Article Aabout Our State's QRIS-WI

[MarinaVanessa]

Just because a provider makes more than $11 per hour doesn't mean that after taxes and expenses that they are still making that same amount per hour....kwim?

Yes, I personally make more than that....but I have also been in this business for 2 decades, don't struggle to fill spots (although many providers around me do) and I have a degree in ECE too so.....

I was really referencing the amount new providers or sahm's had the potential to make without a degree as well as what most center employees make.

Yes, I earned $11+ as a starting wage for HS. Our HS workers here now start at well over that amount. They are required to have at minimum a CDA credential. Lead teachers here make a lot more than public school teachers.

Our Head Starts aren't struggling with finances at all and as a matter of fact, just recently opened a couple more centers in my town as well as begun offering summer classes/care to their students. Head Start here is flourishing and is fast becoming the number one place for parents to enroll their children for preschool and child care options. Even though low income children are accepted first, they can still enroll over income families and do.

For one particular metro area in my state the average income for:

Preschool Teacher is $33,000
Public School English Teacher $43,000
Head Start Lead Teacher $109,000

http://www.indeed.com/salary/q-Early-Head-Start-Teacher-l-Rochester,-MN.html

So yeah, pretty sure we know where the money is going for these programs.


Google Head Start teachers in your area and see for yourself....they make GOOD money! According to one site, the average salary for a lead teacher is $25.14 per hour.

There are hundreds of sites that will tell you how well they are paid.

http://salarybox.com/compare.php?st=MN&cst=OR&id=2433&year=2011

http://www.umchs.org/umchsresources/administration/pandp/Human_Resource_Management/HR03_Salary_Schedule/Salary_Scale.pdf

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Head...es-E133376.htm

Ours don't get paid nearly as much either. Ours cap out at $30,000 a year. Here are the requirements for a Head Start Teacher in my county:

TEACHER (Head Start Center Based Preschool): $12.58-$17.52/hr 35-40hrs/wk. Min 2 years work experience in a preschool-age instructional capacity. *AA/AS in Child Development/Early Childhood Education or related and a state-awarded Child Development teacher permit or higher. (Those holding only the degree will be required to apply for and obtain a state awarded teacher permit) *BA/BS in Child Development/Early Childhood Education or related field is preferred and pay is within a range of $14.13 - $20.57/hr. Bilingual (Eng/Span) skills highly preferred.

We also don't have as much funding so only really low-income families can qualify. I think that a family of 3 has to have an income of $40k or lower which is hard to do when you have two working parents. They would each have to make under 20k a year. Even then there is no guarantee because there are so many families that want to get into the program but can't because there aren't enough spaces. Here they don't have the space to open it up to families that still want to pay for the program even if they don't qualify as low-income.

[Unregistered]

Just talked to a friend that taught there for 3 years, possible four. She said that when she started she made just under $15 and when she left she was making $15.50. My friend has an elementary education degree.

The girl who replaced her had a early childhood education and started at $12.75.

My friend also said that Head Start here is not union so that probably would have something to do with the salary differences. I never knew HS could be unionized! That was an interesting tidbit of information.

[Blackcat31]

Just talked to a friend that taught there for 3 years, possible four. She said that when she started she made just under $15 and when she left she was making $15.50. My friend has an elementary education degree.

The girl who replaced her had a early childhood education and started at $12.75.

My friend also said that Head Start here is not union so that probably would have something to do with the salary differences. I never knew HS could be unionized! That was an interesting tidbit of information.

Hmm, that doesn't seem right. Why would she start at around $15 ONLY to have a .50 increase over 3 possibly 4 years....she must not have had very good job performance reviews.

We got a cost of living raise every.single.year of employment.

Head Start is not union here either. I think the salaries are dependent on what each state receives for funding and bases on the number of unemployed and low income families we have here in this state, I imagine that our state receives a big amount of funding each year.

[Heidi]

But the bus driver's get paid pretty good for as little time on the job as they have ....

