Children Separated by Pay Type
Recently, my one year old was moved to a new room at her day care center. This was not unexpected as I knew she couldn't stay with the babies forever. However, shortly after the move, I learned that the center was separating children by the method in which they are paid. Private pay infants and toddlers are in one room together, while infants and toddlers receiving DHS subsidy have not been moved and are grouped by age and like development.
The center is the recipient of a grant, which I believe is issued by the state. The grant provides diapers and formula for children who qualify. The child must receive DHS subsidy to qualify. The grant also provided the center with new furniture including cribs and shelving/cubbies, new flooring and new toys/ equipment for every room. Every room except the "private pay" room. As a result of these recent developments, my child is now in a disorganized, thrown together, make-shift room with babies much younger than her. Honestly, I'm upset. I want to address this with the director, but I don't want to come forth without solid reasoning and cause unnecessary drama either. I feel like children being separated because of payment method is not ethical. What would you do if you were in this situation. |
I cannot speak for legalities from the daycare perspective because I don't accept subsidy, so I'm not sure.
However, I can speak personally. I would never segregate my daycare like that. They're children and all are entitled to the same proper care and equipment. And if you're unhappy with it, there's nothing wrong with at least asking what is going on. If you're not satisfied (as I don't believe I would be), I'd pull and take somewhere else. No drama necessary. |
Originally Posted by Unregistered: Also what state is this? As for approaching the director, just ask. If it's true, there IS reason to address it. |
Originally Posted by Blackcat31: The center has been very open about the grant and the changes it would bring to the center. However, I have a family member at the center. More specifically the director, who informed me of the private pay vs subsidy situation. This information is very true. This is in Oklahoma. I have no problem approaching the situation, I am simply seeking opinions to determine if I may be blowing this out of proportion. |
I would be livid! I can not believe this is legal.......Segregation of any kind should not be tolerated.The school should have all the children grouped as licencing says.I know many schools have infants up to age 15 months .Then they move on...I can not imagine this is legal.That would be like having school children who receive free or discounted lunch not only sitting separately but getting different meals.I hope its not legal. If I were you I would absolutely talk to the Directer.If you do not get the answers I would call licencing.Good luck.
|
The grant is per room. The room is for subsidy aka "at risk" children.
The supplies are FOR those children specifically. With required supplies lists. You will have to complain at a federal level for this. I know we have been. :o |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: |
Originally Posted by rosieteddy: It is part of a grant. For that specific room.;) Think franchised head start. |
Originally Posted by Thriftylady: I've had 10 grand worth of supplies so far, in three separate stages over 4 years. |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: |
Originally Posted by Thriftylady: |
Now, if I were to have top of the line supplies and ONLY allow my private pay clients children access, but kept the state pay kids in a different room with old toys, etc. I would get in big trouble.
I find this alarming. |
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: Originally Posted by rosieteddy: Originally Posted by Play Care: There are certain "requirements" I must give families in my care that are receiving subsidy but do not have to extend the same to those that do not receive subsidy. :rolleyes: Originally Posted by Cat Herder: |
Originally Posted by Play Care: The board of education is not interested in fair. :o They assume parents who can Will provide those experiences and supplies for their own children. These federal programs are for those who can't. I also suspect some is about statistic gathering. Showing improvements in a select group. |
Originally Posted by Blackcat31: They are still growing and adding a room. Somebody's kids had to go in there. The grant is to benefit subsidy kids, so subsidy kids get first choice of slots in new rooms. Just like a Pre-K class and the standard "4 year old class" in the same private center. One belongs to and is overseen by the BOE, the other is a private center overseen by CCR&R. KWIM? |
I'm still confused. Every room in this center was part of the grant. Once, the grant materials were applied to the entire center, another make-shift room was opened for private pay babies. So, are you telling me that these children whose parents pay out-of-pocket don't receive the same standard of care as the subsidized children? What makes subsidized children "at risk"? And why is income even a factor when it comes to child care standards? I make $12/mo over the income limits for DHS subsidy in my state. I understand that there has to be defined limitations for this. However, it's absolutely insane to say that my $12/mo extra is reason to put my child in a sub-standard room. $12/mo means my child doesn't deserve the same staff with "higher training requirements". $12/mo justifies the center is allowed to not hold every room to the same standards.
