preschool taskforce final report - seattle public schools · preschool taskforce final report...

Preschool Taskforce Final Report December 15, 2016

Seattle Public Schools is committed to making its online information accessible and usable to all people, regardless of ability or technology. Meeting web accessibility guidelines and standards is an ongoing process that we are consistently working to improve.

While Seattle Public Schools endeavors to only post documents optimized for accessibility, due to the nature and complexity of some documents, an accessible version of the document may not be available. In these limited circumstances, the District will provide equally effective alternate access.

For questions and more information about this document, please contact the following:

Tisha Crumley Early Learning Inclusion Specialist

[email protected]

The Seattle Public Schools’ Board of Directors initiated a process for studying the impacts, risk and benefits of sustaining and expanding preschool services within Seattle Public Schools through the establishment of a Preschool Task Force. The primary purpose of the task force was to gather, analyze, review and consider information and data on the Seattle Preschool Program, and to examine current preschool services offered within Seattle Public Schools. The Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force convened from May 2016 to December 2016, in order to prepare recommendations to the Superintendent on potential changes to preschool programs within Seattle Public Schools. The Superintendent will use this report, along with other important data, to make recommendations to the School Board for potential changes in the 2017-18 school year.

Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force Final Report

December 15, 2016

For ADA assistance in accessing this document please contact Tisha Crumley, Early Learning Inclusion Specialist at [email protected]

SPS Early Learning Department

2 Updated 2.15.17 Preschool Taskforce Final Report

Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

Statements of Recommendation…………………………………………………………………………………….4 Background and Context…………………………………………………………………………………………………6 Task Force Process………………………………………………………………………………………………………….7 RECOMMENDATIONS Statement of Intended Service………………………………………………………………………………………..8 Outreach Statement …………………………………………………………………………………………………….11

Inclusion (Continuum of Services) Statement………………………………………………………………..13 Financial Statement ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..19

APPENDIX

A. Task Force Charter………………………………………………………………………………………………….20 B. Task Force Members……………………………………………………………………………………………….24 C. Consultant Biography……………………………………………………………………………………………..25 D. Gradients of Agreement …………………………………………………………………………………………26 E. Meeting Progression Summary ………………………………………………………………………………27 F. Current Preschool Offerings…………….……………………………………………………………………..28 G. Preschool Location Map………………………………………………………………………………………….32 H. Preschool Program IEP Comparisons ………………………………………………………………………33 I. Special Education Preschool Data Visualization……………………………………………………….34 J. Seattle Preschool Program at EEU …………………………………………………………………………..35 K. Performance Indicators…………………………………………………………………………………………..37 L. Seattle Preschool Task Force PPT Presentation 5-26-2016 ………………………………………38 M. Seattle Preschool Task Force PPT Presentation 6-16-2016 …………………………..………….47 N. Seattle Preschool Task Force PPT Presentation 9-16-2016 …………………………………..….62 O. Reading References……..…………………………………………………………………………………………67 P. Individual Task Force Statements…………………………………………………………………………….68



Introduction

The Seattle Public Schools’ Board of Directors initiated a process for studying the impacts, risk and benefits of sustaining and expanding preschool services within Seattle Public Schools through the establishment of a Preschool Task Force. The primary purpose of the task force was to gather, analyze, review and consider information and data on the Seattle Preschool Program, and to examine current preschool services offered within Seattle Public Schools. The goal of the task force was to bring together experienced staff, family, and community members who represent the diversity of Seattle Public Schools, to collectively provide insight, perspective and recommendations regarding the future of Seattle Public Schools preschool programming. The Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force convened from May 2016 to December 2016, in order to prepare recommendations to the Superintendent on potential changes to preschool programs within Seattle Public Schools. The Superintendent will use this report, along with other important data, to make recommendations to the School Board for potential changes in the 2017-18 school year. As requested by Seattle Public Schools’ Board of Directors, the report and recommendations were to include but were not limited to:

A. An affirmation statement between Seattle Public Schools and City of Seattle to create inclusive preschools in Seattle that seek out and welcome students regardless of their race, socioeconomic status, social-emotional learning needs or learning style.

B. The purposeful outreach to families with the specific intent of creating classrooms with a diverse student population with varying abilities, regardless of whether the classrooms are operated by the District or other community-based organizations.

C. The development of special education inclusion preschool classrooms consistent with the District’s goal of offering, at a minimum, a continuum of educational placements within each middle school feeder area.

D. A plan for coordination and engagement between the SPP classrooms and the District’s developmental preschool classrooms.

E. Assessment of the financial impact preschool classrooms has on the K-12 buildings and feasibility of eliminating the 25% performance holdback.

F. Any other provisions that the task force identifies as necessary to create high-quality and equitable preschools.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY



To address this scope of work, the SPS Preschool Task Force collectively decided to make four Statements of Recommendation to the Superintendent in response to the following fundamental questions: Who are we serving? How will we fund it? How should we do outreach? Where do we serve? And how do we pattern our classrooms to be inclusive? Final recommendation statements put forth by the Preschool Task Force include: Statement of Intended Services (Affirmation Statement) Outreach Statement Inclusion (Continuum of Services) Statement Financial Statement This action was brought to promote collaboration and partnership between the City and Seattle Public Schools in their joint goal of providing high quality preschool to Seattle’s children; a step which is critical to closing the opportunity gap. It recognizes that in addition to race and socioeconomic factors, children with differing emotional regulation and developmental abilities demonstrate a readiness gap that preschool may be effective in closing or eliminating. Statements of Recommendation Statement of Intended Service (Affirmation Statement) We, the Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force, recommend that our city provide access to high-quality preschool for all of its three- and four-year old children. Based on available data, in cases of resource constraints, we recommend prioritizing four-year olds. In keeping with Seattle Public Schools’ Strategic Plan, we support access for all children, with a variety of learning abilities and learning characteristics, and recommend prioritization of children, families and communities with historical barriers to eligibility. Finally, we recommend that the City of Seattle and Seattle Public Schools collaborate to deliver high-quality preschool taught by certified teachers who demonstrate a deep understanding of equity and early childhood development. Preschool programs will engage, challenge and support all learners, and partner with families in a culturally responsive manner. Community Outreach Statement Seattle Public Schools and the City of Seattle Department of Education and Early Learning (DEEL) should provide outreach for all Seattle preschool programs, including developmental preschool. This outreach should be continuous and multi-lingual, intentionally reaching families with historical barriers, as well as students with varying abilities and learning characteristics. We should specifically encourage and support families with children with special needs to apply.



We recommend the development and implementation of a comprehensive plan to engage families through a variety of methods, using multiple community-based and school-based partnerships. Possible outreach strategies include continuous improvement and maintenance of SPS Department of Early Learning website, print materials, brochures, informational posters, surveys, Child Find activities, flow chart and FAQ of the whole process, (beyond the enrollment process) as well as active presentations on preschool options in venues where families naturally gather across the city. Content should include awareness of all options, visual representations of diverse populations, understanding and navigating the enrollment process, and helping all preschool teachers and appropriate administrative staff understand how to educate and help families through this entire process. Outreach should also target schools of education, colleges, and universities to encourage participation in our preschools. These actions will help realize Seattle Public School’s plan to prepare all students to succeed and thrive in school. Inclusion (Continuum of Services) Statement Seattle Public Schools and the City of Seattle Department of Education and Early Learning should establish inclusive and culturally responsive Seattle preschool classrooms and provide access to a continuum of placements, services and supports that reflect the diversity and needs of all children with varying types of abilities and learning characteristics so that every child has the opportunity to succeed. Next steps should include blended preschool classroom pilots based on proven models. In particular, those classrooms co-located next to developmental preschool in SPS buildings should pilot blended environments in both classrooms. Blended classrooms should also be geographically dispersed to promote equal access. We recommend City, community programs, and SPS collaborate to align systems to better coordinate services. We further recommend setting initial internal metric targets to at least 10% of slots in all classrooms reserved for students with special needs, with rigorous attention to unintended disparity of impact on over- identification of any population segment. Financial Statement Given that Early Learning is a core strategy in eliminating the opportunity gap, the Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force recommends that all efforts should be made to maximize allowable funding streams by blending and braiding funds to expand access to high quality preschool services. The task force examined the nine programmatic milestones of the Seattle Preschool Program and the 25% performance pay structure and does not recommend a change at this time.



Background and Context In September 2013, the Seattle City Council unanimously adopted Resolution 31478, which supports the goal of creating a program to make voluntary, high-quality preschool available and affordable to all of Seattle's three- and four-year-old children. In May 2014, Mayor Murray and the Seattle City Council proposed a taxpayer-funded levy (Ordinance 124509) to support a four-year demonstration project. In November 2014, Seattle voters overwhelmingly approved the demonstration project which builds toward serving 2,000 children in 100 classrooms by 2018.

The Seattle Preschool Program (SPP) offers high-quality, affordable preschool to children across the City of Seattle. Seattle Public Schools is currently collaborating with the City's Department of Education and Early Learning to manage eight SPP preschool classrooms and currently serves approximately 160 students. SPP is a mixed delivery model in that community-based organizations (CBOs) also offer SPP services. The Department of Education and Early Learning (DEEL) currently contracts with twenty CBO sites, and an additional eight SPP Seattle Public School classrooms serving approximately 600 children total in the 2015-16 school year.

In March 2016, Seattle Public Schools initiated a process for studying the impacts, risks, and benefits of sustaining and expanding its preschool programs through the establishment of a Preschool Task Force. The task force convened from May 2016 to December 2016. The role of the task force is to gather, analyze, review, and consider information and data and to prepare a report to the Superintendent regarding Seattle’s preschool programs. The Superintendent will use this report, along with other important data, to make recommendations to the School Board for potential changes in the 2017-18 school year. (See Figure 1. SPP Timeline of Events.)

Sept. 2013 City Council unanimously

passes preschool Resolution

31478

Winter 2014 Seattle sends delegation to Boston, New

Jersey & DC to look at model

preschool

Evolution of universal

preschool idea to a 4 year

scale up demonstration

phase

Spring 2014 Seattle

Preschool action plan published

Sept. 2014 School

Board work session held

Nov. 2014 Seattle voters

approve Seattle

Preschool Program by 70% margin.

Feb. 2015 Board work session SPP

briefing

May 2015 Partnership Agreement accepted by the School

Board

Aug. 2015 Service

Agreement accepted by the School

Board

Sept. 2015 Seattle Public

Schools opens 3 SPP classrooms.

