|
Providing educational, emotional, and social support for children and families in every Tennessee county |
|
Tennessee Head Start White Papers |
|
Some of the problems confronting Tennessee’s Head Start programs might best be faced by enthusiastically pursuing a cooperative approach to the implementation of the state’s new pre-K program — at least that’s the opinion of David Kelley, director of the Family Resource Agency’s Head Start program. A good approach, he says, would be one that mirrors the relationship between the state’s school systems and the federally-funded Title I programs. |
|
Of course, he says, everything works better “if you already have an established relationship with the LEAs [the local education agencies] in your area,” Kelley admits. However, he is quick to add that “even if I had no relationship — or even a bad relationship” with the LEA, he’d still try to get some kind of cooperative program underway. “I’d rather start now and achieve whatever success is possible than wait for years and wind up in an impossible situation.” Kelley came to the Family Resource Agency in Cleveland with admittedly difficult relationships with some of the LEAs he worked with at the time. Over the years, however, cooperative efforts opened more and more doors until, today, Kelley’s agency actually runs the state’s pre-K program under contract for two of them and in close partnership with most of the others. Since the state’s new pre-K standards actually mirror the Head Start Performance Standards in many, many ways, he is able to integrate his Head Start children into what are actually the state’s pre-K classrooms. His agency provides the additional Head Start services to those children and families that meet the Head Start eligibility requirements – as well as provide the same services to the other children through partners. In one case, for example, he split one Head Start class into two groups of ten children, then added his existing staff of two teachers to the state-funded teaching staff in a state-supported classroom. As a result, his 20 Head Start children are fully served, but without the extensive overhead associated with the physical operation of the classroom: the cost of the space, heat lights, and maintenance. The problems faced by LEAs in trying to establish pre-K classrooms and meet the state’s standards are enormous, Kelley says. “How in the world,” he asks, “can you set up a classroom from scratch, then staff it and run it for what they get after the BEP formula is applied?” It’s just not possible to do it, he says. The actual amount provided varies from urban to rural areas, depending on each community’s taxing ability. One idea he has found that works well in selling the idea of Head Start’s involvement is to explain that Head Start should serve as the “Title I” program for the state-funded pre-K classrooms. “That’s an idea they can latch onto and understand,” he says. However, he adds, it still takes a good deal of faith in a Head Start program for an LEA administrator to essentially subcontract the pre-K program to an outside agency. Kelley explains that the key idea during the process of achieving the cooperation necessary is to make sure the LEA knows that the Head Start program understands — and is uniquely equipped by its many years of experience to deal with — the very real differences between running a pre-K program and a typical kindergarten program. At the same time, Kelley says, he does not try to hide the difficulties facing Head Start if there can not be a cooperative effort: dwindling pools of available four-year-olds; rising costs associated with trying to serve more three-year-olds; and the financial vise-grip of flat federal funding (or even cuts) now facing every Head Start program. “I just try to be very up-front with them,” Kelley says when talking about his on-going discussions with the LEAs. “If they understand how we can help them, and how our helping them and their helping us helps the children, then the wisdom of cooperating — of resolving the very real problems that inevitably arise — becomes clear.” Actually, most of the original state-funded pre-K pilot programs had Head Start involvement, and several were even operated by Head Start programs – sometimes directly. One very successful partnership involved a local school system that, as part of the funding request, included a copy of the detailed contract between itself and the local Head Start program. “These ideas are not new,” points out Judy Graham, the president of the Tennessee Head Start Association. However, not every Director of Schools knows how to make the partnerships and blended funding work. “Making it work can be a real challenge,” she points out. Head Start programs must pull at least 90% of their enrollees from very low income families, families with incomes about half the income limit for a reduced-price lunch. “The greatest challenge,” said Graham, “may be competition for the very low income families that Head Start must serve.” Some Tennessee programs are struggling to stay fully enrolled, since children in the pool of very low income four-year-olds may enroll in a neighborhood school. “We are thrilled that public schools are catching on to the importance of early childhood education. Now we need to maximize all our resources to serve as many four-year-olds as possible in Tennessee,” Graham said. Kelley believes that, as time passes and more examples of cooperative arrangements emerge across the state, the political pressure to cooperate will also increase. He points out that the director of the state’s Office of Early Learning, Bobbi Lussier, is already aware of the issues involved and will be looking hard to see what works and what does not. He has confidence that she will “work with us in every way possible to create these ‘pockets of success’ around the state.” He points out that it’s a “win” for her office as well as for Head Start. “The more good examples we can create of cooperative successes,” Kelley says, “the greater will be the pressure on resistant LEA’s, and resistant Head Start programs, to create more cooperative successes.” Kelley has invited anyone interested in taking a closer look at the successes — and the difficulties — in Cleveland and its nearby counties to contact him at dkelley@fratn.com or by phone at 423-479-4210, ext. 18. |
|
TN Pre-K Collaboration The ‘Title I’ of Tennessee’s Pre-K? |