As PlayCare noted, If the tables were turned and only the private pay children had access to the newest equipment while DHS children were grouped together in a separate room, this would be a HUGE issue. I'm having a difficult time wrapping my head around the idea that child care is not equal to all children, regardless of their parents income. Such discrimination is a great injustice to our children, regardless of income status. |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: Even Head Start accepts a certain number of children/families over income to keep up the appearance of non-discrimination. |
BC and Mama, I hear you both. lovethis You are preaching to the choir. This is why I don't accept subsidy. ;)
It will follow you all through your childs education. It just will. My honor kids had to share a book between 3 students while the kids with a criminal record were given laptops to take home. It is how it will be.... The only real vote we have is with our feet. |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: (I'm speaking specially to SPED programs, talented and gifted programs. In my state/area charter schools are awful and no parent in their right mind would send their kid:ouch: ) One of my kids receives some sped services. We weren't told we were on our own because we had the ability pay for it. My other child is in gifted classes, same thing. The school/state provides those things. I mean, we can't force the school to allow our one child who struggles into the talented and gifted program. But that's because she's perfectly ordinary :o not because we make too much. |
Playcare, I was referring to the amount allocated per program.
|
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: My bet is after reading the state regulations and comparing them to the federal program regulations most will realize the new room is not actually substandard. It is what was the norm and still above what many programs offer. Not calling you out, Mama, just using that statement. I hear it a lot when discussing "quality" programs. |
Originally Posted by Blackcat31: I would ask them what their improvement plan was for that room. Try to nail them down to a specific date. |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: |
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: I am not trying to upset you. I am trying to explain it from a business perspective. :o The risk of losing a few private pay clients did not outweigh the risk of losing a federal contract. Again, I would expect them to upgrade as soon as the room becomes profitable enough to support it. |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: |
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: It is getting harder and harder to do. We are being forced out of business. :( Our ratios keep being lowered while our training, regulations and supply lists keep getting more and more expensive. I hope you stick around the forum. You have more of an ability to make a difference than most providers with this issue. :hug: |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: I have found that it just isn't worth it to me to accept subsidy. The hoops they want me to jump through here are outrageous. And the pay is substandard! I have found I can lower my rates for private pay, and skip subsidy payments, because the low rate the pay, and the amount of money it would cost me to keep up to the demands of the system. I am sure I would loose money taking subsidy. I would be full and have a waiting list longer than I am tall if I did, because many providers in my area won't take it. |
I will definitely stick around. I really appreciate the open discussion here. Honest without being salty. Thank you all, I am armed with knowledge and will go forth into the director's office with confidence!
|
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: |
Originally Posted by Thriftylady: |
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: |
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: otherwise, sorry you have to go through that, especially since you don't seem to have any other option, and just pulling your child may do more harm than good. |
Originally Posted by Mad_Pistachio: Whatever method of media a person chooses to use is up to them but providers in my state have had some great successes by "venting" and sharing feedback via our local and statewide media sources. |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: Originally Posted by Blackcat31: Yes, please stick around! It's wonderful to have a parent perspective! :) |
Don't think I haven't thought about going to media with this issue! I want to talk to the director first, as she is a family member. Unfortunately she has been out sick. After she has had a chance to respond, I would like to talk to the owner because she is the facilitator of all this. She's very brash and I can see her telling me to take my child elsewhere if
I'm not happy. She will be the one to really fan the flames and send me straight to media outlets! |
http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...empty-promises
This might interest you, Mama. Notice how long this debate has been going... Scroll down to the Oklahoma section.. |
I'm still going to argue that those gains that children make, then lose, is because of our public schools, NOT because they didn't make them in the first place.
