Where are the PK3 programs in west NW neighborhoods?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many people on this board assume that just because someone lives WOTP, they are wealthy and own some SFH zoned for Janney. I just want to remind you that that is not always the case. My small family of three rents an apartment zoned for Murch. Even though we are years away from school aged for our kid, we live where we live because it's much less expansive than where we used to live EOTP. We're saving as much as we can to be able to buy a place, but that likely won't be in our current neighborhood. So for us, free pre-k 3 would be a huge bonus (which is why we will apply to many of the wonderful programs EOTP and just make it work with our commutes). Point being, please don't assume that everyone WOTP can afford private, and can afford to stay there as homeowners long term.

+1. And even among the homeowners, there are people who bought small fixer uppers WOTP, maybe before prices of those climbed close to a million. That's the case for us, and with the budget we had back then, we'd today be looking IB for the Title 1 school where we attended PK. I'm not clamoring for PK3 to be made available WOTP, but please don't assume everyone in Ward 3 is rich, dropped a million on a house, and can easily afford private preschool for multiple kids.

+1 EOTP is becoming more expensive than WOTP.

Really? More expensive than Wesley or mass ave heights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope. No preK 3 west of the Park.

Not true. Francis Stevens, Hyde Addison, Appletree CH and Ross all offer PK-3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nope. No preK 3 west of the Park.

Not true. Francis Stevens, Hyde Addison, Appletree CH and Ross all offer PK-3.

Huh? Except for Hyde-Addison (when not in swing space), all of these are EOTP.

[Anonymous]

I don't think PK-3 is provided for those "looking to save up to buy a house." In DC, the money, rather than expanding PK3 to those west of the park, could be much better spent providing smaller classes, social workers etc for those the original PK3 plan was meant to serve, not well-educated, middle income families. No, it is not "fair" in the sense that there is not free PK3 for all. But the program isn't supposed to be free PK3 for all. In other jurisdictions PK4 is provided based on income. Maybe that would be the more "fair" approach. I have a feeling those clamoring for more PK3 wouldn't fit any definition of income need.