal comfort, access to classroom sinks and bathrooms, the availability of adult work space, and space for active play.

The Inventory also found a number of hazards; and only one site was fully accessible to physically disabled children and adults.

4

CIF’s Bond Bill Proposal

CIF will file a bond bill for facilities financing in January 2013. It will be either a stand-alone bill or part of a larger community development and housing bond bill.

Eligibility for funds will be targeted to community-based nonprofits in MA in which at least 25% of the slots serve low-income families who are eligible for public subsidy.

5

CIF’s Bond Bill Proposal (cont…)

CIF will partner with The United Way of Massachusetts Bay and the Merrimack Valley (UWMBMV) in the “Building Quality” campaign.

Goal: • To secure funding to support the development

costs for community-based ECE and OST facilities across the Commonwealth.

UVMBMV will make the “Building Quality” campaign one of its key policy initiatives during the upcoming legislative session.

6

CIF’s Bond Bill Proposal (cont…)

CIF believes that the success of efforts related to QRIS, to reducing the achievement gap, and improving the health of high needs children requires investment in suitable educational environments for these children and their teachers.

7

Building an Infrastructure for Quality - Appendix

8

Facilities Inventory Advisory Committee Dianne Bruce, Edward Street Child

Services Lesley Christian, Crispus Attucks

Children’s Center Maryellen Coffey, BOSTnet Joanne Gravell, Family Services of Central

MA Marta Gredler, DELTAS, Boston Public

Schools Kimberly Haskins, Barr Foundation Deborah Hughes, Brookview House, Inc. Steven Kenney, N.B. Kenney Co., Inc. Michael Lindstrom, Horizons Design –

Michael Lindstrom Associates Architects David McGrath, MA Department of Early

Education and Care Ophelia Navarro, Boston EQUIP, a

program of Associated Early Care and Education

Carolyn O’Brien, Thrive in 5

Amy O’Leary, Strategies for Children, Early Education for All Campaign

Dora Robinson, United Way of the Pioneer Valley

Yvette Rodriguez, ABCD Head Start Jason Sachs, Early Childhood

Department, Boston Public Schools Christopher J. Smith, Boston After School

and Beyond Carl Sussman, Sussman Associates David VanderWoude, Massachusetts

Afterschool Partnership Pat Xavier, Boston Alliance for Early

Education Corey Zimmerman, United Way of

Massachusetts Bay & Merrimack Valley

9

Research Team & Methodology

Research Team: Wellesley Centers for Women On-Site Insight

Research Team helped CIF to develop evidence-based Program Facility Standards and research methodology.

Methodology: On-Site Insight made field visits to 182 randomly chosen

licensed sites across Massachusetts. On-Site Insight spent approximately ½ a day at each site.

10

Program Facilities Standards

There is no single set of standards that pays comprehensive attention to facility quality and functionality and none that address standards for both ECE and OST programs.

CIF and the Research Team developed standards for the physical environments that support children’s safety and healthy development.

There were 10 core facilities standards, with over 300 individual criteria, that cover various aspects of a site.

In addition, the Program Facilities Standards include an appendix that provides a summary of key regulations governing accessibility in ECE and OST program facilities (See Building an Infrastructure for Quality, Appendix 1 and Appendix 2, pp. 40-41).

11

The Program Sample

Total of 182 randomly selected ECE and OST sites.

130 licensed sites across Massachusetts: • 73 ECE sites • 57 OST sites

City of Boston (second phase of study) - included 45 sites in Boston from the statewide sample and 52 additional sites, for a total sample of 97 licensed sites:

• 57 ECE sites• 40 OST sites

Children’s ages ranged from birth to age 14, depending on program type.

12

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: Positive Findings

Research Team evaluated each site using three standards:1. Regulatory Standards – 76 Items:

• Existing regulations for Massachusetts.2. Professional Standards – 60 Items:

• ECE and OST national accreditation, Massachusetts QRIS standards, and other published quality criteria.

3. Best Practice Standards – 132 Items:• U.S. Department of Defense Unified Facilities Criteria and

other national standards.

Nearly all sites met 80% of the 76 Regulatory Standards. Nearly all sites met 50% of the 60 Professional Standards. Nearly all sites met 50% of the 132 Best Practices

Standards.13

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: Positive Findings (cont…)

Despite budget constraints, most programs did their best to maintain physical environments that met the state standards for health and safety.

All programs provided adequate classroom space to accommodate varied activities and children playing individually or in small or large groups:

• Highlights positive impact of Massachusetts QRIS and national accreditation quality improvement efforts.

14

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: Areas for Improvement: Building Code Compliance

The Research Team found that 9 to 26 percent of the program sites did not meet building code requirements for the condition of one or more of the following areas:

• Exterior Walls• Roof• Floors• Windows

15

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: Health and Safety: Potential Hazards

Research Team unexpectedly uncovered a number of potential hazards - all are relatively easy to fix and do not require substantial capital investments.

33% of centers statewide and 50% of centers in Boston had entrapment hazards in play equipment and structures.

26% of centers statewide and 18% of Boston centers did not have screens in windows used for ventilation.

16

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: Health and Safety: Indoor Air Quality

Children breath a greater volume of air in proportion to their body weight than adults – potential impact of poor air quality is more serious for young children.

Poor air quality contributes to absenteeism, illness, and increased incidence of asthma for children.

22% of centers statewide and 16% of centers in Boston have carbon dioxide levels that exceed 700 parts per million (ppm).