March 2016

School Board approves continued

funding of 3 current preschool classrooms and 5 more open Fall

2016

May 2016 Seattle Public

Schools Preschool Taskforce Convenes

Figure 1. SPP Timeline of Events

http://www.seattle.gov/council/issues/PreschoolforAll/docs/2013%2008%2023%20Resn_31478%20as%20adopted.pdf

http://clerk.seattle.gov/%7Escripts/nph-brs.exe?s3=118114&s4=&s5=&s1=&s2=&S6=&Sect4=AND&l=0&Sect2=THESON&Sect3=PLURON&Sect5=CBORY&Sect6=HITOFF&d=ORDF&p=1&u=%2F%7Epublic%2Fcbor1.htm&r=1&f=G

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2024953339_elexseattleprekxml.html



Task Force Process The Seattle Public Schools (SPS) Preschool Program Task Force held its first meeting on May 26, 2016. The primary purpose of the task force is to intentionally bring together diverse perspectives, experiences and expertise in order to examine the complex issues involved in building and bringing to scale a high quality, culturally competent and inclusive preschool program in Seattle, to specifically address key issues, and to submit recommendations to the Superintendent concerning the Seattle Preschool Program within Seattle Public Schools. The charter establishing this task force can be found in Appendix A. The Early Learning staff in Seattle Public Schools, the staff in the City Department of Early Learning and Education and the Superintendent will use this report, along with other important data, to evolve the work in preschool programming, and as necessary make recommendations to the School Board and/or Mayor for potential changes in the 2017-18 school year. The task force is comprised of school district leadership, principals, early learning administrators, teachers, early learning experts, City of Seattle and SPS partners, and parents. An application and recruitment process was established and publicized via formal and informal communication channels in Seattle’s communities. All task force meetings were open to the public. Meeting agendas, minutes and information can be found on the task force web page: http://www.seattleschools.org/families_communities/committees/preschool_program_task_force . A complete list of task force members can be found in Appendix B. The task force convened eight times between May and December 2016. Each meeting was four-hours, and facilitated by an experienced outside consultant. (See Appendix C: Consultant Biography.) The meetings were organized according to the task force charter, and included presentations on related topics by school district and education leaders from outside the task force, inquiry into those topics, evaluation of data, group discussion, and consensus building for specific statements of recommendation to be included in this report. Each statement of recommendation was reached by consensus, using the gradients of agreement model (see Appendix D: Gradients of Agreement) or when unable to reach consensus, by majority vote. Task force members were given time on each topic to speak with partners, in small working groups, and in the whole group – to comment, edit, and improve the work of the whole. Each recommendation statement included in this report was passed by at least a majority and usually in consensus. At the conclusion of the task force, members were invited to write individual statements to clarify their individual position for each or any recommendation. The meeting progression is documented in Appendix E.

http://www.seattleschools.org/families_communities/committees/preschool_program_task_force

http://www.seattleschools.org/families_communities/committees/preschool_program_task_force



Statement of Intended Service We, the Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force, recommend that our city provide access to high-quality preschool for all of its three- and four-year old children. Based on available data, in cases of resource constraints, we recommend prioritizing four-year olds. In keeping with Seattle Public Schools’ Strategic Plan, we support access for all children, with a variety of learning abilities and learning characteristics, and recommend prioritization of children, families and communities with historical barriers to eligibility. Finally, we recommend that the City of Seattle and Seattle Public Schools collaborate to deliver high-quality preschool taught by certified teachers who demonstrate a deep understanding of equity and early childhood development. Preschool programs will engage, challenge and support all learners, and partner with families in a culturally responsive manner. Landscape of Preschool in Seattle Public Schools SPS staff prepared two tables to respond to the Task Force’s questions about the number, location and capacity of preschool classrooms currently operating in SPS buildings. The first shows preschool classrooms by school and type of program or funding, and the second lists preschools by provider. (See Appendix F: Current Preschool Offerings) Below is a snapshot of preschool programs offered in Seattle Public Schools for the 2015-16 school year.

Snapshot of Preschool Landscape in Seattle Public School Buildings in 2015-2016

RECOMMENDATIONS

Figure 2. Snapshot of SPS Preschool Programs, 2015-16.



To visually represent preschool locations, staff created a preschool location map (See Appendix G: Preschool Location Map). This map shows all the SPS developmental preschools, SPP SPS sites, SPP community-based organization sites and SPS Head Start sites. This was in response to the task force’s request to be able to see where in the city the preschools are located, and to be able to make a recommendation regarding how SPS can work more closely with SPP SPS and SPP CBO sites to create partnerships between developmental preschools and general education preschools. The map will also assist in thinking about geography, need, and demand for preschool.

Alignment to Strategic Plan The four-year demonstration preschool project known as the Seattle Preschool Program (SPP) has significant implications for Seattle Public Schools’ vision of graduating 100% of its students ready for college, career, and life. A large body of scientific evidence has shown that the fundamental architecture of the brain is established before a child enters kindergarten. As a result, in the absence of high quality preschool, many enter without adequate preparation. This gap in preparedness can be seen in the Fall 2014 kindergarten entry assessment results from Washington Kindergarten Inventory of Developing Skills (WaKIDS). These results indicate that of the 1875 children assessed in SPS’ 31 highest poverty schools, only 58% met widely held expectations (WHE) for literacy and just 31% met WHE for math. This gap continues throughout grades 1-5. From 1st – 5th grade, for example, African-American students’ median measure of academic progress (MAP) scores rose from the 26th to the 39th percentile in math, and during the same period, Hispanic/Latino students’ median scores rose from the 28th to the 50th percentile. (See Appendix M: PPT Presentation 6-6-16 and Figure 3. MAP Assessment Scores.)

Figure 3. MAP Assessment Scores



Approximately 74% of students who attend city-funded non SPP preschool programs enter SPS kindergarten classrooms. Many of these students enter with a readiness gap that does not close by third grade. SPP, if successful, will reduce and potentially eliminate the preparedness gap that currently exists for students entering the District’s kindergarten program, increasing the likelihood that SPS will move closer to achieving its vision for all students. Discussion Points on Intended Service

During the first meeting’s discussion (See Appendix L: PPT Presentation 5-26-16) members were asked to identify their main reason for joining the task force and what they believed might be an explosive topic.

• Equal access • Family system • Misconceptions about preconceived notions • Opportunity gap • Parents need to know how to navigate • High poverty families

Further concepts the Task Force explored included: Access

• Historical practice of segregation, parents’ knowingness to access (navigating the system), access for those in power and knowing how to make access for themselves, language and technology

• Can all classrooms adapt to all students? Space

• Historically, community based organizations offered preschool • District is not required to offer general education preschool (not funded)

o Required programs don’t have enough space o District held accountable to perform but no space

• Basically, the current infrastructure doesn’t have enough capacity • Adequacy of space and geography

Equity • Historical redlining (historical practice of racially-based discrimination limiting

housing availability) that determines where the power & money are • Redlining has (and still currently does) shaped the city’s distribution of

population, resources and access o Creating a system that is equitable (affordable housing, thus creating

needs for schools, etc) • Smaller class sizes as mandated by legislature may impact ability to house

preschool services • Transportation



Outreach Statement Seattle Public Schools and the City of Seattle Department of Education and Early Learning should provide outreach for all Seattle preschool programs, including developmental preschool. This outreach should be continuous and multi-lingual, intentionally reaching families with historical barriers, as well as students with varying abilities and learning characteristics. We should specifically encourage and support families with children with special needs to apply. We recommend the development and implementation of a comprehensive plan to engage families through a variety of methods, using multiple community-based and school-based partnerships. Possible outreach strategies include continuous improvement and maintenance of SPS Department of Early Learning website, translated print materials, brochures, informational posters, surveys, Child Find activities, flow chart and FAQ of the whole process (beyond the enrollment process), as well as active presentations on preschool options in venues where families naturally gather across the city. Content should include awareness of all options, visual representations of diverse populations, understanding and navigating the enrollment process, and helping all preschool teachers and appropriate administrative staff understand how to educate and help families through this entire process. Outreach should also target schools of education, colleges, and universities to encourage participation in our preschools. These actions will help realize SPS plan to prepare all students to succeed and thrive in school. Focusing Questions

• How do families find out about benefits, perks, costs, and application difference between different programs? How are we going to help families navigate this process?

• How can preschool programs unpack barriers, myths, and policy regarding inclusion? • How can we do equitable outreach intentional of diversity to parents and families? • How can we focus on deeper engagement and marketing to create a welcoming

environment and sense of belonging? • How do we work to align the two application systems (one for SPS developmental

education preschool and one for SPP)?

Discussion Points on Community Outreach Survey

• The task force did not agree on a recommendation about a community survey. Following up on the previous decision, there was not consensus regarding whether the district should send out a survey to community members about outreach and barriers.

• Members of the task force commented that several surveys which had been sent out previously, only returned a very small percentage of responses.

• Members of the task force commented that they were an intentionally representative body, and whereas surveys might confirm or validate the barriers already identified, it



might not be a good use of time or resources for the preschool taskforce. • There was discussion on the merits of asking Developmental Preschool teachers to ask a

small set of questions to parents during the parent-teacher conferences in order to get information about barriers to accessing the preschool program and needed services to help them understand their path to the best options for their children moving forward.

• In the end, it was decided that this is something that the SPS Early Childhood staff could decide, given the short turnaround time, the rest of the conversation already scheduled in those conferences, and the fact that the timeline of the task force is ending soon.