"19 hours/week; $10.34-$11.41/hr"

sure...but it's only 19 hours a week. $216 gross isn't going to make you much of a living. Oh, and that's 9 months out of a year. If one had another part-time job that could work around the morning and afternoon driving, they might be able to pay for food AND rent! ::

[Heidi]

I also think that, if done correctly and fairly, the QRIS program can be a good thing. I do have some concerns about the requirements especially about requiring a degree. For example in CA they are not quite clear on the requirements yet since they are also just in the pilot program but one of the possible requirements for the highest rating would be having a masters degree. Let's face it ... unless I hired an employee so that I could go to school I would not be able to take all of the required classes online or during the evening (after daycare) because my local colleges don't offer them all during the evening or online. Some require hands on learning and face-to-face observations which makes sense. Also I can only have a sub 20% of the time so I wouldn't be able to take FT classes so it would take me a while to get a degree. And this is just talking about getting an AA, there are other concerns that I have with having to get a masters degree such as the cost, time and whether if and how long it would take for me to recoup the cost.

Also from what I understand any degree may count (again, they are not sure yet) and if that is true then to me that doesn't make sense. I mean if you were a center director and you had a degree in Business Administration and your staff that worked with children were required to have CDA's, units in child development etc then I could agree ... however I don't feel that it would be realistic to give a center 5 stars because the director had never taken any child development courses but had a masters degree in Liberal Arts, Multi Media or other degrees that had nothing to do with child care or the business of child care but only give a FCC home 3 stars because the provider only had an AA in child development (which in my opinion is more important than having a masters in any other degree including business administration).

I do however feel that some type of education should be a requirement. Why wouldn't you want to improve your knowledge base and understanding? It can improve your abilities as a provider, your relationships with your clients, your relationships with the children and in the end your business as a whole. I myself am taking college courses towards getting child development permits (CA), and towards an AA in Child Development (for starters), maybe even for a CDA or accreditation if I qualify and if I have the money. Why not?

But again, it depends on how they implement the QRIS program so I will have to wait and see what the details will be. This is why participating in the pilot process is so important, I'd like to have a voice too.

I absolutely agree that it should be a factor. However, it shouldn't be the deciding factor.

The way WI has it set up, you can earn up to 40 "points", in four areas. Teacher education, health and safety, curriculum, and business practices. It is highly "tipped", as teacher education counts as 14 of those points, and you can only get 3+ stars unless you have s FORMAL education. Even if you got 26 points in all other areas (meaning you are a "perfect" provider in your h&s, curriculum, and business practices), which would qualify you to be a 5 star program, you would still only be a 2 star if you don't have at least 18 credits in early childhood education. There are NO points given for experience, and almost none for countless CEU's.

So you can be a fantastic provider, and have 20+ years experience, and have attended tons of trainings in addition to the "how to be a daycare provider" coursework that is a licensing requirement (a 40-hour course), but you can only be a 2-star program.

We have people who taught classes for the tech school (non-credit childcare courses) and have been in business 30 years, and they cannot be a 3,4, or 5 star program. That's wrong, IMO.

At the very least, they could have worked in some sort of "grandfather" clause for providers with many years of experience. I don't think expecting a 55 or 60 year old person to go back to college is really very fair or really going to change how she does her job.

[MarinaVanessa]

I absolutely agree that it should be a factor. However, it shouldn't be the deciding factor.

I completely agree. I think that the point scale is a good idea. If you fall short in some areas but do better in other areas then you can raise some of the points to get a higher score.

I also don't think that experience should have anything to do with your score (which so far in CA it doesn't seem to be a focus point which is great). I know tons of teachers and providers both that have been teaching or providing child care for 15-20 years+ that I would never want as a teacher or as child care provider for my own children. Experience doesn't and should mean anything if you've been doing it "wrong" the whole time.

[Unregistered]

Hmm, that doesn't seem right. Why would she start at around $15 ONLY to have a .50 increase over 3 possibly 4 years....she must not have had very good job performance reviews.

We got a cost of living raise every.single.year of employment.

Head Start is not union here either. I think the salaries are dependent on what each state receives for funding and bases on the number of unemployed and low income families we have here in this state, I imagine that our state receives a big amount of funding each year.

