1

Massachusetts’Quality Rating and Improvement System

(QRIS)Overview and Update

2

Overview

What and Why of QRIS

Massachusetts’ Process for Developing a QRIS

Preliminary Recommendations

Moving Forward

“A Quality Rating & Improvement System (QRIS) is a method to

assess, improve, and communicate the level of quality in early care

& educationand after-school settings.”

(Stair Steps to Quality, United Way Success by Six, p. 4)

QRIS:Quality Rating and Improvement System

Why QRIS?

QRIS are an early education and care market intervention that help address the tension between increasing standards to produce better outcomes for children and maintaining

affordable prices for families.

From Anne Mitchell

QRIS Creates a Structure to Organize Key Functions of an Early Education and Care System in MA

Positive Outcomes for Children, Families and

Communities

Systems Planning, Monitoring, Accountability

and Enforcement

Family Education, Engagement and Support

Standards for Programs, Practioners, and Children

Support to Programs and Educators to Meet and Maintain Standards

Financial Supports for Families

Slide from Anne Mitchell

Components of Massachusetts’ QRIS

7

1. Standards2. Monitoring and Accountability3. Program and Practitioner Supports4. Fiscal Incentives5. Family Information and Education and the overarching structure

Each element will go through 3 phases – Design, Public Input, & Implementation

MA QRIS Timeline

StandardsDesign PhasePublic InputImplementation

Monitoring & AccountabilityDesign PhasePublic InputImplementation

Program and Practitioner SupportsDesign PhasePublic InputImplementation

Fiscal IncentivesDesign PhasePublic InputImplementation

Consumer EngagementDesign PhasePublic InputImplementation

PILOT QRIS (Fall 2009)FULL IMPLEMENTATION (when funding)

Feb 08| Jul 08| Dec 08| Jul 09| Dec 09| Jul 10

Tod

ay

9

Design Process for the QRIS Structure and Standards

EEC InternalQRIS Team

EEC BoardParent AdvisoryEEC Advisory

QRIS External Working Group

(Subgroup of Advisory

Committee)

Drafts of the Standards now go to Public Input Phase

Standards Design Teams

External Stakeholders Standards Design Team Mary Ann Anthony – Catholic Charities

(representative of MADCA) Chad d’Entremont – Early Education for All Marcia Farris – MassAEYC Jodi Figuerido – Institute for Education and

Professional Development Barbara Finlayson – Hampshire Educational

Collaborative Sarah Fujiwara – Horizons for Homeless

Children Gwynn Hughes – Massachusetts After-school

Partnership Kelty Kelley – Massachusetts Community

Partnerships Councils Pam Kuechla – PACE Child Care Works /

Massachusetts Child Care Resource and Referral Network

Kay Lisseck – Schott Fellows Kathy Modigliani – Family Child Care Project Kathy Reticker – Acre Family Day Care

(representative of MADCA) Grace Richardson – American Family Child Care

Association, Ind. Family Child Care Provider Jim Robertson – Plowshares Jason Sachs/Karen Silver – Boston Public

Schools Ronna Schaffer – MA Head Start Association Peg Sprague – United Way of Mass Bay and the

Merrimack Valley Nancy Topping-Tailby – MA Head Start

Association Donna Traynham – MA Dept. of Elementary and

Secondary Education Libby Zimmerman – Connected Beginnings

Internal EEC Standards Design Team Phil Baimas, Prof. Dev. and

Regulation Pat Cameron, Special Education Amy Checkoway, UPK and Quality Joan Clark, IT Gail DeRiggi, Family Support Nancy Doyle, Quality Joyce Holen, Regional Licensing Annette Lamana, Quality Jennifer Louis, Research Dave McGrath, Licensing Larisa Mendez-Penate, Comp Services Anita Moeller, Programs Deena Papanikolaou, Legal Kelli Piligian, Regional Licensing Alda Rego, Finance Pam Roux, Prof. Dev. Rod Southwick, Research Matt Veno, Communications Tom Weierman, Legal Corey Zimmerman, QRIS and Research

MA QRIS Overarching Structure: Preliminary Recommendations

Include licensed and license-exempt programs and providers serving children birth – 14 years of age.

Voluntary participation initially, eventually may be mandatory to receive certain funding.

Design of standards should consider different setting types.

Recognize and incorporate existing quality standards, such as Head Start, NAEYC and NAFCC

Hybrid of mandatory criteria plus points to move to next level.

Provide financial and other quality supports during implementation.

11

MA QRIS Standards:Preliminary Recommendations Five levels of quality defined in draft standards with

combination of required criteria and more flexible points.

Nine categories within draft standards*: Relationships Physical Environment Leadership and Management Health and Safety Curriculum and Assessment Community Involvement Family Involvement Program Evaluation Workforce Quality and Support

*Special Education & Cultural Competence embedded across categories of draft standards.

Three versions of draft standards by program type: Center/school-based Family child care School-age

12

Center/School-Based StandardsDRAFT

Level 1:Full licensing with no action to revoke, orPrograms operated and overseen by a local education agency (i.e. license-exempt programs)1

Level 2:Programs must earn at least 36 points and at least 4 points must be earned in each standard area

Level 3:Programs must earn at least 72 points and at least 8 points must be earned in each standard area

Level 4:Current accreditation from NAEYC or NAA , or If a Head Start designee, receipt of a Blue or Gold letter from the Office of Head Start as a result of the triennial review process

Level 5:Current accreditation from NAEYC or NAA, andEvery classroom has a teacher with a Bachelor’s degree or higher in a related field, andPrograms which are operated and overseen by a local education agency (i.e. license-exempt) must demonstrate that they meet all EEC licensing requirements for group programs

1 Need to insert appropriate language for other types of license-exempt programs, i.e. Catholic, Montessori

14

Moving Forward with QRIS

Next 6 months Standards out for public review Design of Monitoring & Accountability

component Design and begin implementation of the

Program and Practitioner Supports component Continue communication with the field to

gather input

Next 1-2 years Design Fiscal Incentives component Pilot QRIS rating system and quality

supports

Align with other EEC initiatives Income Eligible Re-procurement UPK Workforce Taskforce recommendations FY10 Budget

Seeking EEC Board Guidance on:

Preliminary recommendations and structure of standards

Key questions for public input phase

Feedback/thoughts on other elements of MA QRIS

For more information: http://www.eec.state.ma.us/QRIS.aspx