Child Find Hubs SPS and the City Department of Education and Early Learning (DEEL) have partnered on a new initiative to increase the likelihood that all families find the information they need and understand the programs and services they have access to, so that every student in Seattle is ready to be successful in kindergarten. A Child Find Hub is a community-based resource that is able to support parents and families that are concerned about their child’s development in initiating the Child Find Process. The Hub is open to all parents, not just those enrolled in the preschool. Child Find is federally mandated and defined as: All children with disabilities residing in the State, including children with disabilities who are homeless children or are wards of the State and children with disabilities attending private schools, regardless of the severity of their disabilities, and who are in need of special education and related services, are identified, located, and evaluated and a practical method is developed and implemented to determine which children with disabilities are currently receiving needed special education and related services. The SPS/DEEL pilot launched in September 2016 at SPP sites, specifically the ones that are not SPS. Child Find Hubs are only involved in the “Concern” step of the Special Education process. All providers were interested in being a Child Find Hub. A training was conducted with center directors around basics for providing a culturally responsive first contact with a family. Responsibilities of the Hub:

• Hang a Child Find Hub poster • Ensure all staff understand the concept of being a Child Find Hub • Ensure that all staff know who the Child Find point-of-contact is for the site • Maintain updated Child find information and keep it available for inquiring families • Maintain a log of contacts • Support inquiring families in contacting SPS



Inclusion (Continuum of Services) Statement Seattle Public Schools and the City of Seattle Department of Education and Early Learning should establish inclusive and culturally-responsive Seattle preschool classrooms and provide access to a continuum of placements, services and supports that reflect the diversity and needs of all children with varying types of abilities and learning characteristics so that every child has the opportunity to succeed. Next steps should include blended preschool classroom pilots based on proven models. In particular, those classrooms co-located next to developmental preschool in SPS buildings should pilot blended environments in both classrooms. Blended classrooms should also be geographically dispersed to promote equal access. We recommend City, community programs, and SPS collaborate to align systems to better coordinate services. We further recommend setting initial internal metric targets to at least 10% of slots in all classrooms reserved for students with special needs, with rigorous attention to unintended disparity of impact on over-identification of any population segment. Discussion Points on Inclusion

• The task force discussed the components of inclusion; these being: o The definition of a continuum of services and/or placements, and whether that

continuum occurs in one setting or is offered across settings; o The different types of diversity that are recognized in an inclusive setting; o The definition of “equal education and benefits” especially for those students

with severe needs; o Access for all to the services provided, meaning that receiving services is not

contingent on having previous knowledge of the system. • Task force members requested data demonstrating the demographics of children being

served in Special Education. In response to this request, SPS staff prepared two data charts. One reflecting a comparison of students being served with IEPs in SPP and SPS preschool programs (See Appendix H: Preschool Program IEP Comparisons), and the other, a snapshot of students with Special Education Case Managers enrolled by region and service (See Appendix I: Special Education Preschool Data Visualization).

• Task force members reviewed the preschool snapshot data, showing the number of special education preschool students being served by region and service. The task force would like to see this data further disaggregated by race/ethnicity, and other demographic areas.

• Task force members would like more information and/or discussion about the possibility of moving towards eliminating developmental preschool as a way of providing inclusive education. Unanticipated consequences of such a move were a concern for members of the task force, though most agree that students at the preschool level benefit from receiving their education with peers that do not have special needs.



Taskforce Work Session – Characteristics of Inclusion and Reasonable Barriers Inclusion Reasonable Barrier Comments Not homogenous is important to me because we don’t live in a homogenous world. What we create for children should assist them with navigating the world as it exists. The classroom should reflect the world as it exists.

Language access makes it hard to get in Segregation that exists within the city right now (children go to school where they live)

Inclusion doesn’t have any rules given collective resources; we’re starting with the individual and collectively meeting their needs; a classroom/system has options and pathways for individuals

Existing systems are hard to change. Cost, complexity, and needs created silo-ed systems. Our current system reflects the need of our system not the need of our current students; Tradition—it’s always been this way

Historically the education system was built for females, not males; existing systems were created in isolation, not to work together

Classroom environments that are reflective of children of all abilities; developing understanding

Cost restrictions: special expertise, sq footage for ADA, lower ratios

How do we reach the families farthest away from opportunity? Will people actually get behind equity?

The environment is welcoming to the caring adults connected to the children and ties families into support that exists in the community

Working schedules, cultural differences, unknown bias, background checks (interferes with feeling welcome), language

Classroom exists within a school building that has the same philosophy and belief system; building has to practice inclusivity

Shift in approach for the staff, it is hard to teach in diverse settings; different understandings of what is normal

There are different understandings of inclusion

All children should be able to get to and from school

Publically funded transportation Head start has transportation, SPP does not; SPP students have been transferring to head start b/c they need transportation; laws and regulations that provide for one thing and not another

Where barriers are seen as barriers not reasons to punish

What children are affected by disciplinary policies? How is discipline applied?

Creating a sense of belonging on multiple dimensions; culture and race are acknowledged and honored, as well as emotional and physical ability

Institutional and historical and personal Racism, city segregation

Provide the training/education/support/role-modeling so that teachers in the classroom are able to deal with children from different backgrounds

Passing the problem to an outside space or another teacher doesn’t create an environment of inclusion; Behavior of children begins to seriously negatively impact the education of the other children

Getting kids where they are and meeting them appropriately; teacher can meet the needs of each child

Reasonable bandwidth for teachers There are so many “teachers” in a child’s life so who else can meet these needs; Support for teachers when they hit challenges and barriers



Providing a Continuum of Services

Focusing Questions

• Within the geography of the school district, do we think there is an appropriate continuum of services for a diverse population of students?

o Diverse population of students = language, race, class, ability • Are preschools distributed geographically to provide continuum of services equitably? • How do we reach families and communicate with them?

Discussion Points on the Continuum of Services

• This work included conversations on the definition of a “continuum”. • We have two extremes in our continuum of services for preschool students; the middle

ground being addressed by split days is not ideal. • General Education (GenEd) doesn’t have optimal supports. • We need more skilled capacity at the GenEd level, GenEd teachers with a dual

placement student lacks the support that exists in the developmental preschool. • Research shows that kids of all abilities develop faster in general education classrooms. • The district should work towards inclusion; instead of focusing on developmental

preschool, we should serve preschool kids in a general education setting, with the necessary supports for kids with special needs, and offer a continuum of services

• Budget needs to be built to include support services in the inclusive/GenEd classrooms. • Can each region have a more inclusive model? Can we pilot inclusive classrooms? • The task force concluded that a call for action needs to be included in this statement. As

part of the action plan, the task force would like to see how proximity of classrooms will be used to create inclusive education and how these pilots might be scaled out further.

• The task force would like to see a detailed, long-term implementation plan and timeline. • The task force recognizes a capacity issue in the school district, and recommends that

SPS partner more with community-based organizations to provide inclusive settings. • Quality inclusion costs a lot of money and if we are serious about it then we need to find

the money to do it.

General Education (5 days)

Developmental Preschool (4 half-days)

Developmental Preschool, extended

program

Developmental Preschool & General

Education (4 days split, 1 day all Gen ED)

General Education + ITS (itinerant teacher

services)

Figure 4. SPS Continuum of Services



Special Education Background: Preschool is still a pretty new model for school systems. Traditionally, these have been school-based preschools serving students in poverty and with disabilities. This conversation is a new conversation for our city.

• 1965 and 66, as part of the “War on Poverty”, Head Start is launched • 1975 Education for All Handicapped Children Act • Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program (ECEAP)

Special Education Funding: Provision requires that Federal Funds be used to supplement the regular education program, not to substitute (supplant) funds or services that otherwise would be provided by District, or State funding. Supplant vs. Supplement: Supplement means to ‘add something to complete a thing’, Supplant means to ‘take the place of’. Special Education Process

Typical time frame of this process:

• From expressing Concern/paperwork submitted to evaluation decision — 25 school days • Screening (if needed for decision to evaluate) for preschool kids—2 weeks • Once the need for an Evaluation is determined and parent’s consent signature has been

received by District, the Evaluation must be completed within 35 school days—7 weeks • From determination of eligibility at Evaluation to an IEP - 30 calendar days • Services start once IEP is developed, parent signs consent form, and student is enrolled

Discussion Points on Special Education

• Special Education for preschool students is a mandated program and special needs kids will always have access to education.

• We’ve provided developmental preschool classrooms because there haven’t been other options historically.

• Seattle Public Schools is responsible for ensuring FAPE—Free Appropriate Public Education, an education right of children with disabilities in the United States that is guaranteed by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

• Not all special education has to be provided by the special education teacher, but they need to design it.

Concern Screening Evaluation IEPEarly Childhood

Services

Figure 5. Special Education Process



• Students in CBO preschools do not have access to the special services (speech therapist, psychologist, etc), so a student with an IEP would have to do half day or only developmental preschool in order to receive services.

• SPP classrooms are full-day (9am-3pm); developmental preschools are 2.5 hours, 4 days a week, with an extended day program for students with diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).

• A student splits their day between a general education classroom and developmental preschool, or receives itinerant services in the general education classroom as determined by the student’s IEP team.

• Enrollment in a preschool classroom in a SPS building does not guarantee kindergarten in that building.

Discussion Points on Special Education Process

• One of the challenges is communicating options to families: o How do families understand what their choices are? o We need to make sure we have consistent messaging to families with all their

options, not just the most cost effective option o There should be communication and coaching with parents

• The options offered seem to depend on a family’s ability to advocate; it’s an equity issue Discussion Points on Special Education Funding

• Students are always general education students first; Special Education (SpEd) funds are above and beyond (supplemental to) general education funds allocated for a student.

• Special Education funds are held accountable to a student’s Individual Education Plan. • In an SPP classroom basic education is provided by general education funds; in a self-

contained / developmental preschool SpEd funding provides education services. • Funding for 25% of SPP preschool classroom is banked, meaning performance metrics

met during the program year provide funding for the preschool program budget • We need to have separate funding streams for Special Education students because

there is a risk of losing Seattle Preschool Program funding, and SpEd can’t risk funding. • Blending funds for inclusion classrooms might make it difficult to ensure students are

receiving full access to their SpEd time/funding as mandated by that student’s IEP. • One of the challenges with blending and braiding funds is that funds may be reduced;

however, this is not always the case. It may actually be helpful in funding programs. • SPS SPP classrooms provide full-day services for preschool students; SPS Developmental

preschool provides part-day programming and services for special education students. • Head Start is also moving towards a full-day model; Head Start has guided programming

across the country. Is it possible to also provide a full-day special education program? • How do we ensure equitable programs and services for all of our preschool students?



EEU Overview

The Experimental Education Unit was started in 1964 as a pilot school for kids with neurological injuries and then down syndrome. It is based in research—a lab school. EEU rebranded to The Haring Center in 2009. It serves 250 children, birth through kindergarten, currently 40% with developmental disabilities. All children learn side-by-side and all services are provided in the classroom. University of Washington undergraduate and graduate students, as well as volunteers, work in the classroom in addition to teachers and aides. In the SPP at EEU classrooms, the teachers have Masters degrees, are dual-certified, and co-teach. Teachers also receive coaching support. (See Appendix J: Seattle Preschool Program at EEU).