36% of centers statewide and 31% of centers in Boston lack mechanical ventilation systems over diapering areas and toilets.

17

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: Health and Safety: Sinks and Toilets

The location of classroom sinks and children’s bathrooms have measurable impact on infection, children’s hygiene, etc.

Nearly 70% of sites statewide and in Boston lack classroom sinks.

While most ECE program sites have children’s bathrooms located within 50 feet of the classroom space, 38% of ECE programs statewide and 62% in Boston did not meet the Best Practice Standard of locating bathrooms in a area directly accessible from the classroom.

18

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: Health and Safety: Physical Activity & Childhood Obesity There is growing concern about the increase in number of overweight

children, and related health risks, including Type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, and asthma.

54% of ECE programs statewide and 31% in Boston lack indoor gross motor space and equipment.

31% of OST sites statewide and 43% in Boston lack separate indoor space for sports or active games.

82% of ECE sites and 61% of OST sites statewide have their own outdoor play space. In Boston, 37% have their own outdoor space and 20% share the outdoor space with another program. Program sites without outdoor space use public playgrounds, which were not visited as part of the study.

46% of OST programs statewide and 23% in Boston do not have playing fields for sports and games; 34% statewide and 28% in Boston have no hard-surface play area.

19

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: The Learning Environment: Classroom Features

Nearly every site for both ECE and OST programs met the Regulatory and Professional Standards of 35 square feet per child of classroom space. Given the tight operating margins, programs serving a higher proportion of low and moderate income children are rarely able to exceed the 35 square feet per child minimum required for a state license.

Over 90% of classroom environments in ECE programs meet most Regulatory and Professional Standards for room arrangement, display, and furnishings.

67% of OST sites did not meet the Professional Standard of 45 square feet per child for enrichment activities, such as art, woodworking, or science activities; 40% did not have computer labs or access to technology.

20

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: The Learning Environment: Accessibility

Physical Environment is often a significant barrier to full participation in education for children with special needs.

Only one program site in the study is fully accessible, and it was constructed a year before the Facilities Inventory was conducted.

21

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: The Learning Environment: Acoustics

Noisy conditions are stressful for all occupants of the space and interfere with language development and reading skills and children’s concentration.

School age children need quiet spaces for homework and small group activities.

26% of centers lack acoustical tile or ceiling treatment.

22

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: The Learning Environment: Daylight and Artificial Lighting

Classrooms with ample daylight, supplemented by good artificial lighting, affect academic performance, comfort, and behavior.

20% of ECE and OST centers statewide and 21% in Boston have at least one classroom without exterior windows. The data for OST programs showed that 1/3 of sites have one or more classrooms without windows.

23

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: The Learning Environment: Thermal Comfort

There is considerable research on the effects of temperature on concentration and learning – when children are too hot or too cold, they cannot concentrate and may resist participating in activities.

34% of sites statewide do not comply with national thermal comfort standards of 68 to 78 degrees F. in the winter and 74 to 82 degrees F. in the summer.

24

Findings from the Facilities Inventory: The Work Environment: Adult Work Space

Teachers working in good spaces feel better about their work and are more engaged and positive with children.

18% of ECE programs statewide and 26% in Boston lack space for administrative work, planning, preparation, or meetings. 30% of OST programs statewide and 53% in Boston lack adult workspace.

33% of sites have no secure place for staff to store personal belongings.

65% of sites statewide and 50% in Boston lack appropriate technology for teachers.

25

Capital Resource Needs and Models In reality, there are 3 capital gaps: (1) repair and replacement; (2) capital

improvements; and (3) new facilities.

Models: (1) Capital Grants – Pennsylvania made available $30 million in

capital grants to construct or renovate 55 child care facilities. The centers had to match at least 20% of the cost.

(2) Debt Service Support – Connecticut helps providers raise tax-exempt bond financing with the promise to pay an average of 80% of the debt service for each project. To fulfill this promise, originally the state appropriated $2.5 million annually for the 30 year term of the bond; it has since increased the level to #4 million per year.

(3) Loans – because of the revenue constraints on ECE and OST programs, their ability to support debt and meet conventional bank underwriting standards is limited. CIF and similar organizations in other states provide loans with more flexible terms, specifically designed for this small business sector.

(4) Public-Private Partnerships – CIF has raised $29 million from foundations, corporations, and government sources to provide training, technical support, and grants and loans to address the capital needs of ECE and OST programs across Massachusetts.

26

Recommendations Address Hazardous Conditions – develop a pool of funding for programs

to address hazards identified and other repairs or minor improvements to comply with licensing.

Build Partnerships with Utility Companies – target some of the public utilities subsidies for energy saving improvements to meet the needs of the ECE and OST small business sector.

Leverage Community Development Resources to Build or Improve ECE or OST Sites – the community development system should realign its capital sources and investment strategies by using existing capital funding streams and regulatory tools to stimulate improvements in the supply and quality of ECE and OST services in lower-income communities.

Leverage the Focus on High Quality ECE through the RTTT-ELC Competition to Draw Attention to the State of Infrastructure – there is an opportunity to demonstrate the measurable impact that a well-designed learning environment and good work environment will have on teacher effectiveness and children’s educational outcomes.

Develop a Public Funding Mechanism – that will permit low interest, long term loans for major repairs, renovations and/or new construction of ECE and OST facilities to serve low income children. To build an infrastructure for quality, there must be an affordable and dependable capital financing sources for ECE and OST programs in lower-income communities.

27