Is it like this every year?

[Anonymous]

Or the city could decide to pay for ECE above and beyond what the federal head start funds provide.

It is a matter of what they want to invest in. The DCPS budget IS a zero-sum game. Gotta make choices. The city isn't swimming in cash the way it was 5-6 years ago.

Something has to give.

[Anonymous]

Since PK is still non-compulsory I don’t believe that DCPS will ever invest in it. If Head Start services and support ends, this would most likely be the end of ECE at DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Realistically DCPS has too many schools providing Head Start services. Operating out of 60 Title I elementary schools is just too much and if DCPS wants to focus on improving educational outcomes they should only focus on the kids that need the services. If it was up to me, DCPS would only have Head Start services and support at the schools below.

All elementary school EOTR (wards 7 and 8)
Tubman ES
Raymond EC
Brightwood EC
LaSalle Backus EC
Walker Jones EC
Truesdell EC
Cleveland ES
Wheatley EC
Dorothy Height ES
Burroughs ES
Langdon ES
Langley ES
Noyes ES
Barnard ES

So, how did you come up with that list?? Our IB Bunker Hill that is very much majority low income. Bunk Hill has had the best Prk review scores in the city years running. I love walking to our school and would hate to see it go, just join a larger school nearby.
But I do agree school that are not Title one could have Prk phased out. But let's face it the free Prk also what keeps a LOT of families in the city at all.

The children in grades K through 5 at Bunker Hill are very much low income but the Head Start eligibility percentage for Bunker Hill is hovering around 30-35%. That does not justify having Head Start services anymore. If DCPS does move forward with eliminating Head Start at some schools, many of the dual language Title I schools like Bancroft, Powell, and Marie Reed will probably see their Head Start program cut. However if DCPS wants to ensure that Head Start eligible kids, they should designate one or two of the PK classrooms as Head Start classrooms. Given the demographic changes, that’s the only way that DCPS can justify to the Federal Office of Head Start the need to continue offering Head Start at certain schools.

So like one classroom for the upper-income kids and a separate room for the poors? You can't be serious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Realistically DCPS has too many schools providing Head Start services. Operating out of 60 Title I elementary schools is just too much and if DCPS wants to focus on improving educational outcomes they should only focus on the kids that need the services. If it was up to me, DCPS would only have Head Start services and support at the schools below.

All elementary school EOTR (wards 7 and 8)
Tubman ES
Raymond EC
Brightwood EC
LaSalle Backus EC
Walker Jones EC
Truesdell EC
Cleveland ES
Wheatley EC
Dorothy Height ES
Burroughs ES
Langdon ES
Langley ES
Noyes ES
Barnard ES

So, how did you come up with that list?? Our IB Bunker Hill that is very much majority low income. Bunk Hill has had the best Prk review scores in the city years running. I love walking to our school and would hate to see it go, just join a larger school nearby.
But I do agree school that are not Title one could have Prk phased out. But let's face it the free Prk also what keeps a LOT of families in the city at all.

The children in grades K through 5 at Bunker Hill are very much low income but the Head Start eligibility percentage for Bunker Hill is hovering around 30-35%. That does not justify having Head Start services anymore. If DCPS does move forward with eliminating Head Start at some schools, many of the dual language Title I schools like Bancroft, Powell, and Marie Reed will probably see their Head Start program cut. However if DCPS wants to ensure that Head Start eligible kids, they should designate one or two of the PK classrooms as Head Start classrooms. Given the demographic changes, that’s the only way that DCPS can justify to the Federal Office of Head Start the need to continue offering Head Start at certain schools.

So like one classroom for the upper-income kids and a separate room for the poors? You can't be serious.

It used to be that way. That’s why DCPS went to the schoolwide model.

Replacing the Head Start grant ($13M) is probably possible with local funds. Probably not in the next couple years as the budget tightens, but it’s not an impossible amount of money in a $15B budget. Given the new investments in zero to three childcare, I am extremely skeptical that Mayor/Council would eliminate ECE.

[Anonymous]

You realize that the DCPS Head Start grant expires at the end of this school year and DCPS has to submit a new program proposal. DCPS got in trouble for several classroom safety issues and this has thrown the Head Start grant into jeopardy. DCPS must now recompete for the grant at the end of this school year. No one knows what the new model will look like or which schools will be supported.

[Anonymous]

There is also no guarantee that Head Start will even award DCPS with the grant again. If DCPS does not receive the grant, this will be the end of ECE unless DCPS makes up the difference with local funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is also no guarantee that Head Start will even award DCPS with the grant again. If DCPS does not receive the grant, this will be the end of ECE unless DCPS makes up the difference with local funds.