EEU Lessons Learned

The EEU currently has two SPP classrooms that include children with developmental disabilities and kids who qualify for ECEAP. The ratios are similar to the three half-day preschool classrooms that EEU runs outside of SPP. The classrooms have four students with ECEAP, six with special needs, and six general education students. The preschool classrooms have been going through a lot of changes over the last three years, including, most recently, the partnership with SPP. Last year, all classrooms went through the process of earning an Early Achievers rating. The EEU has begun collecting data on how the amount of instruction impacts progress towards a student’s IEP. At this point, the data suggests that far more instruction towards IEP goals occurs in the SPP classrooms versus the half-day classrooms. The EEU has also found it easier to implement state-sponsored Creative Curriculum lesson plans and assessments in full day (six-hours) versus half day (2.5-hours) programming. Presenting a general education curriculum at the EEU has always been a challenge. Not long ago, the EEU was using a special education curriculum. The shift has come with the State – the Department of Early Learning and Early Achievers. The EEU is keeping up with those trends. This is a case-study.

Discussion Points on EEU

• The EEU decision to keep three half-day programs (to continue serving three-year-olds). • The dual-certified model versus co-teaching (the EEU employs a dual-certified teacher in

its SPP classrooms, along with two para-educators and practicum interns). • The number of minutes devoted to progress toward a student’s Individual Education

Plan (the EEU uses the Building Block framework to determine minutes.) • The funding model (dual-certified teachers are paid with gift funds and SPP funds). • How the EEU introduced SPP to its families and the reasons why some families didn’t

enroll (primarily financial, families with other care arrangements, such as a nanny, or multiple kids, and the full-day model didn’t make sense for them financially).

• Training for teachers and aids (EEU teachers receive training in the Creative Curriculum; all teachers and para-educators have coaches), and the use of practicum students (definitely a benefit, but it also takes time to provide mentoring and supervision).

• Preliminary observation suggests that students in the full-day program make more progress toward their IEP, and a full day program is easier to implement services.

• Easier to implement the State-sponsored Creative Curriculum in the full-day program.

http://teachingstrategies.com/content/pageDocs/WA-CC-Alignment-Birth-thru-60-mos-2013.pdf



Financial Statement Given that Early Learning is a core strategy in eliminating the opportunity gap, the Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force recommends that all efforts should be made to maximize allowable funding streams by blending and braiding funds to expand access to high-quality preschool services. The task force examined the nine programmatic milestones of the Seattle Preschool Program and the 25% performance pay structure and does not recommend a change at this time. SPS Preschool Budget Overview The Seattle Preschool Program funding model is designed with a 75% base fund allocation and a 25% performance pay framework. The 25% performance pay is a series of process milestones (See Appendix K, Performance Targets). New SPP classes have a guaranteed 75% funding at the outset of the school year and reach 100% when the benchmark criteria are reached. The District has created a grant funded reserve account in which it sets aside earned performance pay to cover any shortage of resources due to performance milestones not being met. (Note: this reserve account was made possible by a private foundation grant that allowed funding to be set aside at the beginning of the school year to cover any missed milestone or unforeseen cost.) To date, all of the programmatic milestones have been met by all SPS Seattle Preschool Program Classrooms. (See Appendix N, PPT Presentation 9-16-16). Discussion Points on Funding Model:

• The City requires that benchmarks be met in order to gain taxpayer buy-in and to demonstrate that the program is successful when administering public funds.

• Many City levy funds (K-12, innovation programs, health clinics, summer programming) operate with the same model, where the City allocates 75% plus 25% performance pay when benchmarks are met. This model isn’t new.

• Granting SPS a different funding model could be an equity issue if community-based organizations still operated under the 75/25 pay structure.

o The task force could recommend that the Superintendent explore a different model for the CBOs as well as SPS in order to address equity issues.

• What is the risk? Is the risk really 25%? Teachers aren’t paid 100% of their salary at the beginning of the year. But 75% doesn’t quite cover staffing costs from day one.

• Current preschool budget is based on an assumption of a permanent grant, but if different granting priorities are established, then funding may not be available.

• The task force examined the performance benchmarks: o SPP SPS schools and teachers readily have the wherewithal to meet benchmarks; o The SPP model’s nine benchmarks include gathering data (observational

assessment), a professional development plan for teachers, a kindergarten transition plan, screeings, hearing and vision tests (in collaboration with King County Public Health), a quality improvement plan, and family engagement.



APPENDIX A: Task Force Charter

Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force / Charter

Article I: Name The name of this task force is the Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force (hereafter referred to as “task force”).

Article II: Purpose

The primary purpose of the Seattle Public Schools Preschool Task Force is to prepare a report to the Superintendent of Schools regarding the impacts, risks and benefits for sustaining and expanding the preschool offerings within Seattle Public Schools. The Superintendent will use this report, along with other important data, to make recommendations to the School Board for potential changes in the 2017-18 school years. The report should include:

A. Input on an affirmation statement between Seattle Public Schools and City of Seattle to create inclusive preschools in Seattle that seek out and welcome students regardless of their race, socioeconomic status, social-emotional learning needs or learning style.

B. Analysis of the student population being served to date by Seattle Preschool

Program in comparison with the numbers of children 3-5 served by Seattle Public Schools Special Education Department.

C. Assessment of the financial impact preschool classrooms has on the K-12

buildings and feasibility of eliminating the 25% performance holdback.

D. Analysis of preschool feeder patterns to determine if preschools are offering a continuum of services for a diverse population of students within each middle school feeder area.

Article III: Membership Section 1 – Broad Representation The task force will strive to be inclusive of the broad spectrum of ethnic, racial and geographic diversity found within Seattle Public Schools and will include the following:

A. Two (2) Special Education Preschool Teachers



B. Two (2) Seattle Preschool Program Educators C. Two (2) Seattle Education Association (SEA) Preschool EducatorD. Two (2) Principals E. One (1) Early Learning Content Expert F. One (1) Special Education Central Office Administrator G. Two (2) English Language Learner Preschool Parents H. Two (2) Special Education Preschool Parents I. Two (2) Seattle Preschool Program or Grant Funded SPS Preschool Parents J. One (1) Central Office Early Learning Department Member K. Two (2) City of Seattle Department of Early Learning Administrators L. Two (2) Community Based Organization Administrators M. One (1) At Large Member

Section 2 – Appointment of Members

All members of the Task force shall be appointed by the Superintendent of Schools.

Section 3 – Length of Appointment/Service

The appointment to the task force will be from May 2016 through December 2016, with monthly, 3 hour meetings unless specified otherwise. Additional meetings may be scheduled as needed to analyze community input, review operational issues, and finalize recommendations to the Superintendent.

Section 4 – Attendance Requirement

Members must attend any and all meetings of the task force, unless previously excused by a task force chair, in order to participate in the recommendations made to the Superintendent of Schools.

Article IV: Responsibilities

Section 1 – General Responsibilities

The task force is a resource to the Superintendent of Schools specifically on equity in SPS Seattle Preschool Program classrooms and funding models for preschool. As such, the task force work is intended to generally be: 1) inquiring, 2) informing, 3) suggesting, 4) recommending, and 5) evaluating. Group norms will be established to facilitate trust and authentic discussions. Task force members may be removed for repeated violations of group norms.



Section 2 – Limitations

The task force members may not dictate or work outside of current School Board policy limitations.

Section 3 – Consensus Model Voting

When asked to provide a measure of task force opinion on specific topics, suggestions, or proposals put before the task force, the members will use a voting methodology that shall identify the degree of consensus for each topic using the metrics:

4 = strongly agree 2 = disagree

3 = agree 1 =strongly disagree

This model of voting will allow the Superintendent to understand if there is a divergence in opinion and whether and how to seek additional information to inform district decisions, programming and recommendations to the school community. Minority opinion reports from task force members to the Superintendent will be allowed.

Article V: Roles of Task Force Members

Section 1 – Task Force Members Shall:

a. Participate regularly in task force meetings b. Become knowledgeable about the research, operational issues, including trends

and issues that may impact recommendations as it relates to disproportionality and issues across the entire school district

c. Understand how funding streams and facilities constraints could be impacted by Task Force recommendations.

d. Act as a committee member according to established procedures by making suggestions and providing input representative of the views of parents, citizens, and community organizations of the school community

e. Act as a resource person for the task force. f. Maintain active participation in task force following established group norms

Article VI: Task Forces

Section 1 – Sub-group work

The task force may create from time-to-time sub-groups necessary to carry out specific work of the task force. These sub-groups should be task-specific and have a limited duration of existence.



Section 2 – Size and Selection of Sub-Group Members

Sub-task forces shall be restricted in size to between three (3) and five (5) current members in order to expedite the task(s) at hand. Sub-group members will be sought from the regular task force membership and shall be appointed by the chair of the task force or the Superintendent of Schools

Article VII: Meetings

Section 1 – Schedule of Meetings

The task force shall meet as often as necessary to perform its duties, but no less than monthly. The first meeting shall be held in May. Current schedule:

First two meetings: May 26, 10:00am – 2:00pm June 16, 10:00am – 2:00pm

Remaining meetings: Members will vote at the May meeting to determine dates and times for remaining meetings.

Section 2 – Quorum Requirement

A quorum of regular members (i.e., 16 out of 30) must be present to conduct business which results in any form of formal recommendation by the task force. For those matters deemed ‘critical’ for which a quorum is not present, the chair of the task force shall have the authority to electronically poll all members not in attendance in a timely basis in order to assure that a more inclusive recommendation is accomplished.

Section 3 – Public Meetings Meetings of the task force will be open to the public, but public input will not be taken. The chair may occasionally invite guests to speak as resources to the task force



APPENDIX B: Taskforce Members

Name Representation Eileen Sinclair Special Education Preschool Teacher Meredith Fourre Special Education Preschool Teacher Dylan Bosseau Seattle Preschool Program Educator Erica Watson Seattle Preschool Program Educator Mimi Day Seattle Education Association Preschool Educator Teri Erland Seattle Education Association Preschool Educator Matthew O'Connor Seattle Education Association Preschool Educator Beth Carter Principal Greg Imel Principal Julie Ashmun Early Learning Content Expert Tisha Crumley Early Learning Content Expert Jennifer Pelland Special Education Central Office Administrator Sarah Hamilton Seattle Public Schools Parent Heather Brooks Special Education Preschool Parent Nicole Morrison Winters Seattle Preschool Program Preschool Parent Joanne Griesemer Seattle Preschool Program Preschool Parent Michele Flannell Central Office Early Learning Department Member Monica Liang-Aguirre City of Seattle Department of Early Learning Administrators Erica Johnson City of Seattle Department of Early Learning Administrators CiKeithia Pugh Community Based Organization Administrators Erin Okuno Community Based Organization Administrators Cecilia McCormick At Large Member



APPENDIX C: Consultant Biography

Consultant Professional Biography Barbara Grant, MA A.B.S., CEO

Barbara is unusually useful. She doesn’t waste time, incisively heading right into the “crux” of whatever issue is on the table. With more than twenty five years of leadership experience, Barbara hired, managed, mentored and trained hundreds of people at Microsoft and has coached and facilitated boards, executives, teams and organizations around the world. Barbara’s focus is delivering return on the investment for Crux’s clients. In bringing together the Crux team, she has focused on building a high quality consulting team and partnership approach. Barbara is a

quick study, delights in client victories, and believes in being a “disappearing stitch,” - where clients continue to grow and scale successfully long after the interaction with Crux is completed. She works competently in a variety of cultures and settings, is fluent in Spanish and, being of Irish heritage, has a well-developed sense of humor.