I think it makes sense because here you cap out at so they probably don't give pay raises every year. Also, the girl that took her spot came in $2.00 less then her and also had a degree.

Thats why I asked about making $11 an hour 20 years ago. It sounds like Minnesota pays way better then most HS. Ours and CA it sounds like both start at around $12.00 and cap at $17, imagine what they paid 20 years ago. My SIL has worked as an aid for the school district for 17/18 years and is capped at $13.00 an hour and literally once she pays her insurance, taxes, she brings home around $1,000-$1,200 a month. Not much for almost 20 years and I hear the same thing with HS-no pay.

Our funding should be pretty good since we had/have the highest unemployment rate in the state for our county. Must be like the Food Program-each state totally different in the way its run.

[Blackcat31]

Estimated state allocations of COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) for Head Start for the state of California was $40,858,826.00, Oregon $2,921,668.00 and Minnesota $3,537,462

I'm sure it is based on state demographics as well as enrollment.

The by laws of Head Start state :

All staff in Head Start programs will, in FY 2012, receive a cost-of-living increase of at least 4.9 percent in their hourly rate of pay, subject to the provisions of Section 653 of the Head Start Act that prohibit Head Start salaries “in excess of the average rate of compensation paid in the area where the program is carried out to a substantial number of persons providing substantially comparable services, or in excess of the average rate of compensation paid to a substantial number of persons providing substantially comparable services in the area of the person’s preceding employment, whichever is higher” and also prohibit any Head Start employee from being compensated at a rate higher than that of an Executive Schedule Level II position (currently $177,000). Any grantee proposing to award salary increases of less than 4.9 percent or proposing to award differential cost-of-living increases to staff must justify its rationale in its budget narrative.
(http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/hs)

So your friend should have gotten a COLA every year unless your area HS could justify it via budget restrictions/limitations.

[Cradle2crayons]

The most the state will pay for a child in my county is $115 per week. Minus the parent's copay. So, even if I were a 5 star, the most will be $132.50, minus the co-pay, and for family childcare, they pay on attendance only, so that's $3.77 per hour minus the parent co-pay, at a maximum of state-pay of 35 hours per week. The parent is expected to pay the co-pay, and absent days, and any hours over 35, or the provider is expected to eat the cost. Centers are paid on enrollment.

Your state pay amount is THREE TIMES the rate I get here in MS. Crying shame.

[Heidi]

Your state pay amount is THREE TIMES the rate I get here in MS. Crying shame.

no kidding!

In the cities, the rates are 2-2.5 times what they are here.

Honestly, from a parents perspective, how does one pay $250 a week for childcare? What kind of job would you need to have to pay that, and if you have 2 kids, forget it!

I'm thinking a "typical" job. A bank teller, for instance, in Madison probably makes $12 and hour. That's $480 a week. If she has 2 kids, she would be better off staying home. Even with one, after taxes, transportation costs, and apparel costs, the net gain would be pretty minimal.

[AmyKidsCo]

My problem isn't with having quality initiatives or setting higher standards. My issue is with the cookie-cutter approach that the ONLY way to provide high-quality care is through meeting these 100 or so standards above and beyond health and safety (which in WI, is roughly 750 standards already). A degree alone does not make one a better provider, nor does experience alone. It's a combination of things, and then there's a lot of things one can't really quantify, either.

AGREED!!!! Not to mention that no matter what they say about judging FCC differently from group programs, you have to become more like a group program to get more points.

First of all, the QRIS process is designed to look at flaws in a program, not strengths.

It's someone with a measuring tape and a stopwatch saying "oh...dcb touched the dog and you didn't wash his hands immediately...minus point". Not, "Wow, the way you handled that meltdown shows that you really understand child development, and how much that child's self-worth means to you".

It's "those children sat at the table and waited 4 minutes for their lunch" and "all children must have chairs their size where their feet touch the floor", not "boy, this is really a family environment where you all sit down for a meal together".

It's "everything must be designed around the child", not "these kids are learning to live in the real world".

YES again! And you don't know what you lost points on so you can't explain anything that they don't see. For instance, if you're short on toys in the infant room you can't say it's because Joey puked into the toy basket 5 min before they arrived so all those toys are being washed and sanitized.