I was a family childcare provider for 14 years, and have been a HS Home Visitor for 6 months. I am appalled at the difference between the children I cared for then and the children I serve now. They are so behind, for the most part, it's sad. As frustrated as I sometimes got with daycare families that didn't seem to really care what was going on with their children during the day (how or what they learned), at least I had them 9 hours a day and they learned! The kiddos I serve now, I see 1 1/2 hours a week. I see progress; but 1 1/2 hours a week is a drop in the bucket. We have to document every single visit to every single child, and track their development. We have to do quarterly reports to show their gains. I'm telling you, as frustrating as it is, the gains are there. Without HS, these kids would be way behind when they get to school. As far as one classroom getting grant money and therefore being able to offer better materials or equipment for those kids, I wish it weren't the case. But, honestly, that's what the money is allotted for. We used to be able to get grants that benefited ALL the children in our group; those grants are gone. Years ago, having low-income children in your group did give you extra "points" in your grant application, but it wasn't as in-your-face as this program seems to be. |
Originally Posted by Heidi: We moved to Ohio in the middle of second grade, the teacher told us there was no way DD would pass the test in third grade to move on and suggested we hold her back in second. It made a world of difference for her with NO special ed, and no autistic classroom. So in my experience, HS is a complete and total waste of taxpayer dollars and gets us nowhere. Which brings me to my next question. Now not only do we have HS but we have "no child left behind". How do we go from Head Start to left behind? |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: You saved me a lot of typing. |
Originally Posted by Thriftylady: As for our centers, yes, they are play based. They also do developmental and mental health assessments,provide healthy meals (food program), set goals for individual children, and plan activities based on those goals. The social aspect his HUGE, but as childcare providers, I'm pretty sure that's what we've been arguing all along. It's not about craming a whole lot of facts into their brains before they get to school; it's about them being ready to learn once they get to school. With HS, we just have to document everything. To death...:ouch: Children who live in poverty are less likely to have the experiences middle-income children do. There are no trips to the zoo, the children's museum, sometimes even the grocery store. They don't get read to, they don't go to the library. We've got families of 5 or 6 people who live in campers year round. Not exactly an ideal learning enviroment. So, I agree that maybe it didn't help your DD any more than your daycare did. But, that's because you run a quality daycare program. Most of our kiddos would be at home, with the same 1 or 2 adults, until they reached Kindy if it weren't for HS. "Head Start" is really a kinder way to say "So they're not so far behind". If we sold it as "hey, we don't want your kid to be behind when they get to school because your poor and undereducated", most people would probably not say "yeah, sure, that's me". I don't know if HS is the most efficient way to spend taxpayer money to make sure low-income children are ready for school. But, I will say that I do not beleive it's a waste of money. |
Update
I have met with the director at my center regarding the issues of segregation based on payment method and the quality of equipment and care provided in the "private pay room".
She was able to show me the plans in place for improving the room, which does not include furniture, equipment or toys at this time. It is strictly a wall being built which will allow the rooms to become more organized and "put together". (If you'll recall, the room is in a make-shift state right now.) She has lined up 2 additional teachers with early childhood education degrees for the room. However, DHS is backlogged for completing background and fingerprint checks (according to the director). In the meantime, the room has revolving teachers, which is taking a toll on the infants and toddlers that occupy it. They need stability, and that's not what they're getting right now. I was not the first parent to come forth with concerns about the segregation. Many parents have expressed concern about their child being moved to this less than appealing room. One parent stated that he felt like he was "Throwing his hard earned money down the drain" each time he stepped into the room. Which I understand his frustration. He pays a large amount every month to one of the top-rated centers in our area and in return, his child is not afforded the same benefits and experiences as those who pay nothing each month. I do feel a little better after having aired my concerns. But I know that there will not be a quick resolution. If I want to see progress I will have to stick around and wait it out. |
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: |
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: You could start a PTA fundraiser for supplies. You could find another center/provider. Waiting for other people to meet my needs is not in my nature. :lol::lol::lol: I am glad you said something, though. |
Originally Posted by Cat Herder: I've thought about finding a new provider, but it took me SO LONG to get into this center. I had to push back my start date with my employer because I didn't have child care. I figure by the time my name gets to the top of another center's waiting list, my baby will be in school and this won't be an issue any longer. I'm definitely keeping an eye on this and will hold the director to her promises of improvements. I'm patient, I can sit back and let them try to keep me happy. |
Originally Posted by MamaMightSnap: |
Originally Posted by Thriftylady: As for no child left behind, I was told there target was more of a finanaclly means. My foster kids got there field trips paid for and continued transportion to and from school, even when they move to a Foster home that was out of the school district. (sometimes this meant that the school would pay for a taxi, or another person to drive the child) *Side note, I told the school no way was my 8 yo foster girl giving to ride with a random taxi driver, my sister volunteer to do it and they paid her. The program also continues transportation for children that become homeless (like the family losses a home due to fire or eviction and move out of school district) , so they don't have to continue changing schools every time they move. There is another part of the program that supplies foster kids with school supplies, which any way states that foster homes refuse to supply the kids with the supplies but on other hand my one foster girl gave away everything that I bought for her (or i think it was bullied from her), so it came in handy when she needed more stuff. I know that the transportation is at every school but the supplies and field trip thing did vary. One school sent back my check and told me it was covered, while the other school said that "if they had the funds available" - School supplies was the same way, one child came home with supplies, while the other one got in trouble for not having the supplies needed. |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:08 AM. |