APPENDIX D: Gradients of Agreement



APPENDIX E: Meeting Progression Summary

From these scope points, the SPS Preschool Task Force will make four statements of recommendation to the Seattle Public School Board.

Who are we

serving?

How will we fund

it?

How should we do

outreach?

Where do we

serve?

How do we pattern our classrooms to be

inclusive?

#1: May 26, 2016

Introduction and Exploration

Discussions and Actions

#2: June 16, 2016

Statement of Intended

Service drafted

CBO partnerships

#3: Aug 29, 2016

Statement of Intended

Service finalized

Budget presentation

Survey content, purpose, and

distribution discussed

#4: Sept 16, 2016

Statement of Intended Service approved

75/25 budget, forecast, and surplus re-

investment

How do families find out about options?

Landscape data

presented

Experimental Education Unit at UW as model

Facilities capacity

Exercise: One aspect of inclusion and one barrier

to it

#5: Oct 18, 2016

Financial Statement

Presented and Approved

Presentation on child-

find hubs

Special Education Presentation: Special Ed 101, funding, and

supplanting

Build on inclusion conversation:

Continuum of Services

#6: Nov 4, 2016

Presentation on Inclusion Data

Discussed Community Survey / Community

Outreach

Presentation on

Geography & Capacity

#7: Nov 15, 2016

Discussed Seattle

Preschool Map

Presentation on Lessons Learned from

the EEU Present / Discuss

Inclusion (Continuum of Services) Statement

#8: Dec 6, 2016

Discussed additional recommendation

regarding performance indicators, as they are

related to funding

Expanding outreach conversation

Discussed preschool data

by region and service provided

Edit / Approve Inclusion (Continuum of Services)

Statement

Edit / Approve

Outreach Statement

Final review and approval of Statements as needed



APPENDIX F: Current Preschool Offerings by Provider

School Sites Number of Classrooms

Number of Students Provider

Funding Source Sessions

Broadview Thomson 2 60 Head Start federal 3 sessions - half day each session Concord 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Dunlap 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Emerson 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session MLK 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Northgate 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Olympic Hills 2 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Roxhill 3 60 Head Start federal 3 sessions - half day each session West Seattle 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Total 13 400 9 Gatzert 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Thornton Creek 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Arbor Heights 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Original Van Asselt (OVA) 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Van Asselt 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Dearborn Park 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Highland Park 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session STEM K-7 @Boren 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session South Shore 3 54 SPS 3 full day sessions Total 11 214 9 Thornton Creek 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Sand Point 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Sacajawea 2 40 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Green Lake* 0.5 10 SPS Spec. Ed district PM Medically Fragile Pre Broadview Thomson 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Viewlands 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre North Beach* 0.5 10 SPS Spec. Ed district AM Developmental Pre Greenwood* 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Gatzert 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Lowell* 2 40 SPS Spec. Ed district 3 sessions of Dev pre and 1 Med Frag Madrona 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Thurgood Marshall* 0.5 10 SPS Spec. Ed district AM Developmental Pre Dunlap 2 40 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Early Learning Center (OVA)* 2 40 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre South Shore 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Fairmount Park* 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre



Lafayette 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre STEM K-7@Boren 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre West Seattle Elementary 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Total 21.5 422 19 *AM/PM extended day program Arbor Heights 1 20 YMCA part day Beacon Hill International 1 20 Launch SPP Concord 1 20 YMCA SPP Dunlap 1 20 YMCA SPP Emerson 1 20 Tiny Tots

Gatewood 1 20 The Cottage

School

Greenwood 1 20 Nurturing

Knowledge Highland Park 1 20 Launch SPP John Hay 1 20 Kids Co. half day John Muir 20 Kids Co.

Lawton 1

20 Ballard Boys and Girls Club

Laurelhurst 1 20 LASER part day Leschi 1 20 Launch SPP Madrona 2 40 Launch SPP Martin Luther King Jr. 1 20 Seed of Life SPP

Olympic View 1 20 Collaboration

Station half day Orca K-8 1 20 First B.A.S.E. South Shore P-8 1 20 Kids Co. Friday only, preschool STEM K-7@ Boren 20 YMCA SPP

Stevens 1 17

Interlaken Preschool (Sound Child Care)

Viewlands 1 20 Creative Kids SPP West Woodland 1 20 Kids Inc. Whittier 2 40 Whittier Kids Wing Luke 1 20 Tiny Tots Total 26 517 24

TOTAL 69.5 1553 61



APPENDIX F Continued: Current Preschool Offerings by School Site

School Sites Number of Classrooms

Number of Students Provider

Funding Source Sessions

Arbor Heights 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Arbor Heights 1 20 YMCA part day Beacon Hill International 1 20 Launch SPP Broadview Thomson 2 60 Head Start federal 3 sessions - half day each session Broadview Thomson 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Concord 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Concord 1 20 YMCA SPP Dearborn Park 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Dunlap 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Dunlap 2 40 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Dunlap 1 20 YMCA SPP Early Learning Center (OVA)* 2 40 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Emerson 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Emerson 1 20 Tiny Tots Fairmount Park* 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre

Gatewood 1 20 The Cottage School

Gatzert 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Gatzert 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Green Lake* 0.5 10 SPS Spec. Ed district PM Medically Fragile Pre

Greenwood 1 20 Nurturing Knowledge

Greenwood* 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Highland Park 1 20 Launch SPP Highland Park 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session John Hay 1 20 Kids Co. half day John Muir 20 Kids Co. Lafayette 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Laurelhurst 1 20 LASER part day

Lawton 1 20

Ballard Boys and Girls Club

Leschi 1 20 Launch SPP Lowell* 2 40 SPS Spec. Ed district 3 sessions of Dev pre and 1 Med Frag Madrona 2 20 Launch SPP Madrona 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Martin Luther King Jr. 1 20 Seed of Life SPP



MLK 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session North Beach* 0.5 10 SPS Spec. Ed district AM Developmental Pre Northgate 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session Olympic Hills 2 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session

Olympic View 1 20 Collaboration Station half day

Orca K-8 1 20 First B.A.S.E. Original Van Asselt (OVA) 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Roxhill 3 60 Head Start federal 3 sessions - half day each session Sacajawea 2 40 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Sand Poiht 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre South Shore 3 54 SPS 3 full day sessions South Shore 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre South Shore P-8 1 20 Kids Co. Friday only, preschool STEM K-7 @Boren 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session STEM K-7@ Boren 20 YMCA SPP STEM K-7@Boren 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre

Stevens 1 17

Interlaken Preschool (Sound Child Care)

Thornton Creek 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Thornton Creek 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre Thurgood Marshall* 0.5 10 SPS Spec. Ed district AM Developmental Pre Van Asselt 1 20 SPP/SPS SPP 1 full day session Viewlands 1 20 Creative Kids SPP Viewlands 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre West Seattle 1 40 Head Start federal 2 sessions - half day each session West Seattle Elementary 1 20 SPS Spec. Ed district AM and PM Developmental Pre West Woodland 1 20 Kids Inc. Whittier 2 20 Whittier Kids Wing Luke 1 20 Tiny Tots

Total 69.5 1553 61 *AM/PM extended day program



APPENDIX G: Preschool Location Map



APPENDIX H: Preschool Program IEP Comparisons

Program Comparison – Students with IEPs SPS, CBO, EEU, HS, and Riser Numbers Seattle Public Schools - Seattle Preschool Program

# of Students

Students w/ IEP

% of students w/IEPs

Total 154 10 7% Community Based Organizations - Seattle Preschool Program

# of Students

Students w/ IEP


Total 409 11 2.70% Experimental Education Unit - Seattle Preschool Program

# of Students

Students w/ IEP


Total 32 13 40% Head Start – Seattle Public Schools

# of Students

Students w/ IEP


Total 400 36 9% Developmental Preschool - Seattle Public Schools Rise to K Return to PK Developmental Preschool 40% 60% SPP 70% 30%



APPENDIX I: Special Education Preschool Data Visualization



APPENDIX J: Seattle Preschool Program at EEU

Seattle Preschool Program at the EEU Seattle Preschool Program (SPP) is a program with the goal of providing high-quality preschool available and affordable to all of Seattle’s children. Mayor Murray adopted SPP in May of 2014, and starting in Fall of 2016, the EEU will be piloting this program in two classrooms, which will include children with disabilities. This program partners with Seattle early learning programs to:

E. Prepare children for school F. Enable students to achieve pre-academic skills G. Enable students to develop socially and emotionally H. Eliminate the readiness gap for participating children

ENROLLMENT Enrollment is conducted through the SPP, but for our first year, the city has agreed to let us grandfather any current part day preschool students into the full day classrooms. Carolyn Cottam, from our Family Support Program, will begin enrolling students immediately. Contact Carolyn if you are interested ([email protected]).

SPP CLASSROOMS AT EEU Both of the EEU classrooms will adhere to the following guidelines:

D. SPP is open to 4-year-olds born by August 31. E. We will continue to use Creative Curriculum and Teaching Strategies Gold. F. Children will have a homeroom, but will have access to both SPP classrooms at

various times of day. G. Lunch will be provided by EEU. Families are free to send in lunch if they would

like. H. Emily Wakefield and Melissa Maurer will be the two full-day preschool teachers.

TUITION All students in the full-day program will need to pay tuition rates according to an income based sliding scale. Payments are due monthly to SPP. The EEU invoices the City for spots in our classrooms and receives funding. Here is a link to the parent information page. There is a tool for calculating tuition on the right side of the page



http://www.seattle.gov/education/child-care-and- preschool/seattle-preschool-program/for-parents

SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES IN SPP Special Education services will be delivered in the SPP classroom based on the student’s IEP. Seattle Schools contracts with EEU to provide special education services for student enrolled in EEU.