Also, I've heard MANY stories about Technical Assistants saying one thing on one visit and the opposite on the next visit... Providers not being told that expectations were changed (You're supposed to check the website regularly to check for changes, but they only list the new info not that there was a change so you have to know what used to be there to know if something changed...) TAs saying one thing and raters saying another.... I even know a FCC provider whose TA said she'd earn 3 stars easy but she ended up with 2 stars. She challenged and ended up with 3 stars - obviously there was a problem with the original rating. I wonder how many other programs have a "bad" rating...

There are many, many different ways to offer quality care. WI's QRIS says there's one way. That's my issue with it.

Oh, and one other MAJOR issue. Our state does very, very little to shut down illegal providers. There are people around here who have 15 or 18 kids in their homes every day ALONE, or with the help of their home-schooled kids. If we are so worried about quality, let's get that taken care of. The state is very aware of these places, but claim "their hands are tied".

They also let providers (mostly centers, but family, too) who should have been shut down due to violations long ago remain open. Some of these places are disgusting; dirty, bottle-propping, bleary-eyed bored "teachers" who have no business caring for children. They get violation after violation, even fines, but rarely do they shut one down. There is a program on the south side of Madison (in the poorest neighborhood) that I've been in a handful of times over the last 23 years. It honestly makes me want to cry. They are a 2-Star program. I am a 3-star program. Yeah, right!

AGREED again!

IMO, the best way to improve overall quality is to require regulation. (I know I'm opening a bucket of worms here...)

I'm not saying that all unregulated programs are bad. I'm not saying that all regulated programs are good. I realize that there's good and bad all over.

What I am saying is that if everyone has to be regulated then there's a minimum standard that's expected. The people who have too many kids can be shut down - no more "hands are tied." There's a minimum safety requirement - no one can say "I didn't know I couldn't leave a carful of kids in the parking lot while I ran into the store." There's a minimum education requirement - they can't say "I didn't know I couldn't let an infant sleep on her belly on a waterbed." And there's someone popping in unexpectedly to look over your shoulder a couple of times a year instead of no-one knowing what's going on.

(I should's warned you not to get me started on YoungStar, LOL!)

Generally I'm first in line with the newest "best practice" and go above and beyond, but I chose not to participate in YoungStar and don't plan to until I'm required to. Hopefully by then they'll have the kinks worked out.

[Unregistered]

My friend also mentioned that during the last year she was there, they quit taking money out of the checks for retirement and put it into your checks. It didn't make much of a difference though for her because she hadn't built anything up.

I know last year they had no time off except major holidays. One of my mamas worked for them and had to work-Thanksgiving break, Christmas Break, Spring Break. Something about being in a review year or being up for a review.

Here are some other articles I found on salaries:

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-head+start+teacher

http://www.edsource.org/today/2013/h...ducators/25375 (very interesting read)

http://www.fwps.org/dept/hr/compensation/headstart.pdf

http://www.ccrpc.org/headstart/payscale.php

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/head-start-teacher-salary-SRCH_KO0,18.htm

It looks like the high, high salaries are few and far between from what I can see.

[Heidi]

AGREED!!!! Not to mention that no matter what they say about judging FCC differently from group programs, you have to become more like a group program to get more points.



YES again! And you don't know what you lost points on so you can't explain anything that they don't see. For instance, if you're short on toys in the infant room you can't say it's because Joey puked into the toy basket 5 min before they arrived so all those toys are being washed and sanitized.

Also, I've heard MANY stories about Technical Assistants saying one thing on one visit and the opposite on the next visit... Providers not being told that expectations were changed (You're supposed to check the website regularly to check for changes, but they only list the new info not that there was a change so you have to know what used to be there to know if something changed...) TAs saying one thing and raters saying another.... I even know a FCC provider whose TA said she'd earn 3 stars easy but she ended up with 2 stars. She challenged and ended up with 3 stars - obviously there was a problem with the original rating. I wonder how many other programs have a "bad" rating...



AGREED again!