There are other federal funding streams that can be spent on Pre-K, and then there's state, and some philanthropy/PTA funds. I would be surprised if DCPS doesn't receive the grant. But even if they do, I would be shocked if EOTR and EOTP preschool is discontinued. Cutbacks WOTP are likely regardless as building space becomes even tighter.

https://www.ffyf.org/congress-approves-260-million-funding-increase-for-federal-early-childhood-programs/

[Anonymous]

https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/no-search/hs-program-fact-sheet-2018.pdf

Washington DC got $31.9 million from Head Start for FY 2018, but some of that went to freestanding ECE places and Martha's Table-- it doesn't all go to the elementary schools. $32 million is about the budget of Wilson and Deal together. If they cut back preschool funding WOTP and for EOTP schools that aren't serving very many at-risk preschoolers, they could make up a lot of the difference. A PK3 classroom gets about $15,000 per student in the UPSFF, plus more for special needs services and a modest supply allocation. So I'd guess each preschool classroom is costing about $250,000-$300,000, depending on whether it's PK3 or PK4 and the level of special needs. So, if they cut, say, 12 preschool classrooms that's $3 or $4 million right there.


https://osse.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/osse/publication/attachments/2019-20%20UPSFF%20Payment%20Letter.pdf

[Anonymous]

The only thing that DCPS finds that is related to ECE are the personnel costs for teacher and paraprofessional salaries. Things like the curriculum are covered by the Head Start grant. The 17 schools that switched to Creative Curriculum this year had all of their curriculum materials covered by Head Start. SWW at Francis Stevens was the only schools that wasn’t covered since they are no longer Title I and don’t offer Head Start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only thing that DCPS finds that is related to ECE are the personnel costs for teacher and paraprofessional salaries. Things like the curriculum are covered by the Head Start grant. The 17 schools that switched to Creative Curriculum this year had all of their curriculum materials covered by Head Start. SWW at Francis Stevens was the only schools that wasn’t covered since they are no longer Title I and don’t offer Head Start.

Is curriculum really that expensive? What else, supplies, maybe new furniture once in a while? I feel like if they cut Head Start, a lot of schools would find a way to cover it through PTA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only thing that DCPS finds that is related to ECE are the personnel costs for teacher and paraprofessional salaries. Things like the curriculum are covered by the Head Start grant. The 17 schools that switched to Creative Curriculum this year had all of their curriculum materials covered by Head Start. SWW at Francis Stevens was the only schools that wasn’t covered since they are no longer Title I and don’t offer Head Start.

Is curriculum really that expensive? What else, supplies, maybe new furniture once in a while? I feel like if they cut Head Start, a lot of schools would find a way to cover it through PTA.

ECE Instructional Coaches, ECE Family Services, GOLD Access for teachers to do their assessments, curriculum materials, health and safety supplies, two fully covered field trips per year, and compensation for ECE teachers to do home visits.

[Anonymous]

The only current Title I schools where ECE would survive to some degree would be Bancroft, Marie Reed, Powell, Ludlow Taylor, Van Ness, and Garrison. However, every school except Ludlow-Taylor and Van Ness relies heavily on the ECE content specific instructional coaching provided by Head Start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only current Title I schools where ECE would survive to some degree would be Bancroft, Marie Reed, Powell, Ludlow Taylor, Van Ness, and Garrison. However, every school except Ludlow-Taylor and Van Ness relies heavily on the ECE content specific instructional coaching provided by Head Start.

I wouldn't count on Powell being able to qualify for too long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only current Title I schools where ECE would survive to some degree would be Bancroft, Marie Reed, Powell, Ludlow Taylor, Van Ness, and Garrison. However, every school except Ludlow-Taylor and Van Ness relies heavily on the ECE content specific instructional coaching provided by Head Start.

What on earth are you talking about? There are tons of schools EOTR. Are you oblivious to their existence?

https://dcps.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dcps/publication/attachments/List%20of%20Title%20I%20Public%20Schools%20SY%2019-20.pdf

A lot of schools are pretty gentrified for PK3 but much less so for PK4. So I think a lot more schools would survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only current Title I schools where ECE would survive to some degree would be Bancroft, Marie Reed, Powell, Ludlow Taylor, Van Ness, and Garrison. However, every school except Ludlow-Taylor and Van Ness relies heavily on the ECE content specific instructional coaching provided by Head Start.

Needs citation.