SCHEDULE

SPP Student Ratios Room 135 Room 136 Total

Students who qualify for special education services

6 children 6 children 12

Students who qualify for ECEAP 4 children 4 children 8

Total number of students in SPP 16 children 16 children 32

SPP Staffing Ratios Room 135 Room 136 Total

Dual Certified Special Education Teacher

1 1 2

Para-Educators 2.5 2.5 5

Related Services (OT, PT, SLP, FTE based on FTE based on

Extended Day Services) individual student individual student need according to need according to their IEP their IEP

Coaching Support

I. Coaching support: Early Achievers coach with special education background (20% FTE)

J. EEU coach for para-educators (20% FTE) EEU – University of Washington Box 57925 – Seattle, WA 98195-7925 P: 206-543-4011 F: 206-543-8480 haringcenter.org

TIME Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

8:45AM-3:00PM X X X X X

http://www.seattle.gov/education/child-care-and-



APPENDIX K: Performance Indicators 2016-17SY

Completion Date Performance Targets

October 31, 2016

Each teacher will develop or update a Professional Development Plan with his/her DEEL Coach. Verification: Copy of PDP Plan

October 31, 2016

The Agency will submit a completed Kindergarten Transition Plan to the Early Education Specialist. Verification: Copy of Transition Plan

November 15, 2016

Teachers will complete fall TSG assessments portfolios for all children enrolled for at least 60 days prior to the checkpoint deadline. Verification: Assessment Status Report from TSG

December 31, 2016

The Agency will complete health screenings for each child within 90 days of the child’s program start date. Verification: Agency will update information in ELNIS and Education Specialist will provide approval.

December 31, 2016

The Agency will complete developmental screenings for each child within 90 days of the child’s program start date. Verification: Agency will update information in ELNIS and Education Specialist will provide approval.

February 28, 2017

Teachers will complete winter TSG assessments portfolios for all children enrolled for at least 60 days prior to the checkpoint deadline. Verification: Assessment Status Report from TSG

May 31, 2017

The Agency will inform families about kindergarten enrollment processes.

Verification: Documentation including, but not limited to, Kindergarten transition night flyers, Kindergarten enrollment letters to families, parent newsletter.

May 31, 2017 Teachers will complete spring TSG assessments portfolios for all

children enrolled for at least 60 days prior to the checkpoint deadline. Verification: Assessment Status Report from TSG

May 31, 2017 Each teacher will complete or update progress on their Professional

Development Plan with his/her DEEL Coach. Verification: Copy of updated PDP Plan



APPENDIX L: Seattle Preschool Task Force PPT Presentation 5-26-16

Seattle Public Schools: Every Student. Every Classroom. Every Day.

.

What’s in Scope?

• Who are we building preschools for? • How should we do mandatory outreach in a

way that is equitable? • How should we fund it?

Every Student. Every Classroom. Every Day.



Seattle Preschool Task Force Goals A. Input on an affirmation statement between Seattle Public Schools and City

of Seattle to create inclusive preschools in Seattle that seek out and welcome students regardless of their race, socioeconomic status, social-emotional learning needs or learning style.

B. Analysis of the student population being served to date by Seattle Preschool Program in comparison with the numbers of children 3-5 served by Seattle Public Schools Special Education Department.

C. Assessment of the financial impact preschool classrooms has on the K-12 buildings and feasibility of eliminating the 25% performance holdback.

D

D. Analysis of preschool feeder patterns to determine if preschools are offering a continuum of services for a diverse population of students within each middle school feeder area.


Seattle Preschool Program Basics

• The Seattle Preschool Program Levy was proposed by Mayor Murray and the City Council, and was approved by voters in 2014.

• The City also adopted a Seattle Preschool Program Action Plan

that describes the demonstration project and the core guiding principles.

• The Plan is anchored in evidence-based practice, acknowledging

that program quality is vital to success.

• The project will build toward serving 2,000 children in 100 classrooms by 2018.

• 6 hour day, 5 days per week, high standard for teacher qualifications,

2 curricular options (Creative Curriculum or HighScope)




Timeline Landscape SPP 4 year, $58 million dollar Levy 2015-2018 SPP mixed delivery model (CBO/SPS) Scale Up Model – 14 Classrooms Year 1 (2015-2016) – 39 Classrooms Year 2 – 70 Classrooms Year 3 – 100 Classrooms Year 4

3 Seattle Public Schools SPP classrooms Year 1 4 additional classrooms Year 2

Every Student. Every

Classroom. Every Day.

Seattle Preschool Program: Timeline to Date




Learning

History of Task Force


Seattle Public Schools: 2015‐2016 Early Learning System

• •

Pre-K and Kindergarten Transitions

•

New teacher supports PD supporting mastery of core teacher habits PD supporting math and literacy instruction

Supports for children 0-5 Week long orientation for new Kindergarteners Enrollment outreach to high poverty neighborhoods

•

Teacher & Administrator Effectiveness

SPS Preschool Programs

• •

Early Learning •

•

Seattle Preschool Program classrooms Head Start Preschool classrooms taught by community based providers Special education preschool sessions

• Before and after school supports (PreK-5) aligned to SPS Early Learning offerings

Community Partnerships

Social

Literacy

Extended Learning

RULER (Recognizing, Understanding, Labeling, Expressing, and Regulating emotons) curriculum in K-5 4a)nd K-8 schools •

• Summer Learning (K-4) After School Supports (K-5) Every Student. Every

Classroom. Every Day.



Seattle Public Schools: Department of Early Learning


Seattle Early Education

Providers & Median

Household Income by

Census Tract




Density of 3 & 4 Year olds by Census Tract & Enrollment

Capacity of Seattle Family Child Care Providers

Every Student. Every Classroom. Every Day. 11

Density of Three and Four Year Olds

by Census Tract, 2010 and Total

Enrollment Capacity

(number of slots) of Seattle Child Care

Centers




Seattle Preschool Site

Preschool Site





.



APPENDIX M: Seattle Preschool Task Force PPT Presentation 6-16-16

Early Learning Gap

How Seattle Public Schools and the City of Seattle are working together eliminate the achievement gap



Who offers preschool in Seattle Public School Buildings?

What are their funding sources?

Landscape of Preschool in Seattle Public School Buildings in 2015-2016

Seattle Preschool Program

(11)

• Launch @Highland Park, Beacon Hill, Maple, Madrona, Hawthorne, Leschi

• SPS@Van Asselt, Original Van Asselt, Bailey Gatzert

• Creative Kids @Viewlands • Causey’s @ Dearborn Park

City Levy Funded

Step Ahead

• Seed of Life @MLK • SPS South Shore K-8 (also grant funded)

Head Start (10)

• SPS @ Broadview Thomson, Dunlap, Emerson, MLK, Roxhill, Concord, Highland Park, Northgate, Olympic Hills West Seattle

Community Based Childcare Providers

(18)

Special Education Developmental

Preschool (14)

• SPS@Bailey Gatzert, Madrona, Lowell, T Marshall, Sand Point, Sacajawea, Green Lake, Broadview, Greenwood, Viewlands, North Beach, West Seattle, Fairmount Park, Lafayette, Dunlap, Original Van Asselt

• Kids Co @Adams, Graham Hill, John Hay, John Muir

• YMCA@Arbor Heights, Concord, Dunlap • Tiny Tots @Emerson, Wing Luke • The Cottage School @Gatewood • Nurturing Knowledge@Greenwood, • LASER @Laurelhurst • Ballard Boys & Girls Club@ Lawton • Collaboration Station @Olympic View, • First B.A.S.E. @Orca • Interlaken Preschool @Stevens, • Kids Inc. @West Woodland

Whi i Kid @Whi i Preschools in Closed

School Buildings (3)

• Crown Hill, Fauntleroy and E.C. Hughes



Seattle Preschool Program Overview

SPS Preschool Task Force June 16, 2016

City of Seattle, Department of Education and Early Learning 5

Goal of Seattle Preschool Program

• On November 4, 2014, Seattle voters approved a four-

year, $58 million property tax levy to provide “accessible high-quality preschool services for Seattle children designed to improve their readiness for school and to support their subsequent academic achievement.”

(City of Seattle Proposition 1B, preamble).

6



Demonstration Phase (2015-18)

1. Which elements originally adopted for SPP need to be in place to provide high quality preschool?

2. How do the adopted SPP elements affect the different types of providers? (CBOs, SPS)

3. How responsive are we to individual children and family needs? 4. What policy modifications could support racial equity and social

justice?

7

Background

City Council requested a plan for Universal PreK

in Fall 2013

Mayor’s Action Plan for Seattle

Preschool Program was

approved June 2014

Voters passed Prop 1B in

November 2014


Implementation Plan was

approved April 2015

SPS Board of Directors

approves 3 classrooms

August 2015

Seattle Preschool Program Year 1

starts September 2015



Year One: Snapshot

Number of Classrooms: 15

Number of different sites: 13

Number of students: 256

9

10



80

2015-16 SPP Participants by Race/Ethnicity and Age

(Count of Children Enrolled as of April 11, 2016; N = 256)

43

21 15

22 10 7 2

3

Hispanic Multi-Racial White Other

4-year-olds 3-year-olds

11

70 60 50 49 40 30

31 20

10 25 13

0

9 6

Asian Black Unknown

Primary Language of SPP Non-English Participants (30%)

Amharic (Ethiopia) Cantonese

7% Arabic 5% 1% French Japanese

Vietnamese 1% 1%

12% Mandarin 2%

Oromo (S. Ethiopia) 5%

Unknown Other African 23% Languages and

Dialects 2%

Somali Other Chinese

6% Languages and Dialects Tagalog 5%

5% Russian Spanish 1%

20% Turkish

1% Thai 1%

12



Tuition Payment Amount, 2015-16

13

Child Eligibility

Children who live in Seattle

4-years old by August 31, 2016; no income requirement

3-years old by August 31, 2016; must meet income requirements

(300%FPL and below)

Tuition Payment Amount # %

None (Free) 203 79%

Partial Tuition 46 18%

Full Tuition 8 3%

Grand Total 257 100%



Child Selection

• Children apply to SPP via the city. • Selection process is based on certain weights and preferences

(siblings, geographic proximity, extended care options, specialty programs)

• Parents are NOT asked whether the child has a suspected on confirmed disability on the application.