IMO, the best way to improve overall quality is to require regulation. (I know I'm opening a bucket of worms here...)

I'm not saying that all unregulated programs are bad. I'm not saying that all regulated programs are good. I realize that there's good and bad all over.

What I am saying is that if everyone has to be regulated then there's a minimum standard that's expected. The people who have too many kids can be shut down - no more "hands are tied." There's a minimum safety requirement - no one can say "I didn't know I couldn't leave a carful of kids in the parking lot while I ran into the store." There's a minimum education requirement - they can't say "I didn't know I couldn't let an infant sleep on her belly on a waterbed." And there's someone popping in unexpectedly to look over your shoulder a couple of times a year instead of no-one knowing what's going on.

(I should's warned you not to get me started on YoungStar, LOL!)

Generally I'm first in line with the newest "best practice" and go above and beyond, but I chose not to participate in YoungStar and don't plan to until I'm required to. Hopefully by then they'll have the kinks worked out.

I don't totally agree, but I get what you're saying. But, honestly, the regulations are in place just fine, IMO. It's the ENFORCING of the regs that I take issue with. Illegal providers (for out-of-staters, that's anyone caring for 3+ children under age 7 without a license), and the regulated providers who don't meet the standards (I'm not talking about paperwork violations...there needs to be some degrees of severity). Once they get those things accomplished with some consistency, THEN they can worry about the next step.

A fantastic model is the accreditation model through NAFCC or Satellite (local Madison program). In both those models, there are approx. 250 standards, but only a handful are mandatory. Then, a combination of self-study (reflection), observation by a trained observer, and provider interview earn you the credential. THAT is how you encourage quality. Make accreditation affordable (maybe through scholarships), and give incentives to accredited providers, as well as higher pay for state-assistance clients. Make people WANT to be accredited. For the most part, we WANT to do better. We WANT to learn and serve our families. We just want to do that and still be ourselves, right?

[Cradle2crayons]

no kidding!

In the cities, the rates are 2-2.5 times what they are here.

Honestly, from a parents perspective, how does one pay $250 a week for childcare? What kind of job would you need to have to pay that, and if you have 2 kids, forget it!

I'm thinking a "typical" job. A bank teller, for instance, in Madison probably makes $12 and hour. That's $480 a week. If she has 2 kids, she would be better off staying home. Even with one, after taxes, transportation costs, and apparel costs, the net gain would be pretty minimal.

I know right?? My family of three kids is state pay and a single mom. The state only pays $125 a week for all three kids and she has to pay the difference which is approximately the same as the state. So even with a certificate, she still pays $125 a week for three kids. And the only reason she got a decent rate was because they are only here 30 hours a week.

Now centers here get 80 bucks a week per kid but the moms out here where I live don't want their kids to go to a center and even if they did, most of the jobs around here are after 600 pm when centers are closed. So it really gives moms who have non traditional jobs no choice but to NOT use a center and have to lay double out of pocket even wi a certificate.

[Leanna]

I don't totally agree, but I get what you're saying. But, honestly, the regulations are in place just fine, IMO. It's the ENFORCING of the regs that I take issue with. Illegal providers (for out-of-staters, that's anyone caring for 3+ children under age 7 without a license), and the regulated providers who don't meet the standards (I'm not talking about paperwork violations...there needs to be some degrees of severity). Once they get those things accomplished with some consistency, THEN they can worry about the next step.

A fantastic model is the accreditation model through NAFCC or Satellite (local Madison program). In both those models, there are approx. 250 standards, but only a handful are mandatory. Then, a combination of self-study (reflection), observation by a trained observer, and provider interview earn you the credential. THAT is how you encourage quality. Make accreditation affordable (maybe through scholarships), and give incentives to accredited providers, as well as higher pay for state-assistance clients. Make people WANT to be accredited. For the most part, we WANT to do better. We WANT to learn and serve our families. We just want to do that and still be ourselves, right?

I TOTALLY agree. Accreditation is an already existing valuable tool for identifying high quality programs. It is a true learning process (rather than simply a rating process) for the provider. Instead of spending thousands of dollars to create these QRIS programs, why not promote & subsidize the accreditation process?