• Once selected, parents enroll into the program (and at this time provide information on any special needs)

15

Provider Eligibility

Licensed by the WA state Department of Early Learning (or exempt

from licensing)

Participation in the Washington State Early Achievers (EA) system and holds EA rating of 3 or higher

2 Full-day (6 hour) preschool classrooms

• Could be at one or more sites • Could be a partnership of multiple providers

16



Provider Requirements

• Maximum 20 • Professional Development children/classroom (1:10 ratio) • Child-level assessment

• Teacher Quality Requirements • Classroom and teacher • Coaching assessments • Evidence-based Curricula • City-managed student

enrollment

17

SPS and DEEL Collaboration

SPS classrooms in 2015-16: 3 SPS classrooms in 2016-17: 8

* SPS/DEEL Early Learning Special Education Committee started in fall of 2015 to develop strategies to

• Broaden child find efforts for preschool age students • Collaborate on developing a continuum of services for Seattle preschool

students with IEPs

* SPS/DEEL Cohort attending the University of Washington’s P-3 Executive Leadership program. Action research project revolving around preschool special education

18



20



100%

100%

District SPP sites are serving low-income children. Only 2 of 60 children served by District SPP sites pay partial tuition. No children served pay full tuition.

Distribution of Tuition Bands Paid by SPP Families

10% 3%

16%

90% 81%

SPP‐ Bailey

SPP‐ Original Van

SPP‐ Van

SPP Overall

No Tuition (≤300% FPL) Partial Tuition (>300% ‐ <760% FPL) Full Tuition (>760%

21

Initial District SPP performance on TSG domains varies both within and across sites As expected, nearly all sites have room for improvement in all/most domains. Students are assessed using TSG in fall, winter, and spring.

Percent of Students Assessed by Fall Teaching Strategies Gold (TSG) Assessment Meeting Widely Held Expectations in Six Domains

Data Source: Teaching Strategies Gold Fall 2015 custom data export prepared for the City of Seattle January 11, 2016. Data reflect students assessed by November 30, 2015 fall checkpoint deadline.



ce: Teaching

eflect

Initial District SPP performance on TSG domains varies both within and across sites All sites showed improvement the six developmental domains between fall and spring. Students are assessed using TSG in fall, winter, and spring.

Percent of Students Assessed by Fall Teaching Strategies Gold (TSG) Assessment Meeting Widely Held Expectations in Six Domains

Data Sour Strategies Gold Spring 2016 custom data export prepared for the City of Seattle June 6, 2016. Data r students assessed by May 31, 2016 spring checkpoint deadline.

Funding in Preschool and Seattle

Public Schools K-12

Preschool and District funding sources and how it is used.



City of Seattle Department of Education and Early Learning

CHILD CARE & PRESCHOOL FUNDING SOURCES

Comprehensive Child Care Program The City of Seattle helps low- and moderate-income working families pay for child care for children ages one month to 13 years. Families will be given vouchers and can choose from more than 100 licensed family child care homes and centers in Seattle, which contract with the City to provide high-quality and affordable child care.

Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program (ECEAP) The Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program (ECEAP), funded through the State of Washington's Department of Early Learning and the City of Seattle, offers part-day and full-day, high-quality, culturally and linguistically appropriate preschool services for eligible 3- and 4-year-olds and their families.

Seattle Preschool Program Seattle Preschool Program: City of Seattle, levy funded, voluntary, high-quality,

Where District Operating funds come from

Other Other, 5.0% Revenue, 5.8%

Federal, 8.5%

Local Levy,

State, 55.3%

State Local Levy Federal Other Revenue Other

Source: FY15‐ 16 adopted budget book



28

Expenditures

5‐Year Seattle Public Schools Budget Perspective FY2011‐12 to FY2015‐16 Actual Expenditures Actual Expenditures Actual Expenditures Actual Expenditures 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Teaching - Instruction $326.0 59.8% $340.5 59.8% $366.4 59.9% $385.3 59.5% $473.9 62.9% Teaching - Support $53.1 9.7% $51.9 9.1% $55.9 9.1% $66.0 10.2% $72.1 9.6% School Administration $34.2 6.3% $37.6 6.6% $40.7 6.7% $41.8 6.4% $46.4 6.2%

Total Teaching/Learning $413.3 75.9% $430.0 75.5% $463.0 75.7% $493.1 76.1% $592.4 78.7% Central Administration $31.5 5.8% $34.3 6.0% $35.2 5.8% $41.3 6.4% $43.7 5.8% Child Food Nutrition $11.2 2.1% $12.4 2.2% $12.3 2.0% $12.4 1.9% $13.8 1.8% Transportation $28.9 5.3% $29.0 5.1% $31.5 5.2% $28.2 4.4% $31.6 4.2% Grounds $1.5 0.3% $1.7 0.3% $1.8 0.3% $1.9 0.3% $2.0 0.3% Operations $19.8 3.6% $19.9 3.5% $20.4 3.3% $21.3 3.3% $22.5 3.0% Maintenance $13.9 2.5% $16.2 2.8% $17.3 2.8% $20.1 3.1% $14.7 2.0% Utilities $11.1 2.0% $10.8 1.9% $12.4 2.0% $13.0 2.0% $13.8 1.8% Security $3.2 0.6% $3.4 0.6% $3.7 0.6% $1.9 0.3% $1.5 0.2% Information Systems $8.0 1.5% $9.8 1.7% $9.9 1.6% $11.1 1.7% $12.8 1.7% Warehouse $1.9 0.4% $2.0 0.4% $2.1 0.3% $2.2 0.3% $2.3 0.3% All Other $0.4 0.1% $0.3 0.1% $1.9 0.3% $1.6 0.2% $2.0 0.3%

Total Support Services $100.1 18.4% $105.5 18.5% $113.4 18.5% $113.7 17.5% $117.0 15.5% Total Expenditures $544.9 100% $569.8 100% $611.6 100% $648.1 100% $753.1 100%

FY16-17 School Budget Development Timeline

Jan 12 – WSS Model changes presented to Principals Jan 25 – 1st Training on Schools Budgets for Parents (JSCEE) Jan 27 – Board Budget Work session Feb 9, 10, 12 – SPOT & Budget training for Principals (JSCEE) Feb 16 – Initial Enrollment estimates to Budget Office Feb 17 – Budget Instructions to Schools Feb 17 – 24 – Early Budget Workshops for Staffing Feb 24 – Release of 2016-17 Budget Allocations Feb 25 – Mar 2 – Budget Workshops continue Mar 2 – Mar 21 – Budget Arenas with schools Mar 21 – School Budgets finalized.



Landscape of Preschool in Seattle Public School Buildings in 2015-2016


(11)

• Launch @Highland Park, Beacon Hill, Maple, Madrona, Hawthorne, Leschi

• SPS@Van Asselt, Original Van Asselt, Bailey Gatzert

• Creative Kids @Viewlands • Causey’s @ Dearborn Park

City Levy Funded

Step Ahead

• Seed of Life @MLK • SPS South Shore K‐ 8 (also grant funded)

Head Start (10)

• SPS @ Broadview Thomson, Dunlap, Emerson, MLK, Roxhill, Concord, Highland Park, Northgate, Olympic Hills West Seattle

Community Based Childcare Providers

(18)

Special Education Developmental

Preschool (14)

• SPS@Bailey Gatzert, Madrona, Lowell, T Marshall, Sand Point, Sacajawea, Green Lake, Broadview, Greenwood, Viewlands, North Beach, West Seattle, Fairmount Park, Lafayette, Dunlap, Original Van Asselt

• Kids Co @Adams, Graham Hill, John Hay, John Muir

• YMCA@Arbor Heights, Concord, Dunlap • Tiny Tots @Emerson, Wing Luke • The Cottage School @Gatewood • Nurturing Knowledge@Greenwood, • LASER @Laurelhurst • Ballard Boys & Girls Club@ Lawton • Collaboration Station @Olympic View, • First B.A.S.E. @Orca • Interlaken Preschool @Stevens, • Kids Inc. @West Woodland

Whi i Kid @Whi i Preschools in Closed

School Buildings (3)

• Crown Hill, Fauntleroy and E.C. Hughes



APPENDIX N: Seattle Preschool Task Force PPT Presentation 9-16-16

Photos by Susie Fitzhugh

Preschool Task Force Seattle Preschool Program Financing

2016-17

Budget Presentation Agenda

Seattle Preschool Program Funding

Potential Alternative Funding Sources

2015-16 Estimated Classroom Costs

2016-17 Projected Classroom Costs

Risks and Opportunities



Seattle Preschool Program (SPP) Funding

Service agreement between Seattle Public Schools (SPS) and City of Seattle currently through 2016-17 for eight SPS schools. Two types of compensation:

– Baseline Pay – 75% of contract*

May be used beginning September 1st, 2016.

– Performance Pay – 25% of contract*

Earned throughout the school year by achieving performance targets in contract.

* This contract structure is a policy of the City of Seattle. 3

Potential Alternative Funding Sources

Head Start- $4.4M – Serves Pre-k – Eligibility subject to certain poverty guidelines

Title I - $12M – May be used to serve Pre-k, must be Title I designated school – Schools in which children from low-income families make up at

least 40% of enrollment

Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program (ECEAP) – WA State funding that serves Pre-k – Serves low-income families

Private Grants Fee-based

4



2015‐16 Actual Costs Estimate

5

2015‐16 Whole Year Actual Costs Estimate

6

Expected Earnings

Budgeted Cost

Estimated Actual Cost

3 Classrooms

Type of Cost

% of

Actual Cost

Potential Savings

75% $460,150 $460,150 $417,845 $42,305

Staff $328,443 79% SPP SPP SPP Non-Staff $89,402 21% 25% $153,383 $135,752 $9,230

15-16 Performance

Grant Grant Non-Staff $9,230

Total $613,533 $595,902 $427,075 $427,075

Expected Earnings

Budgeted Cost

Estimated Actual Cost

3 Classrooms

Type of Cost

% of

Actual Cost

Potential Savings

75% $460,150 $460,150 $481,627 -$21,477

Staff $392,225 81% SPP SPP SPP Non-Staff $89,402 19% 25% $153,383 $135,752 $9,230

Non-Staff $9,230 15-16

Performance Grant Grant

Total $613,533 $595,902 $490,857 $490,857



2015‐16 Three Classrooms in 2016‐17

7

Five New Classrooms in 2016‐17

8

Expected Earnings

Budget Available

Budgeted Cost

Type of Cost % of

Budget Cost

Potential Savings

75% $502,656 $502,656 $502,656 Staff $433,371 86% SPP SPP SPP Non-

Staff $69,285 14%

25% $174,188 $147,540 $124,728 $22,812

Staff $68,568 55% Non- $56,160

Staff 45%

16-17 Performance

15-16 Performance

15-16 Performance

Total $676,844 $650,196 $627,384 $627,384

Expected Earnings

Budget Available

Budgeted Cost

Type of Cost % of

Budget Cost

Potential Savings

75% $837,760 $837,760 $837,760 Staff $722,285 86% SPP SPP SPP Non-Staff $115,475 14% 25% $290,313 $257,880 $207,880 $50,000

Staff $114,280 55% Non-Staff $93,600 45% 16-17

Performance Grant Grant

Total $1,128,073 $1,095,640 $1,045,640 $1,045,640



Questions?

11

Risks and Opportunities

Actual vs. Average Salary in the long term Future changes in SPS labor contracts – 2017-18 has 4.5% increase alone, excluding COLA

State Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) – 3.0% in 15-16 – 1.8% in 16-17

Facilities space – District needs to meet state mandated lower K-3 class sizes

Many of these variables can change at the last minute – Where is the flexibility to change?

Payment Inflator – How does payment inflate over time? – Consumer Price Index (CPI)?

10



APPENDIX O: Reading References

Policy Statement on Inclusion of Children with Disabilities in Early Childhood Programs U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Education, September 14, 2015 http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/earlylearning/joint-statement-full-text.pdf Joint Position Statement of the Division for Early Childhood (DEC) and the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Division for Early Childhood (DEC) and National Association of Young Children (NAEYC), April 2009 http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/DEC_NAEYC_EC_updatedKS.pdf

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/earlylearning/joint-statement-full-text.pdf

http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/DEC_NAEYC_EC_updatedKS.pdf

http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/DEC_NAEYC_EC_updatedKS.pdf



APPENDIX P: Individual Task Force Member Statements

My Personal Statement Seattle Public Schools (SPS) and the City Department of Education and Early Learning (DEEL) have undertaken a laudable mission: to provide high quality preschool (Seattle Preschool Program, or SPP) for all three- and four-year old children in Seattle, thereby closing early learning gaps and preparing them for Kindergarten.

In making the case to expand the number of SPS/SPP programs in SPS buildings, the district presents data showing persistent and unacceptable learning gaps for African-American and Hispanic children. Notwithstanding my numerous requests and in spite of the district’s legal obligation to serve children with disabilities, no data was provided on the early learning gaps for these children. I would posit that these are the largest gaps in our district. SPS and the School Board cannot act to eliminate these gaps if they don’t measure, report and remediate them.

In its initial roll-out, the SPP preschools made little provision to serve children with disabilities. In fact, at Bailey Gatzert (BG) preschool the first child to be identified as needing special education supports was transferred to a developmental preschool (Dev PreK) where his access to early learning was reduced by 60% (full-day to less than half-day), an inauspicious start for BG. However, SPP has performed better to date than the 27 community-based organizations programs (CBOs, whether CBO/SPP or not) located onsite in SPS buildings, many occupying classrooms for low or no rent. Of onsite CBO/SPP enrollment, children with disabilities constitute only 2.7% in these preschools. Based on reports from parents and Dev PreK teachers, I expect the other CBOs have even lower enrollment. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits SPS from providing significant assistance to a CBO that discriminates based on disability. Any transformation of existing preschool programs must include these entities or they can find free rent elsewhere.

At SPS, special education is all too often a place, not a service. Concentrating children with special needs into developmental preschools is expedient for SPS, with as much as 87% of preschoolers with disabilities in the NW region being served in Dev PreKs, rather than receiving services in community settings with their typical peers. This runs counter to USDOE policy that guides districts to place disabled preschoolers in inclusive high-quality preschools.

I am gratified that the Preschool Task Force unanimously endorsed blended preschool programs in its Inclusion Statement. The method and speed with which this transformation takes place remains to be seen. What is indisputable is that to maintain two such disparate and unbalanced preschool programs is untenable (and immoral, in my opinion).

I object to the term “pilot” in our Inclusion Statement and made that clear in our meetings. SPS has seen blended classrooms work for decades at the Experimental Education Unit. There is no need to pilot. I am concerned that a go-slow approach will deprive many vulnerable children of the benefits of full-day services and preschool at a point in their development where time is of



the essence. The transformation of preschools at SPS should happen over a 3-4 year timeframe as discussed in the Task Force, no longer than that. The end result should be the elimination of exclusive Dev PreKs, but for a few for the children most impacted by their disability. The few remaining Dev PreKs should be full-day, offer equitable educational benefit, and provide these children opportunities to interact with typical peers.

With respect to the Task Force Financial Statement and Appendix N, the latter does not accurately reflect the hand- out at the 9/16/16 Task Force meeting. The Task Force PowerPoint presentation itself was confusing with two tables presenting different “actual costs estimates” for the same year. (In my line of work, an actual is an actual and an estimate is just that, an estimate.) The 15-16 Whole Year Actual Costs table reflects a loss of $21,477. SPS explained this net economic loss on a staffing change at Old Van Asselt; staffing changes, absences or leaves are not an unheard-of occurrence at SPS. Unanticipated costs can manifest themselves at any time. Note that for the current year, DEEL lowered its SPP projections and increased the funding for its SPP contractors because actual costs are proving higher than estimates.

I question SPS’ projected net financial gain for additional SPS/SPP preschools. This projected “savings” is directly the result of the intentional under-resourcing and understaffing of SPS/SPP programs, effectively avoiding the cost of resources to serve children with disabilities. SPS staff argues that this anticipated savings could be used to leverage SPP/SPS classrooms at the start of the following school year, thereby obviating a change to the DEEL 75/25 funding holdback. This use of projected “savings” will effectively sustain an inequitable and discriminatory program and therefore should be rejected. Any savings should be spent on the children SPP must serve. Finally, the true cost of an inequitable SPS/SPP program is felt by the child who is denied services in an SPP classroom.

I want to say how much I have enjoyed meeting, and thoughtfully discussing inclusive education with my fellow Task Force members. Dr. Nyland, thank you for this opportunity.

Cecilia McCormick, parent and former President of the Seattle Special Education PTSA

Below are additional notes on the report “discussion points”. As I read through them, I inferred a bias in how discussions were recorded or presented.

Discussion points on “Continuum of Services”

With respect to title of this section, the report fails to mention that Director Geary and I clarified the language in IDEA. The law defines a continuum of “placements” (e.g. general education setting, self-contained classroom, day school etc.). The term “continuum of services” is wholly a construct of SPS SpEd Department to imply that they don’t actually deliver special



education services in programs/places like Dev PreKs. By using this phrase, SPS conflates placements with services. A more apt descriptor is individualized services in a variety of settings (or placements).

The Task Force spent a good deal of time talking about existing itinerant services options in CBOs, and (mandated) Head Start enrollment of SpEd students. The Draft Report included a discussion point asserting that Dev PreKs were the "least restrictive environment up until this year". The discussion point was inaccurate and intimated that SPS has been doing things right all this time. The point has been removed once I noted the error.

There is no mention of an aggressive timeline for implementation of legally compliant inclusive programs. At our early December meeting, I suggested 1-2 years for implementation. Another member suggested 3-4 years and there was general agreement that a timeframe of 3-4 years was reasonable. Is the “pilot” supposed to go on forever? Given the civil rights protections of our youngest children with disabilities – blended preschools must come sooner, rather than later.

As for the statement implied as fact: “(q)uality Inclusion costs a lot of money and if we are serious about it then we need to find the money to do it”; this was said by one member of the Task Force, with no data to support it. What is “quality inclusion” and what is the evidence of how much it costs? In point of fact, the EEU’s Chris Matsumoto reported that their SPP classroom is less expensive than their other full-day inclusive classrooms; they no longer have to dip into the EEU gift fund to subsidize costs for typical peers to attend. I have seen a number of studies that indicate that inclusive models cost LESS than other delivery methods. I find a number of these sources here:

http://ectacenter.org/topics/inclusion/funding/funding.asp.

SPS and DEEL need not reinvent the wheel to figure out a compliant manner of providing inclusive preschools.

Discussion points on Special Education Funding:

Many misstatements here, perhaps due to the note taker’s unfamiliarity with the subject matter. SpEd funds are not “allocated to a student”. They are applied to salaries first and foremost, and that salaried staff is restricted to delivering services, modifying lessons and providing accommodations on IEPs.

I do not recall any discussion or suggestion that “blending and braiding funds” (a term not be used loosely) would lead to reduced funding. Why and how? We saw no data regarding this.

“We need to have a separate structure for funding Special Education preschool because there is a risk of losing Seattle Preschool Program funding, and SpEd can’t risk funding.” This statement makes no sense to me. What program is at risk, SPP or SpEd? I do not recall anyone asserting that "a separate structure for funding" the (ultimately) few remaining Dev PreKs, is necessary

http://ectacenter.org/topics/inclusion/funding/funding.asp


71

because of some unexplained "risk of losing Seattle Preschool Program funding, and SpEd can't risk funding." SpEd will not risk funding as it comes from the state. Disabled preschoolers should also benefit from the per-student taxpayer funding offered by DEEL and SPP. To not do so is discrimination.

I only missed one Task Force meeting, and raised Head Start numerous times to no avail. I was pleased when SPS’ Head Start administrator finally attended our last meeting, but SpEd funding was not discussed. In any discussion about funding, the question is not whether it is possible to provide a full-day special education program; rather how will SPS meet its obligations under federal civil rights laws to ensure equitable offerings are available to all class of preschool-aged children in Seattle: whether that funding be State, City Levy, grant or otherwise. We cannot use funding as an excuse to offer lesser programs to protected classes.

Discussion points on EEU:

The point stating that “dual-certified teachers are paid with gift funds and SPP funds” is erroneous. Matsumoto noted that no gift funds are used. The teachers are partially paid from SPS funds it collects from the state.

Discussion points on Funding Model:

The point cited that City benchmarks are in order “to gain taxpayer buy-in and to demonstrate that the program is successful when administering public funds..." is presented as a statement of fact - unsupported by any evidence presented to the Task Force. Were there surveys or opinion polls? Seattle voters are very generous when it comes to levies benefiting public services and programs. This prejudices the reader into thinking that performance metrics are a necessity.

Finally, no mention is made of my suggestion on multiple occasions that performance benchmarks be modified to incentivize enrollment and outcomes for preschoolers with disabilities, given that financial remuneration is a great incentive. Setting a target of 10% of slots for disabled preschoolers is woefully inadequate. SPS has hundreds of preschoolers receiving special education services. We would need 150 SPP classrooms to provide access for our disabled preschoolers to attend full-day preschool with their typical peers.

It is the lack of these kinds of benchmarks and opportunities in SPS/SPP and SPS/CBO preschools that have led to seemingly insurmountable obstacles for our youngest and most vulnerable students, and their lack of preparedness for K-5, both academically and socially.

preschool taskforce final report - seattle public schools · preschool taskforce final report...

Documents